A study conducted by NASA and published in Science - describes 14 ways to control and reduce air pollutants. According to the researchers, if the methods are implemented, it will be possible to moderate the rate of global warming, improve the health of the human population and increase the production of agricultural products.
A study conducted by NASA and published in Science - Describes 14 ways to control and reduce air pollutants. According to the researchers, if the methods are implemented, it will be possible to moderate the rate of global warming, improve the health of the human population and increase the production of agricultural products.
The researchers claim that targeting and implementing unique methods to prevent air pollution will slow down global warming to 0.5 degrees by 2050. At the same time, food production (from farms) will increase by 135 million tons per season. It will also prevent the premature death of hundreds of thousands of people each year from diseases resulting from air pollution. The benefit will be felt all over the world, but the biggest beneficiaries will be countries in Asia and the Middle East.
The researchers tested about 400 different technological ways and methods based on evaluations by the Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Laxenburg, Austria (International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis in Laxenburg, Austria.). Out of all the methods, 14 were chosen that would give the greatest climatic "profit".
Methods that will reduce the emissions of soot and methane gas - the two pollutants that exacerbate climate change and cause direct damage to people and plants, as well as indirect damage by creating ozone in the lower layers of the atmosphere, which is a toxic pollutant.
Soot (Black carbon) - is a product emitted by burning mineral fuel as well as burning biological material (wood, garbage, etc.). The soot is absorbed into the body by breathing and may cause respiratory diseases, and damage to the blood and heart systems. The tiny soot particles absorb the sun's radiation and cause warming and weather changes. When the soot particles fall on ice and snow surfaces, the surfaces darkened by the soot absorb more radiation and thus again increase global warming.
Methane is a flammable gas that is a main component of "natural gas". Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas as well as an ozone booster. Ozone is a key component in smog and causes damage to human health, plants and agricultural crops.
While carbon dioxide is considered the main cause of global warming, reducing the emission of soot and methane will have an immediate effect, since both pollutants are recycled and disappear from the atmosphere at a relatively high speed.
According to the researchers, preventing and reducing soot and methane emissions will be a protection against global warming in large areas where there are large areas covered in ice (Northern Russia for example). The positive effect in reducing emissions will be felt in countries such as Pakistan, Iran and Jordan where the yield of agricultural crops will increase.
South Asia and the Sahel (Africa) will benefit from the change due to better rainfall cycles. In countries like India, Bangladesh and Nepal there will be a sharp decrease in (premature) mortality. The study shows that between 700 thousand and 4.5 million deaths (premature) can be prevented each year.
Soot and methane have many sources. To implement the reduction of emissions, it will be necessary to improve infrastructure. According to the researchers, the main ways to reduce methane emissions are by capturing the gas that "runs away" from coal mines and oil wells, reducing leaks in long lines, preventing emissions from garbage dumps, upgrading sewage treatment systems, aerating rice fields, and limiting emissions from farms (organic manure).
The proposed ways to prevent soot emissions include: installing filters in diesel engines, taking polluting vehicles off the road, upgrading cooking stoves and heating facilities to facilities with high utilization and clean combustion, installing efficient roasting (baking) ovens, upgrading stone coal stoves and banning the burning of agricultural waste.
The researchers used computer models to calculate the results of emissions reductions. The calculations showed that the benefit from reducing methane emissions would be extensive, since the gas is dispersed throughout the atmosphere.
Soot falls out of the atmosphere a few days after its emission, so the benefit of reducing its emissions will be significant in certain areas, especially in areas where there is ice and snow cover.
According to the researchers, a reduction in soot and methane emissions will protect public health and improve food production. The activity to reduce emissions will precede the other activities to prevent and mitigate climate change, and will help to promote and incentivize a general policy to mitigate warming.
10 תגובות
For Tomer Ravid, pollution is not a marginal matter but a matter of life and death.
After all, killing a person with a rifle carries a heavy penalty, so why is killing him with mercury in water not a problem?
The sentence is taken from here:
https://www.hayadan.org.il/antropogenic-global-warming-081211/
A similar sentence was also added to other articles on environmental issues.
As far as I understand, the sentence is not said in a specific context but simply concludes the articles on a philosophical-general note.
I mean, of course, the polluting factories, not the corporations—even though there is no fundamental distinction in the context. I stand corrected.
To show that they extended life expectancy there is no need for research: you simply have to compare life expectancy in industrialized countries before and after the industrial revolution, and isolate all the variables.
Then, you can also add the introduction and technology of the 20th century. In the end, I'm sure it converges to 40 years at the very least.
Given all this, the trend is clear, and pollution is a completely marginal issue.
The quote you brought is from the mouth of Dr. Assaf Rosenthal and he devoted an article to his explanation (I will locate the link when I have the opportunity).
Corporations are a bad product of humanity. Instead of encouraging their action, they should be limited because extroversion is inherent in their DNA. They cause future generations to be charged for the actions of today's opportunistic managers.\
I don't recall a single case where corporations extended someone's life. Usually the research is done in universities which are a government funded body.
Avi,
Thanks for the compliment, but I'm not an oil tycoon.
I've been following your site for quite some time now, and I wasn't at all surprised to find the following quote in an official coverage of an international climate conference:
"For once again without the distinction and understanding that instead of controlling the environment for the sake of the human population, there will be control of the human population for the sake of the environment and the future of the environment and humanity will go up in smoke."
Long before the ecological sciences are transformed into politics, they deal with man and technology.
The idea is simple: man and his "arrogant" advancement actually cause the destruction of nature, but nature is at least as important as man.
You don't have to be brilliant to come up with this, as activists often explicitly state this (as in the quote above).
This is the ultimate reason for the green laws, as well as for events such as "Earth Hour" in which the lights are turned off and similar.
"According to this logic, everyone can throw away all their dirt but also not pay taxes in which the dirt will be cleaned."
By this logic, if, in exaggeration, air pollution takes 40 years off the average person's lifespan, the corporations amplify it by XNUMX, so it is offset.
To Tomer Ravid
The third goal exists only in the imagination of the oil gods and their libertarian friends who think that the externalization of the corporations should not be imposed on anyone.
According to this logic, everyone can throw away all their dirt but also not pay taxes in which the dirt will be cleaned.
Of course, the demand for responsibility and bearing the costs of the damage makes people think that it takes them back to before the industrial revolution. But it's only in their head. There is an idea that you may not have heard - they exist. which allows both to enjoy the introduction and to leave the same earth that we receive for future generations as well.
Actually, three birds with one stone.
Also reduce global warming, both reduce pollution and return us to the eve of the industrial revolution using physical force.
with a strong emphasis on the latter.
Yair, do you want to pollute the space with lenses? Haven't we polluted enough with spaceship debris?
In a fascinating series on the Discovery channel called "Project Earth", a number of very interesting solutions to the problem of global warming were presented, each episode was dedicated to testing one of the solutions, for example a "cloud" of lenses that would hover between us and the sun and cast a shadow on the earth:
http://dsc.discovery.com/videos/discovery-project-earth-space-sunshield-in-a-nutshell.html
Very interesting, thanks! Now we just have to hope that some of the recommendations will be implemented by the USA and China.
Good Morning,
In my opinion, this problem is not only scientific, it is for all people living on this planet
You have to take it in your hands and now "better late than never"