건강과 대안 » climate change

[기후변화] “2100년까지 지구 해수면 91.4㎝ 상승”

건강과대안 — Thu, 29 Aug 2013 02:47:33 +0000

“2100년까지 지구 해수면 91.4㎝ 상승”<유엔보고서>

뉴욕·런던·상하이 등 주요도시 잠길 수도

연합뉴스 2013/08/20 16:25
http://www.yonhapnews.co.kr/international/2013/08/20/0608000000AKR20130820134700009.HTML?template=5567

(서울=연합뉴스) 이한승 기자 = 현재 수준으로 온실가스가 방출된다면 2100년까지 해수면이 최대 91.4㎝ 상승할 것이라는 조사 결과가 나왔다.

미국 보스턴글로브는 19일(현지시간) 뉴욕타임스가 단독 입수한 유엔 정부간기후변화위원회(IPCC) 보고서 초안을 인용해 이같이 보도했다.

보고서는 지구 해수면 상승을 초래하는 몇 가지 시나리오를 제시했다.

가장 낙관적인 견해는 세계 각국 정부가 온실가스 배출량을 통제하는데 성공한다면 2100년까지 해수면 상승폭이 10인치(약 25.4㎝) 상승에 그칠 것이라고 전망했다.

이는 지난 20세기 해수면 상승폭인 8인치(약 20.3㎝)보다 조금 많은 수준으로, 해안가에 심각한 침식 현상을 가져올 수는 있지만, 대체로는 관리할 수 있는 수준이라고 보고서는 설명했다.

그러나 앞으로도 현재와 같이 온실가스 배출량이 빠른 속도로 증가한다면 해수면은 21인치(약 53.4㎝) 이상 상승하고, 극단적인 경우에는 3피트(91.4㎝) 이상 오를 수도 있다고 보고서는 분석했다.

이 경우에는 해안가에 사는 인구 수억명이 위기를 맞고, 특히 3피트 이상 상승한다면 미국의 뉴욕, 마이애미, 뉴올리언스, 영국 런던, 중국 상하이(上海), 이탈리아 베네치아, 호주 시드니 등 주요도시가 잠길 수 있다고 전망했다.

보고서는 또 화석연료 사용과 같은 인간의 활동이 1950년대 이후 관측되고 있는 대기 온난화의 주요 원인이라고 지적했다.

이 같은 내용은 지난 2007년 발간된 보고서보다 전반적으로 훨씬 악화된 것이다.

당시 유엔이 발간한 보고서에선 인간의 활동이 지구 온난화에 미치는 영향을 90∼100％ 정도라고 밝혔지만, 이번 보고서는 95∼100％로 상향했다.

보고서는 최근에 지구 온난화 속도가 느려지고 있다는 주장에 대해 단기적인 현상이라고 반박하며, 지구 온난화를 초래하는 요인들이 더욱 확고하게 역할을 하고 있고, 온실가스 방출의 영향도 더욱 심각해질 것이라고 강조했다.

jesus7864@yna.co.kr

================

IPCC Report: Global Warming Caused By Humans, Impacts Speeding Up

Posted August 19, 2013
http://theenergycollective.com/josephromm/262201/new-ipcc-report-climatologists-more-certain-global-warming-caused-humans-impacts-a

============

[참고] Climate Change 2007: Working Group I: The Physical Science Basis

10.5.4.6 Synthesis of Projected Global Temperature at Year 2100

출처 : http://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/ch10s10-5-4-6.html

All available estimates for projected warming by the end of the 21st century are summarised in Figure 10.29 for the six SRES non-intervention marker scenarios. Among the various techniques, the AR4 AOGCM ensemble provides the most sophisticated set of models in terms of the range of processes included and consequent realism of the simulations compared to observations (see Chapters 8 and 9). On average, this ensemble projects an increase in global mean surface air temperature of 1.8°C, 2.8°C and 3.4°C in the B1, A1B and A2 scenarios, respectively, by 2090 to 2099 relative to 1980 to 1999 (note that in Table 10.5, the years 2080 to 2099 were used for those globally averaged values to be consistent with the comparable averaging period for the geographic plots in Section 10.3; this longer averaging period smoothes spatial noise in the geographic plots). A scaling method is used to estimate AOGCM mean results for the three missing scenarios B2, A1T and A1FI. The ratio of the AOGCM mean values for B1 relative to A1B and A2 relative to A1B are almost identical to the ratios obtained with the MAGICC SCM, although the absolute values for the SCM are higher. Thus, the AOGCM mean response for the scenarios B2, A1T and A1FI can be estimated as 2.4°C, 2.4°C and 4.0°C by multiplying the AOGCM A1B mean by the SCM-derived ratios B2/A1B, A1T/A1B and A1FI/A1B, respectively (for details see Appendix 10.A.1).

The AOGCMs cannot sample the full range of possible warming, in particular because they do not include uncertainties in the carbon cycle. In addition to the range derived directly from the AR4 multi-model ensemble, Figure 10.29 depicts additional uncertainty estimates obtained from published probabilistic methods using different types of models and observational constraints: the MAGICC SCM and the BERN2.5CC coupled climate-carbon cycle EMIC tuned to different climate sensitivities and carbon cycle settings, and the C⁴MIP coupled climate-carbon cycle models. Based on these results, the future increase in global mean temperature is likely to fall within –40 to +60% of the multi-model AOGCM mean warming simulated for each scenario. This range results from an expert judgement of the multiple lines of evidence presented in Figure 10.29, and assumes that the models approximately capture the range of uncertainties in the carbon cycle. The range is well constrained at the lower bound since climate sensitivity is better constrained at the low end (see Box 10.2), and carbon cycle uncertainty only weakly affects the lower bound. The upper bound is less certain as there is more variation across the different models and methods, partly because carbon cycle feedback uncertainties are greater with larger warming. The uncertainty ranges derived from the above percentages for the warming by 2090 to 2099 relative to 1980 to 1999 are 1.1°C to 2.9°C, 1.4°C to 3.8°C, 1.7°C to 4.4°C, 1.4°C to 3.8°C, 2.0°C to 5.4°C and 2.4°C to 6.4°C for the scenarios B1, B2, A1B, A1T, A2 and A1FI, respectively. It is not appropriate to compare the lowest and highest values across these ranges against the single range given in the TAR, because the TAR range resulted only from projections using an SCM and covered all SRES scenarios, whereas here a number of different and independent modelling approaches are combined to estimate ranges for the six illustrative scenarios separately. Additionally, in contrast to the TAR, carbon cycle uncertainties are now included in these ranges. These uncertainty ranges include only anthropogenically forced changes.

Figure 10.29. Projections and uncertainties for global mean temperature increase in 2090 to 2099 (relative to the 1980 to 1999 average) for the six SRES marker scenarios. The AOGCM means and the uncertainty ranges of the mean –40% to +60% are shown as black horizontal solid lines and grey bars, respectively. For comparison, results are shown for the individual models (red dots) of the multi-model AOGCM ensemble for B1, A1B and A2, with a mean and 5 to 95% range (red line and circle) from a fitted normal distribution. The AOGCM mean estimates for B2, A1T and A1FI (red triangles) are obtained by scaling the A1B AOGCM mean with ratios obtained from the SCM (see text). The mean (light green circle) and one standard deviation (light green square) of the MAGICC SCM tuned to all AOGCMs (representing the physics uncertainty) are shown for standard carbon cycle settings, as well as for a slow and fast carbon cycle assumption (light green stars). Similarly, results from the BERN2.5CC EMIC are shown for standard carbon cycle settings and for climate sensitivities of 3.2°C (AOGCM average, dark green circle), 1.5°C and 4.5°C (dark green squares). High climate sensitivity/low carbon cycle and low climate sensitivity/high carbon cycle combinations are shown as dark green stars. The 5 to 95% ranges (vertical lines) and medians (circles) are shown from probabilistic methods (Wigley and Raper, 2001; Stott and Kettleborough, 2002; Knutti et al., 2003; Furrer et al., 2007; Harris et al., 2006; Stott et al., 2006b). Individual model results are shown for the C⁴MIP models (blue crosses, see Figure 10.20).

[보건] 세계화, 기후변화, 그리고 건강 (N Engl J Med )

건강과대안 — Thu, 04 Apr 2013 10:09:30 +0000

Globalization, Climate Change, and Human Health

Anthony J. McMichael, M.B., B.S., Ph.D.

N Engl J Med 2013; 368:1335-1343April 4, 2013DOI: 10.1056/NEJMra1109341
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMra1109341?query=TOC#t=article

The global scale, interconnectedness, and economic intensity of contemporary human activity are historically unprecedented,1 as are many of the consequent environmental and social changes. These global changes fundamentally influence patterns of human health, international health care, and public health activities.2 They constitute a syndrome, not a set of separate changes, that reflects the interrelated pressures, stresses, and tensions arising from an overly large world population, the pervasive and increasingly systemic environmental impact of many economic activities, urbanization, the spread of consumerism, and the widening gap between rich and poor both within and between countries.

In recent decades, international connectivity has increased on many fronts, including the flow of information, movements of people, trading patterns, the flow of capital, regulatory systems, and cultural diffusion. These exponential increases in demographic, economic, commercial, and environmental indexes have been labeled the Great Acceleration.3 Remarkably, the resultant environmental effects are now altering major components of the Earth system.4,5 The current geologic epoch is being called the Anthropocene (successor to the Holocene epoch)5,6 in recognition of the global force that Homo sapiens has become, pushing or distorting Earth’s great natural global systems beyond boundaries considered to be safe for continued human social and biologic well-being.4,7 The loss of biodiversity, the greatly amplified global circulation of bioactive nitrogen compounds, and human-induced climate change have already reached levels that are apparently unsafe.4

These changes pose fundamental threats to human well-being and health.4,7 For example, a positive relationship has been observed between regional trends in climate (rising temperatures and declining rainfall) and childhood stunting in Kenya since 1975, indicating that as projected warming and drying continue to occur along with population growth, food yields and nutritional health will be impaired.8 These human-induced climatic changes often act in concert with environmental, demographic, and social stressors that variously influence regional food yields, nutrition, and health. Furthermore, at the current level of global connectedness and interdependence, the environmental impact of human activity has a wider geographic range, although its influence may be offset somewhat by more effective global alerts and more rapid distribution of food aid. The extreme heat and wildfires in western Russia in the summer of 2010 destroyed one third of that country’s wheat yield, and the subsequent ban on exported grain contributed to a rise in the price of wheat worldwide, exacerbating hunger in Russia (where flour prices increased by 20%) and in low-income urban populations in countries such as Pakistan and Egypt.9,10 On the economic front, the recent global financial crisis has underscored the domino-like interdependence of national economies.

Effects of Globalization on Population Health

Global influences on population health such as those described above transcend the more specific, focused frame within which international health issues are addressed.2 The processes of global change are more systemic, involving disruption or depletion (not merely local pollution). Remediating or adapting to these changes requires an understanding of dynamic systems, their complexity and associated uncertainties, and coordinated policy responses across relevant sectors. The relationships between these pervasive processes of change and human health are shown in Figure 1Figure 1Influence on Human Health of Changes Related to Globalization..

Demographic Changes

Population growth is often overlooked in the discourse on global change, including its relation to the mitigation (abatement) of climate change, to which the contribution of global emissions is obvious.11 The projections by the United Nations that today’s population of 7 billion will increase to 9.3 billion by 205012 should reactivate the debate about whether we can succeed in pursuing realistic objectives for a healthy climate without curtailing the actual number of humans pressing on the environment. Furthermore, the negative-feedback loop of excessive population pressure on regional environments (involving soil exhaustion, water depletion, and the loss of various wild animal and plant food species) not only exacerbates various ongoing worldwide environmental and ecologic changes but also entrenches conditions of poverty and disadvantage. In these latter circumstances, fertility rates tend to remain high.

Some additional increase in the world population is inevitable in countries with high fertility rates, given the demographic flywheel momentum of populations weighted toward the young. Meanwhile, moderate gains have been made in facilitating education for girls, although progress in this, as well as in the provision of adequate education about reproduction and reproductive choice, remains slow in many low-income countries.13 Where unplanned pregnancy rates remain high (e.g., Timor-Leste and Nigeria), so do risks to maternal and child health.

Social Changes and Economic Activity

Many other aspects of globalization influence population health,2 including the accelerated emergence of new infectious diseases,14,15 the near-ubiquitous rise in the rates of obesity and associated noncommunicable diseases as daily bodily energy budgets (food energy input vs. physical energy output) shift into surplus,16 the spread of cigarette marketing, the effects of climate change,17,18 increases in resistance to antimicrobial agents, and health risks in the workplace due to the deregulation of international labor markets.2 Looming large in the background as additional determinants of health are the persistent, even increasing, disparities in wealth, education, autonomy, and social inclusion.19 There are, of course, certain aspects of globalization that are beneficial to health, such as the enhanced flow of information, improvements in internationally coordinated vaccination programs and systems to respond to infectious diseases, and a greater capacity for long-distance responses to disasters.

Adverse global influences on health, such as rising food prices and extended ranges of some infectious diseases, have also impeded attainment of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals.20 Future global health goals must be better integrated with the fundamental influences of poverty, inequity, illiteracy, climate change, land-use patterns, and food insecurity on health. After the Rio+20 Conference (2012), the Millennium Development Goals are to be replaced by Sustainable Development Goals in 2016, reflecting the principle set forth at the original Rio Declaration on Environment and Development (1992) that concern for humans must be at the center of sustainable development. Nevertheless, concern for human health is not yet near that center. This reflects the continuing misperception of what health means and the dominance of a narrow, clinically based view that seemingly does not take into account the fundamental need, in improving population health, to address the poor fit between environmental and sociocultural conditions and basic human biologic and psychological needs.

Environmental and Ecologic Changes

The deep-seated, essentially ecologic risks to population health cannot be countered effectively at the local level alone. Climate change induced by human activities, for example, is due to the globally aggregated excess of greenhouse emissions. Primary prevention of health problems arising from such global environmental and sociodemographic changes therefore requires coordinated international policy, supplemented by more local policy-making and action. For example, the World Trade Organization should give greater priority to averting the adverse health and environmental effects of international free trade.21 There is also a need for instruments similar to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control1,22 and the WHO Global Outbreak Alert and Response Network, in relation to the emergence of infectious diseases,23 as well as the United Nations Environmental Programme Montreal Protocol to protect the ozone layer.24

The following four examples describe other environmental and ecologic changes on a global scale that will increasingly influence the world’s health. First, the probability that new strains of influenza virus will emerge is increasing, particularly in the rural villages of Southeast Asia and East Asia.14,25 The risk increases with population growth; the juxtaposition of traditional backyard pig, chicken, and duck farming with intensified commercial poultry production; and environmental changes that affect the flight paths of migrating wild birds.

Second, the decline in available seafood protein (which is important for many low-income coastal populations) is a threat to health and reflects the unprecedented combination of ocean warming, acidification (due to increased uptake of carbon dioxide), deoxygenation,26 destruction of coastal fish nurseries, and overfishing.27

Third, diverse health risks are posed by the deprivation, displacement, and conflict that result from shortages of fresh water.8,28 Many populations, such as those in Bangladesh, Vietnam, Egypt, and Iraq, live downstream on great rivers that traverse several countries. In many cases, river flows are threatened by the loss of glacier mass and snowpack due to global warming and by the increased diversion of flow by neighbors upstream.

Finally, the need to maintain food supplies and adequate nutrition for the increasing world population presents a major challenge.29 Global food production also faces pressures as a result of reduced yield due to land degradation, water shortages, and climate change and the rising demand for animal foods among middle-income populations. Furthermore, agriculture (especially livestock production) accounts for around one fourth of global greenhouse-gas emissions.30 Thus, there are growing pressures to transform food production (e.g., more mixed cropping and inclusion of acceptable genetically modified crops), distribution, and consumption. Since the environmental, particularly climatic, effects of producing red meat from methane-producing ruminants (e.g., cattle, sheep, and goats) are so great, thought needs to be given to the question of whether production of this protein source will need to be curtailed — while allowing a sufficient increase to ensure safe childhood nutrition in the many poorer populations, which currently consume levels of red meat that are lower than those in the overconsuming rich populations by a factor of 10.30 The global food security issue is further complicated by the ongoing land grab in eastern Africa and elsewhere by richer countries seeking investment opportunities and self-insurance against future land, food, and biofuel shortages (e.g., Middle Eastern oil-producing states, China, and South Korea).31

These four examples also confirm that, in a world of global and systemic changes, these individual changes for the most part do not impinge on population health in isolation; instead, they typically act jointly and often interact. Specific examples are discussed in the next section, which reviews the health risks posed by climate change.

Global Climate Change

Global climate change is part of the larger Anthropocene syndrome of human-induced global environmental changes. These include land degradation, ocean acidification, and disruptions and depletions of the stratospheric ozone concentration, soil fertility, fresh-water resources, biodiversity stocks and ecosystem functioning, and global nitrogen and phosphorus cycles.4 Greenhouse emissions from fossil fuel–based power generation and transport and from the agriculture and mining sectors increase the heat-retaining capacity of the lower atmosphere, resulting in global warming (see the interactive graphic at NEJM.org). In addition, deforestation and ocean saturation have added to greenhouse warming by reducing the capacity of terrestrial and marine environments to absorb extra carbon dioxide (the main greenhouse gas) from the atmosphere. Also contributing to such warming are any ongoing natural variations in climate caused by cosmologic and geologic influences.32

Most of the global warming since 1950 (an increase of 0.7°C) has been the result of human activity.32 Annual global emissions of carbon dioxide have increased over the past decade, as have the rates of sea-level rise, the loss of Arctic sea ice, and the number of extreme weather events.33 Without substantial and prompt international action to abate these emissions, average global temperatures (relative to the year 2000) are likely to rise by 1 to 2°C by 2050 and by 3 to 4°C by 2100, including increases of up to 6 to 7°C at high northern latitudes.33,34 Additional warming of another 0.7°C is locked in from the extra radiative energy already absorbed by the lower atmosphere and, in turn, by the oceans, though not yet manifested as surface warming. An average rise of 4°C would return Earth’s temperature to a level not experienced for 10 million to 20 million years.35

Rainfall patterns will also change, with rainfall increasing in some regions and seasons and decreasing in others. Modeling consistently projects an increase in regional aridity, and in the geographic range and severity of droughts, during this century.36 The frequency, and perhaps intensity, of extreme weather events is also expected to increase in most regions — and may well have already begun to do so.37

Effects of Climate Change on Human Health

The complex nature of climate change and its environmental and social manifestations results in diverse risks to human health.17,18,38 A three-way classification of these risks and causal pathways is shown in Table 1Table 1Categories of Climate-Change Risks to Health, According to Causal Pathway..39

Our current, rather skewed knowledge of climate–health relationships has come from epidemiologic studies of health risks in relation to differences and extremes in temperature and from quasicyclical climatic events such as the El Niño–Southern Oscillation phenomenon. However, most of the health risks will arise from climatic influences on environmental systems and social conditions that affect food yields, water supplies, the stability of infectious disease patterns, and the integrity of natural and human-built protection against natural disasters (including forest cover, windbreaks, mangroves, vulnerable constructed seawalls, and urban water-drainage systems) and from the adverse health consequences of social disruption, displacement of communities, and conflict situations.18,38

Key examples of these types of causal paths are shown in Figure 2Figure 2Processes and Pathways through Which Climate Change Influences Human Health.. Many of the indirect effects of climate change will be simultaneously influenced by other global changes and sociodemographic pressures that act in conjunction with climate change. Food yields and, hence, nutritional status reflect changes not only in climate40 but also in water supplies, soil fertility, nitrogen levels, biodiversity (e.g., pollinators and pest predators), and the health and vitality of farm workers.

It is not surprising that the health effects of climate change will be predominantly adverse.38 After all, human biology, domesticated food sources, and culture in general have evolved over many millennia within the usual prevailing climate. Furthermore, populations everywhere will be vulnerable to increasingly severe extreme weather events.

Some beneficial health effects are expected to occur, at least in the earlier stages of climate change.38 In some temperate zones, milder winters may lead to fewer wintertime deaths from myocardial infarction and stroke, and in some low-latitude regions, hotter and drier conditions may reduce mosquito survival and, hence, mosquito-borne infection.

Populations living in diverse social, economic, and physical conditions will be affected differently by climate changes.18,38 Low-income and remote populations are more vulnerable to physical hazards, undernutrition, diarrheal and other infectious diseases, and the health consequences of displacement. Populations on low-lying islands and in coastal areas, such as Bangladesh, are vulnerable to increased storm surges and flooding as the sea level rises. In Arctic circumpolar regions, communities may undergo enforced changes in diet as land and marine animal populations migrate or decline and as access to traditional food sources becomes physically more difficult.41

The likely future effects of climate change on various health outcomes have been modeled with the use of plausible scenarios of future climate change that have been agreed on internationally. For example, in temperate countries, as summers become hotter and heat waves more severe, modeling indicates that, from around mid-century, additional heat-related deaths will progressively overwhelm the number of deaths averted as a result of milder winters.42,43 Such estimates of the extreme effects of weather will improve as the modeling of changes in climatic variability under climate-change conditions improves and as researchers take better account of physiological, behavioral, and technological adaptation by populations over time.

In China, the modeling of medium-scenario warming indicates that the transmission zone of freshwater snail–mediated schistosomiasis will extend northward, putting another 20 million people at risk by 2050.44 Such model-based estimation of the direction and approximate extent of likely change in health risks is an important resource for decision-making about both climate-change abatement and localized adaptation.

Meanwhile, an important research task is to identify ongoing changes in health risks and outcomes that can be reasonably attributed to recent climate change. Given the multivariate causation of most human health outcomes, attribution is rarely simple.45 Nevertheless, over the past decade, observed changes in some health outcomes, viewed collectively, suggest a climate signal (Table 2Table 2Indicators of Early Health Effects of Climate Change.).18,38,46

Health Risks and Benefits of Climate-Change Mitigation and Adaptation

The mitigation of climate change is a crucial first-order task for the world. However, while governments continue to wrestle with this unprecedented, complex political and ethical task, the more immediate challenge for the health sector is to identify the main regional health threats posed by climate change and ensure the development of risk-lessening adaptations.

Adaptation Strategies

Adaptation capacities and strategies will differ greatly among populations. They will be particularly important where the rates of preexisting disease (e.g., childhood diarrhea and malnutrition) are already high and therefore, in absolute terms, would become considerably higher because of the multiplier effects of climate change. Effective adaptive strategies will mostly require collaboration among diverse government sectors, research disciplines, and communities.

During heat waves, deaths and hospitalizations predominate among the elderly, patients with chronic cardiorespiratory disease, and persons living in low-grade housing. Early heat wave–warning systems, community caregiver schemes for vulnerable persons, well-insulated housing, and educational advice from primary health care providers would lower this risk. Meanwhile, longer-term planning is needed to climate-proof urban residential areas.47

Health Benefits of Climate-Change Mitigation

One favorable aspect of efforts to mitigate climate change is that local health gains will quickly accrue to populations that undertake such efforts.48 Awareness of this potential health dividend — in addition to the longer-term global health benefits — should strengthen support for such actions.

Health benefits will result from mitigating actions that address modes of transport, housing-design standards, energy generation, and agricultural systems (including livestock production). In many poor populations, improvements in environment-related technologies will help to replace indoor-polluting cooking fuels with low-carbon fuels, and improvements in reproductive literacy will lead to fewer, better-spaced pregnancies; both types of improvement reduce pressures on the climate system.11 All these actions will directly reduce well-known risk factors for disease and premature death (e.g., air pollution, sedentary living, and dietary excesses).48 Innovative urban design can have wide-ranging positive effects with regard to energy use, greenhouse-gas emissions, the effects of urban heat islands, patterns of physical activity, social relations, and community cohesion.

Challenges for the Health Sector

The health sector has important roles to play in relation to climate-change abatement and adaptation strategies for lessening unavoidable risks to health (Table 3Table 3Role of the Health Sector in Climate-Change Mitigation (Primary Prevention) and Adaptation (Preparedness, or Secondary Prevention).).49,50 Such strategies would include the “greening” of health care institutions and participation in national health impact assessments and in intersectoral planning of sustainable energy systems, transportation, and urban design. National delegations to international policymaking meetings that address global trends and threats (e.g., the annual conferences convened under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change) should include representatives from, or at least substantive briefing by, the formal health sector.

Conclusions

Rapid globalization has brought new, large-scale influences to bear on patterns of human health. Various global-scale changes — economic, social, demographic, and environmental (particularly climatic) — are linked, for example, to the increased prevalence of obesity, changes in regional food yields, the emergence of infectious diseases, the spread of cigarette smoking, and the persistence of health disparities.

Undertaking primary prevention at the source to reduce health risks resulting from these global influences is a formidable challenge. It requires conceptual insights beyond the conventional understanding of causation and prevention, as well as political will, trust, and resources. The complexities of policies to mitigate human-induced climate change are clear. Meanwhile, additional resources and strategies will be needed to reduce the health risks related to global change that have already arisen or are now unavoidable. For populations to live sustainably and with good long-term health, the health sector must work with other sectors in reshaping how human societies plan, build, move, produce, consume, share, and generate energy.

Disclosure forms provided by the author are available with the full text of this article at NEJM.org.

Source Information

From the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT, Australia.

Address reprint requests to Dr. McMichael at the National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia, or at tony.mcmichael@anu.edu.au.

[기후변화] 여름철 북극해 빙하 4년 내 사라질 수도 있어(가디언)

건강과대안 — Wed, 19 Sep 2012 11:11:40 +0000

Arctic expert predicts final collapse of sea ice within four years

As sea ice shrinks to record lows, Prof Peter Wadhams warns a ‘global disaster’ is now unfolding in northern latitudes

John Vidal, Arctic Sunrise, 81N

guardian.co.uk, Monday 17 September 2012 11.14 BST

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/sep/17/arctic-collapse-sea-ice?INTCMP=SRCH

Prof Peter Wadhams calls for “urgent” consideration of new ideas to reduce global temperatures. Photograph: John Mcconnico/AP

One of the world’s leading ice experts has predicted the final collapse of Arctic sea ice in summer months within four years.

In what he calls a “global disaster” now unfolding in northern latitudes as the sea area that freezes and melts each year shrinks to its lowest extent ever recorded, Prof Peter Wadhams of Cambridge University calls for “urgent” consideration of new ideas to reduce global temperatures.

In an email to the Guardian he says: “Climate change is no longer something we can aim to do something about in a few decades’ time, and that we must not only urgently reduce CO₂ emissions but must urgently examine other ways of slowing global warming, such as the various geoengineering ideas that have been put forward.”

These include reflecting the sun’s rays back into space, making clouds whiter and seeding the ocean with minerals to absorb more CO₂.

Wadhams has spent many years collecting ice thickness data from submarines passing below the arctic ocean. He predicted the imminent break-up of sea ice in summer months in 2007, when the previous lowest extent of 4.17 million square kilometres was set. This year, it has unexpectedly plunged a further 500,000 sq km to less than 3.5m sq km. “I have been predicting [the collapse of sea ice in summer months] for many years. The main cause is simply global warming: as the climate has warmed there has been less ice growth during the winter and more ice melt during the summer.

“At first this didn’t [get] noticed; the summer ice limits slowly shrank back, at a rate which suggested that the ice would last another 50 years or so. But in the end the summer melt overtook the winter growth such that the entire ice sheet melts or breaks up during the summer months.

“This collapse, I predicted would occur in 2015-16 at which time the summer Arctic (August to September) would become ice-free. The final collapse towards that state is now happening and will probably be complete by those dates”.

Wadhams says the implications are “terrible”. “The positives are increased possibility of Arctic transport, increased access to Arctic offshore oil and gas resources. The main negative is an acceleration of global warming.”

“As the sea ice retreats in summer the ocean warms up (to 7C in 2011) and this warms the seabed too. The continental shelves of the Arctic are composed of offshore permafrost, frozen sediment left over from the last ice age. As the water warms the permafrost melts and releases huge quantities of trapped methane, a very powerful greenhouse gas so this will give a big boost to global warming.”

===========================================

“여름철 북극해 빙하 4년 내 사라질 수 있다”

배문규 기자 sobbell@kyunghyang.com

출처 : 경향신문 입력 : 2012-09-18 21:29:46ㅣ수정 : 2012-09-18 21:29:46
http://news.khan.co.kr/kh_news/khan_art_view.html?artid=201209182129465&code=970100

ㆍ영국 학자 “온난화 가속 탓”… 대륙붕 메탄 분출 땐 재앙

지구 온난화로 여름철 북극해 빙하가 4년 안에 사라질 수 있어 긴급 대책이 필요하다고 빙하전문가가 경고했다. 빙하전문가 피터 워드햄 영국 케임브리지대 교수는 “북극의 여름철(8~9월) 해빙 면적이 최저기록이었던 2007년 417만㎢를 경신해 올해 350만㎢로 줄어들었다”며 “지구 온난화로 겨울철에는 해빙이 과거보다 적게 생성되고 여름철에는 더 많이 녹고 있다”고 밝혔다고 가디언이 17일 보도했다. 워드햄 교수는 북극해에서 잠수함을 통해 얼음의 두께를 지속적으로 측정해 왔으며, 2007년 여름의 빙하 축소도 예측한 바 있다.

워드햄 교수는 “2015~2016년 여름철이면 북극해에서 얼음이 사라질 것으로 보인다”고 밝혔다. 그는 “초기에는 여름철 빙하가 알아채기 어려운 느린 속도로 줄어들어 50년 정도는 얼음이 남아 있을 것으로 생각했다”며 “그러나 마침내 여름철 빙상이 녹거나 부서지는 정도가 겨울에 얼어붙는 것을 넘어섰다”고 말했다.

태양 광선을 반사해 지구 온도를 낮추는 역할을 하는 북극 해빙 면적은 1970년대에 800만㎢였으나 현재는 절반 넘게 줄었다. 미 국립빙설자료센터의 줄리언 스트로브 연구원은 “최근 급격하게 얼음이 녹는 현상은 북극해의 얼음층이 더 얇고 녹기 쉬운 상태로 근본적인 변화를 겪고 있다는 의미”라고 지난 14일 가디언에 밝혔다.

해빙의 감소는 해수 온도를 상승시켜 해저층에도 영향을 미친다. 특히 북극해 대륙붕의 과거 빙하기에 퇴적된 영구동토층이 해수 온도 상승으로 녹으면 엄청난 양의 메탄이 새어나올 수 있다. 주요 온실가스 가운데 하나인 메탄이 대량으로 대기에 방출되면 지구온난화가 걷잡을 수 없이 빠른 속도로 진행되면서 ‘전지구적 재앙’이 될 수 있다는 것이다. 국제환경보호단체 그린피스의 존 소븐 이사는 “해빙이 사라지면 지구 온도를 높여 식량 생산에 영향을 미치고 극단적 기상활동도 초래할 수 있다”고 경고했다.

워드햄 교수는 “기후변화는 더 이상 수십 년간에 걸쳐 어떤 대책을 시행하는 문제가 아니다”라면서 “이산화탄소 배출량을 줄이는 것은 물론 태양 광선을 우주로 돌려보내고 구름을 희게 만들거나 미세한 안개를 뿌려 이산화탄소를 흡수하는 등의 지구공학적 대책들을 추진해야 한다”고 밝혔다. 국제환경보호단체 세계자연보호기금의 데이비드 누스바움 영국지부 회장도 “미래 세대를 위해 기후 변화에 제동을 걸어야 한다”며 “탄소 배출량을 줄여 완전한 재생경제로의 전환 등 모든 조치를 취해야 한다”고 밝혔다.

[기후변화] 기후변화에 따른 사람과 동물질병관리 및 식품매개질병

건강과대안 — Tue, 18 May 2010 19:23:51 +0000

2010년도 춘계국제공동학술심포지엄 일정

출처 : 대한인수공통전염병학회
http://www.zoonosis.or.kr/notice01/view.asp?Key=21

기후변화에 따른 사람과 동물질병관리 및 식품매개질병

Climate change and relevant diseases in human and animals

일 시 : 2010. 4. 22(목)

장 소 : 국립수의과학검역원 대강당(안양 소재)

주 최 : 대한수의학회, 대한인수공통전염병학회, 한국식품위생안전성학회

주 관 : 국립수의과학검역원

9:00~9:30	등록
9:40~9:50	국민의례 및 개회사	이주호 학회장 (국립수의과학검역원장)
9:50~10:10	기조연설 (Plenary lecture)	지구온난화 현황 및 생물체에 미치는 미래 영향 예측 (전병성 기상청장) A overview of climatic changes and their global impact (Mr. Chun Byung-Seong, Korea Meteorological Administration)
	Special LectureⅠ	기후변화와 동물의 질병 (좌장: 이문한 교수, 서울대 수의대)
10:10~10:40		온난화에 따른 동물질병 예방 및 관리 (정갑수 동물위생 연구부장 국립수의과학검역원) Climate change: effects on animal disease systems and implications for surveillance and control (Dr. Gab-soo Chung, NVRQS)
10:40~11:10		국내의 병원체, 매개체, 보균동물 및 숙주동물에 있어서 기후변화의 영향 (채준석 교수, 서울대 수의대) Impact of climate change on pathogens, vectors, reservoirs and hosts in Korea (Dr. Joon-seok Chae)
11:10~11:30	Coffee break
	Special Lecture Ⅱ	기후변화와 인체의 건강 (좌장: 송재훈 교수, 삼성병원)
11:30~12:00		기후변화에 따른 사람질병의 변화 및 그 관리 대책 (전병율 센터장, 질병관리본부) Climate change impacts and risk for human health (Dr. Byung-ryul Chun, KCDC)
12:00~14:00	Poster presentation

12:30~13:30	Lunch & garden concerts
	Special Lecture Ⅲ	기후변화와 식품매개질병 및 항생제 내성 (좌장: 박용호 교수, 서울대 수의대 )
14:00~14:40		기후변화와 항생제 내성 (Ike 교수, 일본 군마대) Antimicrobial resistance and climate change (Dr. Y. Ike , Gunma University School of Medicine, Japan)
14:40~15:20		기후변화에 따른 식품매개질환의 영향 예측 및 관리 대책 (서건호 교수, 건국대 수의대) The impacts of climate change on the food-borne disease (Dr. Kun-Ho Seo, Konkuk University)
15:20~15:40	Coffee break
	Special Lecture Ⅳ	기후변화와 기타질병 (좌장: 신성식 교수, 전남대 수의대 )
15:40~16:20		기후변화에 따라 유입이 우려되는 주요 동물질병의 병리학적 소견 (김용백 교수, 미국 노스캐롤라이나 주립대 ) The pathological observations of newly emerging disease by climate change (Dr. Yongbaek Kim, NC state university, USA)
16:20~17:00		기후온난화에 따른 일본내 닭에서의 살모넬라증 발생현황과 예방 및 연구 동향 (사또 박사, 일본 과학사료연구소) Current state , control and research works on the chicken salmonellosis in Japan (Dr. Shizuo Sato, Scintefic Feed Laboratory Co., Japan)
17:00	폐회

Ά27STYLE=

[기후변화] 기후변화는 인간 건강에 어떤 영향을 미칠까?

건강과대안 — Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:16:19 +0000

Climate change and the implications on human health

18 December 2009 — We now know that climate change aggravates health problems, most of which are concentrated in the developing world. This episode discusses the impact on human health of climate change.

출처 : http://www.who.int/mediacentre/multimedia/podcasts/2009/climate_change_20091218/en/index.html

Transcript of the podcast
Veronica Riemer: You’re listening to the WHO podcast and my name is Veronica Riemer. In this episode we look at climate change and the implications on human health.

Over the past 10 days, delegations have assembled in Copenhagen for talks aimed at paving the way for a new global treaty on climate change. The conference offers the prospect of a robust political deal, endorsed by the world’s leaders and witnessed by the world’s people, setting out clear targets and a timeline for translation into law. We now know that climate change aggravates health problems, most of which are concentrated in the developing world. WHO’s Director-General Dr Margaret Chan says that the impact on human health is the most significant measure of the harm done by climate change.

Dr Margaret Chan: Already, nearly one billion people live on the margins of survival. It does not take much to push them over the brink. Food insecurity, water scarcity, storms, floods, droughts, population displacements, and polluted air – all of these events have a well-documented impact on health.

Veronica Riemer: Dr Chan says that policy-makers have been slow to realize the threat of climate change to human health.

Dr Margaret Chan: I have personally attended high-level conferences on climate change where health was treated as a peripheral issue. This must change. Health concerns need to be at the centre of the debate. The impact on human health is the most significant measure of the harm done by climate change.

Veronica Riemer: Dr Diarmid Campbell-Lendrum, works on climate change and health at WHO headquarters. He talks to us about the main risks.

Dr Campbell-Lendrum: The main health risks that we see from climate change are basically worsening problems that we already have. We already have a very large burden of disease from diarrhoea – it kills about 2.2 million people every year, almost all of them children in developing countries. There are about 1.1 million deaths each year from malaria and other vector borne diseases and malnutrition is the single biggest contributor to the burden of disease and that kills about 3.5 million people every year, again mainly poor children in developing countries. All of those conditions are highly sensitive to temperature and precipitation so basically the on-going changes that we are seeing in the global climate, threaten to make those current problems even worse and even harder to control.

Veronica Riemer: Professor Andy Haines is Director of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine. He recently chaired the International Task Force on Climate Change Mitigation and Public Health which looked at the public health effects of green house gas mitigation strategies. The task force focussed on four main sectors, household energy, urban land transport, food and agriculture and electricity generation. They looked at policies that could substantially cut green house gas emissions and then assessed the impact of those policies on health.

Sir Andy Haines: In all four of those sectors there are potentially quite substantial benefits to be had to public health. In lower income countries we could get major benefits to public health in the near term by reducing indoor air pollution – responsible for 1.6 million deaths a year –and much of it comes from the burning of biomass fuels in every inefficient cook stoves. That is a major public health problem which has an impact particularly on the health of children and women.

Veronica Riemer: Significant benefits were found by implementing policies within the transport sector.

Sir Andy Haines: We modelled impacts in London and Delhi particularly by introducing more efficient private cars and also by increasing active transport, that is to say walking and cycling in particular. What we found is that both in London and Delhi this could have substantial benefits for public health – for example, reducing ischemic heart disease, cebro-vascular disease, dementia, some types of cancer and particularly in the case of Delhi, diabetes as well. That is because many of this diseases are related to inactivity, and of course to obesity as well.

Veronica Reimer: The food and agriculture sector is thought to be responsible for about 10-12% of global green house gas emissions and these are set to rise by up 50% by 2030. This is driven by the production of livestock to meet the increasing global demands for animal source foods.

Sir Andy Haines: The clear indication is that in high consuming countries, moderate and achievable reductions in animal product consumption could benefit the environment as well as potentially improving population health, by reducing saturated fat intake.

Veronica Riemer: WHO’s Diarmid Campbell-Lendrum says that many of the actions we need to take to reduce greenhouse gas emissions will bring important co-benefits.

Dr Campbell-Lendrum: I think there has been an appreciation within the last few years that we can no longer see climate change as just an economic issue or just as an environmental issue – this is really a discussion about protecting the life support systems for human life as well as all other forms of life on earth.

Veronica Riemer:If you would like to read the Report of the international task force or to obtain related information, there are links on the transcript page of this podcast episode. Look for the link to the podcast on the home page of our web site, at www.who.int.

That’s all for this episode of the WHO podcast. Thanks for listening. If you have any comments on our podcast or have any suggestions for future health topics drop us a line. Our email address is Podcast@who.int.

For the World Health Organization, this is Veronica Riemer in Geneva.

Related links
- Climate change and human health
- Topical overview: climate change
- Report of task force on climate change mitigation and public health