An article posted in the Huffington Post comments on the
dangerous air pollution in India and the effect this has on life expectancy.
They refer to a study published in Economic & Political Weekly that
discusses the ambient particulate matter (PM) air pollution in India and how
this reduces life expectancy. The Huffington post article talks about PM2.5,
which are fine particulate matter pollution with a diameter of less than 2.5
micrometers, small enough to seriously damage the lungs, and that for every 100
micrograms of PM2.5 life expectancy drops by 3 years. The article also
discussed the unsafe levels of pollution present in India stating “estimates
that 99.5% of India’s 1.2 billion people are breathing in pollution levels above
what the WHO deems as safe.”
This is in keeping with the study led by Prof. Greenstone,
which discusses in detail how they examined the fine particulate air pollution
data set and how they estimated the effects of this pollution on long-term
mortality. The study goes into more detail on the air quality standards of
India compared to the stricter World Health Organization standards of air
quality.
The study also mentions “660 million people (54.5% of the
population) live in regions that do not meet the 40 microgram per cubic meter
standards and that 21.7% of the population live in regions with air pollution
levels at more than twice this standard."
The article also explains the dangerously high air pollution
being due to the burning of fossil fuels to grow the economy and pull people up
from poverty. India has pledged to boost its clean energy sector but has also
increased its coal-fired electricity, which will has serious negative effects
on the already polluted air. The news article doesn't include how the study
goes on to talk about possible policy reforms that India should implement to
improve the pollution and increase the life expectancy while having small costs
to the economy.
I think the article did a great job summarizing the key
facts of the study without overselling or misrepresenting the information. The
fact that the article did not mention the directions for policy reforms that
the study discussed did not hurt the article in any way but I thought they were
interesting ideas to improve the air pollution of India.
I agree that this Huffington Post article did a good job summarizing the EPW article. I think this is one of the better Huffing Post science articles I've seen among the recent posts. They did a good job of explaining PM2.5 and why they are harmful to human health. What I found most interesting is that India is planning on tripling its coal-fired electricity capacity in the next 15 years. The HP article brought in this information from outside the original article and I think its good they did since it is incredibly relevant. Overall, I think they did a good job simplifying yet still correctly conveying the information.
ReplyDeleteI thought this was a good article. I do find it interesting that the actual study discussed possible policy reforms but the Huffington Post article did not - usually you see the opposite, media sources interpreting studies in the context of policy. The article sheds light on a very tricky issue-increased energy demands as India strives for economic growth and reducing poverty, but with the potential for related health issues and reduced life expectancy, is it worth it? Can they find a balance?
ReplyDeleteI think the idea of finding a balance is very interesting. I'm sure one could argue that with economic growth and a reduction in poverty the average life expectancy would increase -- if not, at least the quality of life would be better. It's definitely a tricky issue and one that warrants discussion. I thought the article did a good job on summarizing the research and bringing the issue to light.
DeleteIt would be interesting to look at similar numbers for the US (or at least pollution burdened parts of the US). While pollution in some international cities is certainly orders of magnitude worse than many US cities, I do wonder if we're missing part of the story here. There are many cities in the US (LA, parts of Louisiana, NY) that are much more polluted than the national average. It would be especially interesting to see how many people in the US are exposed to PM pollution exceeding WHO standards, given that the EPA standards are higher. In the case of the 24-hour PM10 standard, EPA's 150 micrograms per meters cubed is triple the WHO level.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think one of the many aspects that contributes to the strength of this article is the reference to poverty in the midst of the facts and specifics about the air pollution in India. Rather than limiting this article to the environmental health perspective, they include the actual, the real situation that is occurring in India not only to provide context, but to inform why certain matters towards energy usage were used. In addition, this provides foundation to solving this problem, how can air pollution decrease dramatically in the lowest cost and most efficient way as possible? I think connections to environment and the people is key for making things happen for the better.
DeleteGreat post Theresa. I think my thoughts are in line with most others who have commented, but it is interesting to think how these health effects that are talked about are solely from the PM2.5 pollutants. I wonder what the compounded health effects are when you take into consideration the other air pollutants. A thorough evaluation of how these combined pollutants effect the population would be an interesting article to read.
ReplyDeleteGreat summary! I agree with the comments above and would be curious to know what the stats are for other regions in the world, especially in areas that are similar economically to India. I would have liked to hear more about how they performed this study and how they gathered their data, as well as what other factors they are taking into account (social norms, behaviors, cultural practices, etc.). Lastly, I would have expected more discussion on the awareness of the country of India on this high level of pollution along with any actions that could take place to decrease pollution levels.
ReplyDeleteThis huffington post article surprised me with its informed content and sophisticated language. It gave a detailed, easily understandable description of PM2.5 and India's current pollution status. I do, however, think that their reporting of India's opposing regulations regarding clean energy and coal electricity was too dramatically and stratigically worded to dim India's recent efforts. India's increased usage of coal-power electricity is to offset a worse alternative, and that should be taken into account.
ReplyDeleteIt was great how the huffington post gave a concise presentation about what the current problems of India during the present day and potential future risks. I would like to see more from the extensive future effects of the PM 2.5 pollutants in the atmosphere in India such as the next generation would have asthma or breathing problems. I wonder if this could have a worse effect than the predicted 3 years of lifetime.
ReplyDeleteYou hit gold with this Huffpost article; easy to read, concise, on a substantial topic and good intellectual content. The journal article had far more policy implementation suggestions than I am used to in a scientific journal, but since the work is published in Economic and Political Weekly the discussion is warranted. Figure 1. is useful to illustrate the location of the highest impacted region, but the change in the scale per each color change is an odd choice. I would have like to see the map include air pollution in Bangladesh or Nepal. I am curious to see if the major pollutants are transported from India to Bangladesh or Nepal or are similarly produced in the neighboring countries.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the Huff Post article was very well written and not overly sensationalized, or using unnecessary fear mongering. I really like how they qualified Sarath Guttikunda's statement with her quote "[given] what information is available." This is subtle detail that they could have left out. Another important piece that they included was the lack of monitoring sophistication. This highlights the big unknown. Overall great article and very interesting, Theresa!
ReplyDelete