The Silent Killer: Climate Change and the Health Impacts of Extreme Heat

Climate Council - Elizabeth Hanna  |  Lesley Hughes

More needs to be done to prepare Australia's health and community sectors to cope with the pressures from more frequent and severe heatwaves, our new report has found.
The Silent Killer: Climate Change and the Health Impacts of Extreme Heat found that although many states have taken significant steps to upgrade their heat and health warning systems since the deadly heatwaves of 2009, strategies vary considerably from state to state and focus primarily on reactive rather than long-term planning.

DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

KEY FINDINGS

1. Climate change is a serious health threat for many Australians.

• Heatwaves are a silent killer. Major heatwaves have caused more deaths since 1890 than bushfires, cyclones, earthquakes, floods and severe storms combined.
• Climate change is driving longer, hotter and more intense heatwaves in Australia. Since 1960, the number of record hot days in Australia has doubled and heatwaves have become longer, hotter and more intense.
• Australia's mortality data indicate that over the past four decades there has been a steady increase in the number of deaths in summer, compared to those in winter suggesting that climate change may already be affecting mortality rates.

2. As extreme heat events worsen, the risk of adverse human health impacts is increasing.

• Without substantial action to tackle climate change and cope with a more extreme climate, heatwaves could cause hundreds of additional deaths annually in Australia by 2050.
• Australia must take urgent steps to improve the preparedness of the health sector and the long-term resilience of communities to minimise the impacts of worsening extreme heat.

3. Heatwaves can put intense pressure on health services.

• Extreme heat increases the risk of heat illness and can also exacerbate pre-existing illnesses such as heart and kidney conditions. Children, the elderly, the disabled and outdoor workers are among those most at risk.
• Heatwaves have been shown to dramatically affect patient presentations. During the heatwave in southeastAustralia in January/February 2009, emergency call-outs jumped by 46%; cases involving heat-related illness jumped 34-fold; and cardiac arrests almost tripled in Victoria. In total, 374 excess deaths were recorded, a 62% increase on the previous year.

4. While the health sector has made significant steps in improving resilience to heatwave events, more needs to be done.

• Several states now have comprehensive heat and health plans and a number have adopted early warning systems, but strategies vary considerably among jurisdictions, with some less prepared than others.
• Approaches also focus primarily on immediate reactive capacity, rather than incorporating exposure reduction strategies to build the long-term resilience of communities to cope with worsening heat.
• Adopting national standards or requirements for heatwave response plans would be one approach for further addressing these challenges.

5. Reducing greenhouse gas emissions rapidly and deeply is the best way to protect Australians from worsening extreme heat events.

• Limiting heatwaves requires urgent and deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions.
• Importantly there must be a rapid transition from fossil fuel based energy systems to renewable energy.

DOWNLOAD THE REPORT

Links

• Is the Zika outbreak linked to climate change?
• All the top climate scientists in the world have something to tell you

3,000-Year Sea Level Study Called A Major Advance

NASA - Pat Brennan, Jet Propulsion Laboratory

This first-of-its-kind study shows that sea level is rising "like gangbusters."

A wave breaks on a Hawaiian beach. Sea levels driven higher by global climate change account for two thirds of coastal flooding days in the United States since 1950, a new analysis shows. Image credit: Michele Reynolds, USGS

A newly published analysis of the sea level record spanning three millennia represents a major leap forward in climate science, says Dr. Josh Willis, an ocean, ice and climate researcher at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory who was not involved in the study.

..the rate of globally-averaged sea level (GSL) rise during the 20^th century was significantly higher than at any time in the past 2,800 years.

The first-of-its-kind study, published online in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) on Feb. 22, applied a sophisticated statistical analysis to local relative sea-level reconstructions from around the globe. Using published proxy measurements for 24 locations that relied mainly on marine organisms, the study's authors found that the rate of globally-averaged sea level (GSL) rise during the 20^th century was significantly higher than at any time in the past 2,800 years. The researchers also found that if human influence on climate were removed from the record, global sea level either would have risen far more slowly or even fallen slightly.
"With this record we can definitively say that modern sea level rise is caused by global warming," said Willis, project scientist for the recently launched Jason-3 satellite that measures sea-surface height. "That's something we kind of already knew, but this paper puts the nail in the coffin."
Willis also praised a second analysis by a research group, Climate Central, released the same day and based on the first study's findings. It ascribes two thirds of coastal flooding in the United States since 1950 to human-caused sea level rise.
"A 100-year flood in San Francisco now happens every 10 years," Willis said. "That is global warming, and that is undeniable."
The analysis that made these conclusions possible was based on extremely accurate records of regional sea level changes. Many of the published studies the authors drew from included coastal marine organisms that live only in a narrow range of tidal elevations; their presence is a reliable indicator of specific sea-surface heights.
"There are lots of records that go back thousands of years," Willis said. "But usually you don't have as good an accuracy as these guys got."
The research team that performed the analysis, led by Robert E. Kopp of Rutgers University, supplemented their global database of regional relative sea-level reconstructions with 66 tide gauge records, one going as far back as 1700. The authors found that GSL barely rose  (0.1 ± 0.1 millimeters per year, essentially zero) between 0–700 CE, was nearly stable between 700 and 1000, and fell by 0.2 ± 0.2 millimeters per year between 1000–1400 CE, a period of global air cooling by ∼0.2 °C. They noted a strong acceleration that began in the 19th century and yielded a 20th century rise of 13.8±1.5 centimeters, which is faster than during any of the previous 27 centuries. Prompted by the observed correlation between GSL and air temperatures, the authors also used a semi-empirical model (a simple relationship between GSL and global air temperature) calibrated against the GSL reconstruction, which shows that in the absence of anthropogenic warming, it is extremely likely that 20th century GSL would have risen by less than 51% of the observed 13.8±1.5 centimeters.
The study further used semi-empirical modeling to project sea level rise by the end of the 21^st century under a variety of greenhouse-gas emission scenarios. And the authors' findings—52 to 131 centimeters of sea level rise on the high end, 24 to 61 centimeters if emissions are drastically reduced—were closer to the conclusions reached in the most recent assessment by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change than to the results from previously published semi-empirical projections.
"The short answer is that since the time of Christ, there is not much going on until the Industrial Revolution," Willis said. "And now, sea level is rising like gangbusters."

Links

• Past warming linked to rising sea level
• Briefing: a new era of sea level research
• Study: Rising seas slowed by increasing water on land

Natural Disasters Costing Australia 50% More Than Estimated

The Guardian - Michael Slezak

Reports find increases in family violence and mental health problems due to stress of natural disasters outweighs cost of rebuilding infrastructure

The social devastation resulting from bushfires, flooding and earthquakes can last for years, if not decades, reports have shown. Photograph: Joe Castro/AAP

The cost of natural disasters in Australia is 50% more than previously estimated– $9bn in 2015 – and is set to increase to $33bn by 2050 even ignoring the effect of climate change, according to two reports commissioned by the Australian Business Roundtable for Disaster Resilience and Safer Communities.
The reports included the first analysis of the economic costs of social impacts of natural disasters, and concluded they cost the economy more than tangible impacts like damage to property.
Among the tangible costs, the biggest occurred when critical infrastructure was damaged. Despite this, there was no formal requirement to consider resilience when making decisions about building infrastructure.
The reports said more investment was needed at times other than in the immediate aftermath of a disaster, with funding also required for community and infrastructure resilience, as well as longer-term social care.
The reports follow others by the Productivity Commission and Infrastructure Australia which also recommended more money be spent on resilience than recovery, which the government has been reluctant to implement.
"The reports show the long-term cost of the social impact of natural disasters on our communities and economy, and the benefits of embedding resilience into planning decisions for critical infrastructure," said the managing director and CEO of insurer IAG, Peter Harmer, on behalf of the Roundtable.
"We need to do more to help our communities prepare for and recover from disasters. Sadly the devastation of bushfires, flood and earthquakes on our communities can last for years, if not decades."
One of the two Deloitte Access Economics reports examined the social impacts of disasters and focused on three case studies: the 1989 Newcastle earthquake, 2009 Black Saturday bushfires and the 2011-12 Queensland floods.
In each case it found the cost of social impacts, such as increases in family violence and mental health problems due to stress, outweighed the economic impacts of having to rebuild infrastructure. However, some social costs could not be measured, which meant that the true cost was more than the study found.
Looking at the 2011-12 Queensland floods, some of the social costs it identified included:

• The exacerbation of diabetes and cardiovascular disease, and the development of stroke resulting from the floods was about $430m.
• Research suggesting a link between natural disasters, stress and family violence led to an estimate that increases in family violence cost $720m.
• The lifetime cost of mental health issues resulting from the floods was estimated at around $5.9bn.

It also found some of the social impacts might affect women more than men, leading to the suggestion that responses should be gendered too, citing the example of Firefoxes Australia, which provided social support to women following the Black Saturday bushfires.
Noel Clement, Australian Red Cross director of Australian Services, said the costs could be reduced by investing more in community resilience before disasters, as well as on psychological and social services that extended beyond the immediate aftermath of the disaster.
He said any community program that helped neighbours to know each other could help, since they would then be more able to help one another when disaster struck.
"Governments, business and communities need to work together to address the medium and long-term social impacts of natural disasters through further investment and research into community resilience programs," Clement said.
The second report examined the impact of natural disasters on infrastructure and how it could be avoided.
It found that about $450m was spent each year by governments restoring critical infrastructure, a figure that would rise to $17bn by 2050. Despite $1.1tn likely to be spent on critical infrastructure between now and 2050, it said there was no formal requirement to consider resilience to disasters when making decisions about building infrastructure.
It found that government planning processes should include a requirement to consider resiliance. But that was not only the responsibility of governments.
Paul O'Sullivan, chariman of Optus, which is a member of the Roundtable, said Optus spent more than $1bn annually on infrastructure.
"As we have undertaken our own climate change review, it is clear that there is a need for stronger central coordination across government and other infrastructure providers, and an opportunity to embed resilience into government policy and planning activities. The report issues practical guidelines to address this."
The reports warn that they have not included the effects of climate change, which is expected to increase the frequency and severity of natural disasters in Australia.
In May 2015, the Productivity Commission delivered a report into natural disaster funding, finding it was not currently "efficient, equitable or sustainable".
"Governments overinvest in post-disaster reconstruction and underinvest in mitigation that would limit the impact of natural disasters in the first place. As such, natural disaster costs have become a growing, unfunded liability for governments," it said. It recommended mitigation funding be increased by $400m a year, and expressly warned against "cherry-picking" some recommendations from the report, since they formed a cohesive package.
When asked whether the government would be implementing the recommendations, a spokeswoman for the minister for justice, Michael Keenan, said the government did not plan to implement the shifting of funding from disaster recovery to disaster mitigation, which she described as "severe cuts to recovery funding".
"The government is consulting with the states on proposed reforms to disaster funding arrangements, in particular around a new model for funding the restoration of essential public assets."
"As consultations are ongoing, the timing for the release of the government's response is yet to be settled," the spokeswoman said.

Links

• Cyclone Winston: tens of thousands homeless in Fiji a week after storm
• Home and dry? The flood victims who are putting up their own defences
• Call for urgent inquiry into world heritage forest fires in Tasmania
• Cost of property losses from Victorian bushfires is expected to top $40m
• WA will need twice as many firefighters in 2030 to cope with climate change – report

Impact Of Climate Change On Public Health

ScienceDaily

Health consequences of climate change: Doctors urge action to help mitigate risks and prepare for new challenges

Climate change is already having a noticeable impact on the environment and global health. Around the world extreme weather events, increased temperatures, drought, and rising sea levels are all adversely affecting our ability to grow food, access clean water, and work safely outdoors. Soon in some areas, the transformation will be so drastic and devastating that native populations will be displaced and forced to find new homes as environmental refugees. In a review published in the Annals of Global Health, doctors warn of the impending public health crisis brought on by climate change and call for action to help prepare the world for what is ahead.
As we begin to experience an unprecedented shift in temperature, we are starting to see the immense impact climate change will have on people around the world, especially those living in low-income countries. Bearing the brunt of the damage caused by climate change, low-income nations are especially susceptible because their economies often rely solely on agriculture and most do not possess the resources to ease the risks posed by climate events.
Low-income countries contribute just a tiny fraction of greenhouse gases (GHG), yet, they stand to lose the most if something is not done to curb emissions. In 2004, the United States, Canada, and Australia approached 6 metric tons (mt) of GHG per capita, while per-capita GHG emissions in low-income countries was only 0.6 mt overall.
"As global temperature increases, rich countries' economies continue to prosper, but the economic growth of poor countries is seriously impaired," explained co-author Barry S. Levy, MD, MPH, Adjunct Professor, Department of Public Health and Community Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine. "The consequences for economic growth in poor countries will be substantial if we continue on a 'business-as-usual' path of increasing carbon dioxide concentrations and rapid climate change, with poor countries' mean annual growth rate decreasing from 3.2% to 2.6%."
The adverse health effects of climate change will be broad and will tax public health resources globally. Vector-borne diseases, foodborne and waterborne illnesses, malnutrition, respiratory and allergic disorders, heat-related disorders, collective violence, and mental health problems will all likely increase due to climate change. Already vulnerable populations including the poor, minority groups, women, children, and older people will face the greatest challenges brought on by climate-caused illness. Malaria, Rift Valley fever, tick-borne encephalitis, and West Nile virus disease are spreading due to climate change.
Along with minority populations and poor people, women are more vulnerable to the health consequences of climate change. Co-author investigator Jonathan A. Patz, MD, MPH, Director of the Global Health Institute at the University of Wisconsin--Madison explained, "There are many ways in which climate change disproportionately affects women, including and especially adolescent girls. In low-income countries, women and adolescent girls generally assume primary responsibility for gathering water, food, and fuel for their households. Climate change-induced droughts make this work much more difficult."
Because the challenges presented by climate change disproportionately affect already vulnerable groups, investigators warn that caution must be exercised when trying to manage the effects of climate change. "International organizations and governments at the national, state/provincial, and local levels should ensure that human rights are considered in developing and implementing mitigation and adaptation measures," noted Dr. Levy. "Nongovernmental and humanitarian organizations need to hold governments accountable in protecting and promoting these human rights."
Positive progress on this front emerged last December in Paris from the UN Conference of the Parties (COP21) on climate change. World leaders gathered there agreed to establish a $100 billion fund to pay for both energy development as well as damages already incurred by poorer nations. "The agreement, which included the concept of 'damages,' clearly shows a recognition of the imbalance between industrialized nations that have caused climate change and those countries already bearing the brunt of extreme weather impacts," said Dr. Patz, who attended the Paris meeting.
Now is the time to address these issues and determine proper plans of action. In this issue of Annals of Global Health, "Climate Change, Global Health, and Human Rights," guest editor Holly G. Atkinson, MD, Program Director of Human Rights, Arnhold Institute for Global Health at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, explained, "In many places around the globe where upheavals are occurring, public health systems have broken down. As a consequence, for example, we have witnessed the resurgence of polio--an ancient disease almost eradicated in 2012. Despite the evidence, many people remain substantially uninformed about the link between climate change and global health."
Public health problems resulting from climate change continue to increase, and yet, we are slow to react. With the most vulnerable populations among us set to sustain the most damage, this review in the Annals of Global Health urges swift and decisive action to protect poor people, women, children, older people, and other vulnerable populations from the health consequences of climate change now and in the future.
"The global climate crisis threatens most people and their human rights," concluded Dr. Patz. "The adverse consequences of climate change will worsen. Addressing climate change is a health and human rights priority, and action cannot be delayed. Mitigation and adaptation measures must be equitable, respecting, protecting and promoting human rights."

Links

• UK Health Professionals Unite for Stronger Measures to Tackle Climate Change
• How to Engage the Population With Climate Change? Frame It as a Public Health Issue
• How Do We Talk About Climate Change? The Need for Strategic Conversations
• Climate Change Threatens Global Security, Warn Medical and Military Leaders