Fossil fuel burning poses threat to health of 1.6bn people, data shows

"Fossil fuel burning is not just damaging the world's climate; it is also threatening the health of at least 1.6 billion people through the toxic pollutants it produces, data shows. Carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas from fossil fuel burning, does not directly damage health, but leads to global heating. However, coal and oil burning for power generation, and the burning of fossil fuels in industrial facilities, pollute the air with particulate matter called PM2.5, which has serious health impacts when breathed in."

"A new interactive map from Climate Trace, a coalition of academics and analysts that tracks pollution and greenhouse gases, shows that PM2.5 and other toxins are being poured into the air near the homes of about 1.6 billion people. Of these, about 900 million are in the path of super-emitting industrial facilities including power plants, refineries, ports and mines that deliver outsize doses of toxic air."

"Raising the alarm over air pollution is seen by some in the US as a way to counter Donald Trump's moves to dismantle work by the federal government aimed at tackling the climate crisis. The US president has shut down federal climate programmes, ordered an end to renewable energy projects, and issued a climate report that scientists called a mockery. At the UN general assembly on Tuesday, he denounced climate science as a con job."

Burning coal, oil and other fossil fuels emits particulate matter (PM2.5) and toxins that harm human health when inhaled. Climate Trace's interactive map indicates PM2.5 and other pollutants are emitted near the homes of roughly 1.6 billion people, with about 900 million living in the path of super-emitting industrial facilities such as power plants, refineries, ports and mines. Ten urban areas including Karachi, Guangzhou, Seoul and New York are identified as particularly affected by super-emitters. The US federal government has curtailed some climate programs while officials claim limited interest in certain pollution controls amid scientific criticism of administration climate positions.

Read at www.theguardian.com