Global environmental change

Large-scale and global environmental hazards to human health include climate change, stratospheric
ozone depletion, changes in ecosystems due to loss of biodiversity, changes in hydrological systems
and the supplies of freshwater, land degradation, urbanization, and stresses on food-producing
systems.
Appreciation of this scale and type of influence on human health requires a new perspective which
focuses on ecosystems and on the recognition that the foundations of long-term good health in
populations rely in great part on the continued stability and functioning of the biosphere's lifesupporting systems. It also brings an appreciation of the complexity of the systems upon which we
depend.
Harmful effects of environmental change and ecosystem impairment on human health.

Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005)

Download high resolution image

jpg, 102kb
Protecting health from global environmental change requires management at many levels, from the
social and economic drivers of environmental change, to the resulting hazards and exposures for
human populations. WHO supports this linkage of environmental and health agendas, for example by
providing health expertise into the UN Conventions on Climate Change, Biological Diversity and
Desertification, and by advising the health sector on the necessary responses to address the health
risks posed by large-scale environmental change.

Climate change 2014: impacts, adaptation, and vulnerability

Overview
The latest report on climate change from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
(IPCC), released on March 31, documents the evidence on the scale and nature of the

health risks arising from climate change, as well as the potential benefits that could be
achieved by measures to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
The IPCC constitutes arguably the largest scientific assessment exercise in human history.
The five assessment reports it has released since 1988 have been assembled by several
thousand authors, and document the now overwhelming evidence that human activities
have been the major driver of recent warming of the earths surface, and that both
climate change, and its consequences, will continue into the future.
This latest report covers evidence on the impacts of climate change and adaptation
measures for different regions, natural and human systems including health.

Health problems exacerbated

The health assessment, firstly, confirms and expands the evidence base on the health
risks presented in the previous assessment report, in 2007.
This includes the much stronger evidence that negative health impacts will outweigh
positive effects. It concludes that climate change will act mainly, at least until the middle
of this century, by exacerbating health problems that already exist, and the largest risks
will apply in populations that are currently most affected by climate-related diseases.
It supports the case that under-nutrition resulting from reductions in food production,
injury and disease due to intense heat waves and fires, and shifts in the timing and
spatial distribution of infectious diseases are likely to present the greatest risks.

Additional health risks: heat exposure

Secondly, the report documents evidence on an additional set of risks. Notably, the report
reflects recent research on the significant possibility of high end climate scenarios, with
some projecting warming of 4-7 degrees over much of the globe.
Under these conditions, human capacity to deal with heat will be exceeded in the hottest
parts of the year in some regions, and it will no longer be possible to undertake
unprotected outdoor labour or recreational activity.

Investment in preventative health

Thirdly, the latest report presents evidence that can guide the response to this challenge.
It drew on studies that modelled for the first time the potential consequences of changes
in climate alongside projected social and economic changes.
This research illustrates how climate change opposes the health gains achieved by social
development, and may hold back progress in the poorest countries but also shows how
investment in preventive health programmes, in the context of strong and equitable
socioeconomic development can also greatly decrease vulnerability, and potentially override at least some of the health risks, in the short- to medium-term.

Improving health while cutting carbon emissions

Perhaps the largest advance is in documenting the rapidly growing evidence that wellplanned actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions can also bring very large health
gains. The most obvious gains would come through reductions in air pollution, recently
identified as the cause of approximately seven million deaths a year, or one in every
eight deaths in the world.
The report documents the evidence that reducing emissions of short-lived climate
pollutants such as methane and black carbon would not only slow warming, but could
avoid 2-2.5 million deaths per year, globally. If converted into economic terms, the health
gains associated with mitigation could offset much of the early cost of greenhouse gas
mitigation.
This supports the conclusion that both climate-sensitive health risks, and the health
benefits of cutting greenhouse gas emissions, should be central to any discussion on
climate change.

Stratospheric ozone depletion, UV radiation and health

It has been recognized for several decades that the release of chlorofluorocarbons and other
atmospheric pollutants depletes stratospheric ozone, which in turn increases human exposure to
ultraviolet radiation, causing skin cancer and cataracts.
The recognition of direct effects on human health effects was a major stimulus to the Montreal
Protocol, which acts to reduce emissions of pollutants that weaken the ozone layer. Although this
international agreement is proving highly effective in reducing risks in the long term, UV radiation
remains a health hazard.
The World Health Organization, and partner organizations - through the Intersun project - have
developed and promote the UV Index, a tool to inform and educate the public about sun protection.

Environmentalism
Main article: Environmental activism of Al Gore

Overview

Gore receives the Nobel Peace Prize in the city hall ofOslo, 2007.

Then President George W. Bushmeets with Al Gore and the other 2007 Nobel Award recipients, November 26,
2007.

Gore has been involved with environmental issues since 1976, when as a freshman congressman,
he held the "first congressional hearings on the climate change, and co-sponsor[ed] hearings on
toxic waste and global warming."[57][58] He continued to speak on the topic throughout the 1980s, [59] and
is still prevalent in the environmental community. He was known as one of the Atari Democrats, later
called the "Democrats' Greens, politicians who see issues like clean air, clean water and global
warming as the key to future victories for their party." [60][202]
In 1990, Senator Gore presided over a three-day conference with legislators from over 42 countries
which sought to create a Global Marshall Plan, "under which industrial nations would help less
developed countries grow economically while still protecting the environment." [203] In the late 1990s,
Gore strongly pushed for the passage of the Kyoto Protocol, which called for reduction in
greenhouse gas emissions.[204][205] He was opposed by the Senate, which passed unanimously (950)
the ByrdHagel Resolution (S. Res. 98),[89] which stated the sense of the Senate was that the United
States should not be a signatory to any protocol that did not include binding targets and timetables

for developing as well as industrialized nations or "would result in serious harm to the economy of
the United States".[206]
In 2004 he co-launched Generation Investment Management, a company for which he serves as
Chair. A few years later, Gore also founded TheAlliance for Climate Protection, an organization
which eventually founded the We Campaign. Gore also became a partner in the venture
capital firm, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, heading that firm's climate change solutions group.[3]
[4]

He also helped to organize the Live Earth benefit concerts.[207]

Gore's speech on Global Warming at the University of Miami BankUnited Center, February 28, 2007.

In 2013, Gore went vegan.[208] He had earlier admitted that "it's absolutely correct that the growing
meat intensity of diets across the world is one of the issues connected to this global crisis -- not only
because of the [carbon dioxide] involved, but also because of the water consumed in the
process"[209] and some speculate that his adoption of the new diet is related to his environmentalist
stance.[209]
In a 2014 interview, Gore said "Over a year ago I changed my diet to a vegan diet, really just to
experiment to see what it was like. ... I felt better, so I've continued with it and I'm likely to continue it
for the rest of my life."[210]
Criticism
Gore's involvement in environmental issues has been criticized. For example, he has been labeled a
"carbon billionaire" and accused of profiting from his advocacy; [211] a charge which he has denied,
[212]

by saying, among other things, that he has not been "working on this issue for 30 years...

because of greed".[211] A conservative Washington D.C. think tank, and a Republican member of

Congress, among others, have claimed that Gore has a conflict-of-interest for advocating for
taxpayer subsidies of green-energy technologies in which he has a personal investment. [212]
[213]

Additionally, he has been criticized for his above-average energy consumption in using private

jets, and in owning multiple, very large homes,[214] one of which was reported in 2007 as using high
amounts of electricity.[215][216] Gore's spokesperson responded by stating that the Gores use renewable
energy which is more expensive than regular energy and that the Tennessee house in question has
been retrofitted to make it more energy-efficient.[217][218]
Data in An Inconvenient Truth have been questioned. In a 2007 court case, a British judge said that
while he had "no doubt ...the film was broadly accurate" and its "four main scientific hypotheses
...are supported by a vast quantity of research,"[219] he upheld nine of a "long schedule" of alleged
errors presented to the court. He ruled that the film could be shown to schoolchildren in the UK if
guidance notes given to teachers were amended to balance out the film's one-sided political views.
Gore's spokeswoman responded in 2007 that the court had upheld the film's fundamental thesis and
its use as an educational tool.[220] In 2009, an interviewer asked Gore about the British court
challenge and the nine "errors", and Gore responded, "the ruling was in my favor." [221]
Organizations including People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) criticized Gore for not
advocating vegetarianism as a way for individuals to reduce their carbon footprint. [222] Gore agreed
that meat production contributes to increased carbon emissions, but did not want to "go quite as far
as ... saying everybody should become a vegetarian".[223] He said that although he was not a
vegetarian, he had "cut back sharply" on his consumption of meat. [223]
When asked by Bjrn Lomborg to debate whether spending on health and education should take
priority over limiting carbon emissions, Gore responded that he would not debate because the
"scientific community has gone through this chapter and verse. We have long since passed the time
when we should pretend this is a 'on the one hand, on the other hand' issue . . . . It's not a matter of
theory or conjecture."[224]
The Gore Effect, an informal and satirical term alleging a causal relationship between unseasonable
cold weather phenomena and global warming activism is named after Gore.CNN meteorologist Rob
Marciano describes use of the effect as a mere running gag among weather forecasters.[225]

Albert Arnold "Al" Gore, Jr. (born March 31, 1948) is an American politician, advocate and
philanthropist, who served as the45th Vice President of the United States (19932001),
under President Bill Clinton. He was the Democratic Party's nominee for President and lost the 2000
U.S. presidential election despite winning the popular vote. Gore is currently an author

andenvironmental activist. He has founded a number of non-profit organizations, including

the Alliance for Climate Protection, and has received a Nobel Peace Prize for his work in climate
change activism.[1]
Gore was an elected official for 24 years. He was a Congressman from Tennessee from 197785
and from 198593 served as one of the state's Senators. He served as Vice-President during the
Clinton administration from 1993-2001. In the 2000 presidential election, Gore won the popular
vote but lost the Electoral College to Republican George W. Bush. A controversial election dispute
over a vote recount in Florida was settled by the U.S. Supreme Court, which ruled 5-4 in favor of
Bush.
Gore is the founder and current chair of the Alliance for Climate Protection, the co-founder and chair
of Generation Investment Management, the co-founder and chair of the now-defunct Current
TV network, a member of the Board of Directors of Apple Inc., and a senior adviser to Google.[2] Gore
is also a partner in the venture capital firm, Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers, heading its climate
change solutions group.[3][4] He has served as a visiting professor at Middle Tennessee State
University, Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism, Fisk University, and the University
of California, Los Angeles.[2][5][6][7] He is also a member of the Board of Directors of World Resources
Institute.[8]
Gore has received a number of awards including the Nobel Peace Prize (joint award with
the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2007), a Grammy Award for Best Spoken Word
Album (2009) for his book An Inconvenient Truth,[9] a Primetime Emmy Award for Current TV (2007),
and a Webby Award (2005). Gore was also the subject of the Academy Award-winning (2007)
documentary An Inconvenient Truth in 2006. In 2007 he was named a runner-up for Time' s 2007
Person of the Year