How cutting US air pollution could save 6,000 lives a year by 2030
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2025/sep/05/air-pollution-deaths-us-fossil-fuels?utm_campaign=Princeton%20Media%20Highlights%20for%20t&utm_term=How%20cutting%20US%20air%20pollution%20cou&utm_medium=email&utm_source=directmailmac
20 Comments
Efforts to improve the climate could reduce the number of deaths caused by air pollution in the US by about 6,000 people a year by 2030, according to a [study](https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590332225000582).
If action is not taken, the situation is predicted to worsen. This is because of a growing and ageing population who are more vulnerable to the impacts of air pollution, resulting in nearly 13,000 increased air pollution deaths in 2030 compared with 2015.
ngl, the messaging on this is not very strong. 6k lives sounds like a lot but is basically statistically insignificant given the scale of human life (8+B) and if all the pollution is only causing that much harm, is it even a big deal?? doesn’t climate change kill way more people than that?
If people refused to get vaccinated and wear a mask to save 1M+ lives, what makes anyone think 6000 lives will move the needle?
That is a tiny number, essentially given the uncertainty surrounding these numbers. If this were a PR message, it has already failed.
Im a certified visual emmisions tester for EPA method 9 and a similar industry specific method.
For the industry specific inspection, contractors have to preform the daily inspections. We record how long emmisions are leaking, and they have to pay a fine if the time is too long. The problem is that they can hire anyone certified to do these inspections, but if someone wants to crack down and say “your shit leaks lile a siv, its way out of compliance and your times are much grwater than allowed” the site owner will just ban you from the job site and hire someone that isnt getting them fined almost daily.
The current administration would use this as grounds to roll back regulations even more than they already are.
This administration, probably…
*See we could only save 6,000 people with tighter regulations. We could role them back to 1980s limits and probably only kill like 10,000 more by 2030… no big deal*
It has been so far decades. Problem is, it will cost rich people money, and not save them. Therefore, the rich won’t do it, unless voters make them.
the matter: pursuing an agenda of reduction of the world’s population.
The last thing the American government is concerned about is human life. RFK JR alone will likely lead to needless deaths in numbers that make 6,000 look like a small number.
The state don’t care about your health to begin with
*Ah, but are those lives politically expedient to save?*
But bosses want to see you in the office because they want to make sure you’re working all day~
This assumes we care about people’s health in America. The clean air will be bottled and charged out as a premium.
Read the room. Saving lives is not a priority these days.
US wants to save people? I thought the system there is designed to milk them out of money and let them die if they don’t earn enough. Or at least that’s wants happening according to news and reddit. By the way things are going, pollution is a side business for health insurance and big pharma.
Changing US foreign policy could save 10x that many lives a year.
Right now the US only cares up to the point of your birth. After that you can die unless you are a useful slave to the billionaire class.
Don’t make me laugh. This country voted for Donald Trump, the Rapist.
You’re probably ignoring the first law of Economics 101: Consider all the costs and benefits of any action, meaning all people for all time. So you have to factor in the costs to all people of whatever measures you’re going to do to cut pollution. How many lives might those measures cost? Bear in mind that when you impose financial cost on someone there is a small correlation with earlier death as a result.
The government rn: “why would we cut pollution to save 6k a year when people should just have more babies?” Smh