Different pathways toward net-zero emissions imply diverging health impacts: a health impact assessment study for France

Léo Moutet, Aurélien Bigo, Philippe Quirion, L. Temime, Kévin Jean
{"title":"Different pathways toward net-zero emissions imply diverging health impacts: a health impact assessment study for France","authors":"Léo Moutet, Aurélien Bigo, Philippe Quirion, L. Temime, Kévin Jean","doi":"10.1088/2752-5309/ad5750","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Background: In the transport sector, efforts to achieve carbon neutrality may generate public health cobenefits by promoting physical activity. Objective: This study aims to quantify the health impacts related to active transport based on four different scenarios leading France toward carbon neutrality in 2050. Methods: The French Agency for Ecological Transition developed four consistent and contrasting scenarios (S1 to S4) achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 as well as a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario that extends our current lifestyles until 2050, without reaching net-zero. For each of these Transitions2050 scenarios, we distributed the mobility demand for walking, cycling and e-cycling across age groups. Relying on the health impact assessment framework, we quantified the impacts of the corresponding physical activity on all-cause mortality. The impact of each of the carbon neutrality scenarios was determined by comparison with estimates from the BAU scenario. Results: In S1 and S2 scenarios, volumes of active transport are projected to increase to fulfil the World Health Organisations recommendations by 2050, while they increase slightly in S3 and decrease in S4. S2 scenario reaches the highest levels of health cobenefits, with 494,000 deaths prevented between 2021 and 2050. This would translate into a life expectancy gain of 3.0 months for the general population in 2050, mainly driven by e-bikes. S1 would provide smaller but important health benefits, while these benefits would be modest for S3. On the contrary, S4 implies 52,000 additional deaths as compared to the BAU scenario, and a loss of 0.2 month in life expectancy. Discussion: Different ways to decarbonize mobility in a net-zero perspective may achieve very contrasting public health cobenefits. This study illustrates how the public health dimension may provide a relevant insight in choices of collective transformation toward net-zero societies.","PeriodicalId":517104,"journal":{"name":"Environmental Research: Health","volume":"110 25","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Environmental Research: Health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1088/2752-5309/ad5750","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In the transport sector, efforts to achieve carbon neutrality may generate public health cobenefits by promoting physical activity. Objective: This study aims to quantify the health impacts related to active transport based on four different scenarios leading France toward carbon neutrality in 2050. Methods: The French Agency for Ecological Transition developed four consistent and contrasting scenarios (S1 to S4) achieving carbon neutrality by 2050 as well as a business-as-usual (BAU) scenario that extends our current lifestyles until 2050, without reaching net-zero. For each of these Transitions2050 scenarios, we distributed the mobility demand for walking, cycling and e-cycling across age groups. Relying on the health impact assessment framework, we quantified the impacts of the corresponding physical activity on all-cause mortality. The impact of each of the carbon neutrality scenarios was determined by comparison with estimates from the BAU scenario. Results: In S1 and S2 scenarios, volumes of active transport are projected to increase to fulfil the World Health Organisations recommendations by 2050, while they increase slightly in S3 and decrease in S4. S2 scenario reaches the highest levels of health cobenefits, with 494,000 deaths prevented between 2021 and 2050. This would translate into a life expectancy gain of 3.0 months for the general population in 2050, mainly driven by e-bikes. S1 would provide smaller but important health benefits, while these benefits would be modest for S3. On the contrary, S4 implies 52,000 additional deaths as compared to the BAU scenario, and a loss of 0.2 month in life expectancy. Discussion: Different ways to decarbonize mobility in a net-zero perspective may achieve very contrasting public health cobenefits. This study illustrates how the public health dimension may provide a relevant insight in choices of collective transformation toward net-zero societies.
实现净零排放的不同途径意味着不同的健康影响:法国健康影响评估研究
背景:在交通领域,实现碳中和的努力可通过促进体育锻炼为公众健康带来共同利益。研究目的本研究旨在根据法国在 2050 年实现碳中和的四种不同方案,量化与积极交通相关的健康影响。研究方法:法国生态转型局制定了四种一致且对比鲜明的方案(S1 至 S4),在 2050 年实现碳中和,以及一种 "一切照旧"(BAU)方案,将我们目前的生活方式延续到 2050 年,但不实现净零碳排放。在每一种 "过渡 2050 "情景中,我们都将步行、骑自行车和电动自行车的交通需求分布到各个年龄段。根据健康影响评估框架,我们量化了相应身体活动对全因死亡率的影响。通过与 "一切照旧 "情景的估计值进行比较,确定了每种碳中和情景的影响。结果如下在 S1 和 S2 情景中,预计到 2050 年,主动交通量将增加以满足世界卫生组织的建议,而在 S3 情景中,主动交通量将略有增加,在 S4 情景中,主动交通量将减少。S2 方案的共同健康效益最高,在 2021 年至 2050 年期间可避免 494,000 人死亡。到 2050 年,这将使普通人口的预期寿命延长 3.0 个月,而这主要是由电动自行车驱动的。S1 将带来较小但重要的健康益处,而 S3 的益处不大。相反,与 "一切照旧 "情景相比,S4 意味着死亡人数增加 52,000 人,预期寿命缩短 0.2 个月。讨论:从净零角度来看,不同的交通脱碳方式可能会带来截然不同的公共卫生共同效益。本研究说明了公共卫生层面如何为实现净零碳社会的集体转型选择提供相关见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信