Furthermore, Jacobson et al. While these results do not account for the life cycle emissions of EV battery production and disposal, based on past studies we would expect inclusion of battery production emissions to reduce CO2 mitigation benefits by 5% or less (Samaras & Meisterling, 2008). Regardless of the EV adoption scenario considered, we find that the United States would achieve aggregate national CO2 mitigation and mortality reduction benefits (Figure 2a). Co‐beneficial actions include relatively facile measures, such as the promotion of active transport and reduced meat consumption, as well as more high‐inertia efforts including preservation and expansion of urban greenspaces and the transformation of carbon‐intense transportation and energy infrastructure. in Modeling Earth Systems (JAMES), Journal of Geophysical Research 's experiment. Health outcomes for EV adoption under current energy generation infrastructure vary according to fraction of internal combustion engine replacement. Similarly, a recent International Council on Clean Transportation report estimated that the United States experienced 22,000 transportation‐attributable ambient PM2.5 and O3 deaths in 2015 (Anenberg et al., 2019). Here, we present a transportation sector‐targeted analysis of the co‐benefits and trade‐offs of the electrification of light‐duty passenger vehicles (LDPV) in the United States. Estimates of economic damages avoided due to EV adoption are substantial. Can antibiotic resistance be reduced by vaccinating against respiratory disease? (2006) for PM2.5 for all EV adoption‐energy generation scenarios considered (Figure 4). (2017) found that electrification of 17% of light‐duty vehicles could lead to modest but widespread reductions in O3 and particulate matter, whereas Schnell et al. He also was a regional medical director for the New York State Department of Corrections and medical director of the Albany, New York, county jail. is rooted in their relatively conservative predictions in comparison to the other HIFs considered. Additionally, our health impact estimates of avoided mortality and the corresponding economic valuations should not be seen as comprehensive because (a) there is well‐documented evidence of a variety of non‐mortality health outcomes associated with transportation‐related air pollution, including asthma and other cardio‐pulmonary ailments, and (b) our study only considers ground‐level O3 and PM2.5 exposure, while there may be additional impacts from changes in direct exposure to NO2 and other transport emissions (Anenberg et al., 2018). To provide a more comprehensive understanding of the distribution of U.S. health and climate co‐benefits under potential future vehicle and energy scenarios, we analyze public health and CO2 emission benefits and trade‐offs for individual states and geographic regions. For rC and r2C, the emission‐free power generation fraction is based on an individual state's current emission‐free generation capacity, that is, any state whose current energy generation is composed of less than 50% emission‐free power, will produce a fraction of its needed electricity from combustion sources in the r2C scenario. Small Bodies, Solar Systems Still, Dr. Stern has seen attitudes begin to change. Short‐term O3 HIFs quantify aggregated annual health benefits based on daily 8‐hr maximum O3 values during the warm season. [8] Palmer T et. Processes, Information Pollutant concentration changes are generally proportional to the EV adoption proportion considered, that is, compare magnitudes of e25 changes to e75 changes. These cookies do not store any personal information. and Jerrett et al. At 75% EV penetration, the South also has the greatest range of benefits between power generation scenarios; from a predicted increase of 32 premature deaths per year with combustion‐only energy sources (e75‐r0) to the decrease of 981 deaths per year with doubled emission‐free energy sources (e75‐r2C). This finding is consistent with simulated PM2.5 increases that result from increases in ammonium sulfate emissions in the summer, driven by SO2 emissions from coal‐fired power plants (Schnell et al., 2019). was established by The Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry to operate the ABPI Code of Practice for the Pharmaceutical Industry independently of the ABPI. (2019) found that the air quality benefits from EV adoption would avoid over 17,000 deaths annually in addition to reducing GHGs. Likewise, it is less expensive to discover early-stage breast cancer and treat a woman in prison than wait until it metastasizes and treat it in the community, likely using public funds. Number of NHS vaccinations against infectious diseases, Number of vaccinations against infectious diseases offered routinely or to people most at risk. Announcements The BASE scenario was evaluated in Section 3.1 “Model evaluation” and Figures S1–S3 of Schnell et al. Vaccination greatly reduces disease, disability death and inequity worldwide. (2012) modeled the health impacts of reducing residential car travel by 20% in urban areas throughout the Midwest and found that the corresponding PM2.5 reductions would reduce mortality by 525 deaths per year. Vaccines can have a vital role in the fight against antimicrobial resistance. Sea salt, mineral dust, and biogenic emissions of isoprene and monoterpenes are calculated interactively. (2014) found that in the United States, the health outcome of a 10% EV adoption depended heavily on the type of energy used to charge the EVs. To provide an equal‐footing comparison of simulated changes in tonnage of CO2 emissions and premature deaths avoided, we calculate the monetary value of each change using derived damage metrics, that is, the U.S. social cost of carbon (SCC; Ricke et al., 2018) and the value of statistical life (VSL; U.S. EPA, 2015; Anenberg et al., 2019). The largest magnitude national‐level public health and climate change co‐benefits occur in our aggressive adoption scenario when added energy demand for charging is predominantly supplied by emission‐free energy sources (e75‐r2C).