In a first-of-its-kind study, researchers from the USC have found a link between EV adoption and reduced asthma hospitalizations.

 

In a recent study, researchers from the University of Southern California found a startling correlation: for every 2 percent jump in the number of electric vehicles in a given zip code, there was a corresponding two percent drop in asthma-related hospital emergency room visits.

 

“The transition to electric vehicles is projected to have considerable public health co-benefits, but most evidence regarding air quality and health impacts comes from projections rather than real-world data,” reads the study, titled, California’s early transition to electric vehicles: Observed health and air quality co-benefits, and co-authored by Erika Garcia, Jill Johnston, Rob McConnell, Lawrence Palinkas, and Sandrah P. Eckel, at USC.

 

https://electrifynews.com/science/study-evs-lead-to-fall-in-asthma/

2 hours ago, Scott said:

“The transition to electric vehicles is projected to have considerable public health co-benefits, but most evidence regarding air quality and health impacts comes from projections rather than real-world data,” reads the study, titled, California’s early transition to electric vehicles: Observed health and air quality co-benefits,

The significant word being "projections"!

Impressive, though really shouldn't be a surprise.  Along with other respiratory ailments if studied.

 

I know my unscientific study of me clearing my throat & coughing increases during smog season, and or if I sit surfside next to the beach road/seawall when busy, so actually avoid doing that on weekends.

 

As much as I enjoy Krung Thep, one of the reasons I don't visit more often.

Edited February 18, 20233 yr by KhunLA

Follow on headline...

 

Pick-up trucks, SUVs to pick up the Asthma slack

 

https://ourworldindata.org/fossil-fuels#global-fossil-fuel-consumption

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 18, 20233 yr by bamnutsak

49 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

The significant word being "projections"!

You've got it exactly wrong. This significance of this study lies in the fact that it wasn't a projection but based on an extensive real world analysis of actual data.

The larger issue that lies behind this study is what economists call negative externalities. Negative externalities are costs that are paid for not by those responsible for creating them but by others instead.

This is why the IMF says that most of the almost 6 trilliion dollars in yearly subsidies to the fossil fuel industry are not direct cash transfers or tax relief, but rather costs incurred by those whose health suffers as a result.

.