Global Warming Won't Cut Winter Deaths as Hoped

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

By Alister Doyle, Environment Correspondent

OSLO (Reuters) - Global warming will fail to reduce high winter death rates as some officials have predicted because there will be more harmful weather extremes even as it gets less cold, a British study showed on Sunday.

A draft U.N. report due for publication next month says that, overall, climate change will harm human health, but adds:


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


"Positive effects will include modest improvements in cold-related mortality and morbidity in some areas due to fewer cold extremes, shifts in food production and reduced capacity of disease-carrying vectors."

However a report in the journal Nature Climate Change on the situation in England and Wales said climate warming would likely not decrease winter mortality in those places. It suggested more volatile winters, with swings from cold to mild linked to rising greenhouse gas emissions, might even raise death rates.

Lead author Philip Staddon of the University of Exeter told Reuters that the findings were likely to apply to other developed countries in temperate regions that risk more extreme weather as temperatures rise.

Excess winter deaths (EWDs), the number of people who die in winter compared to other times of the year, roughly halved to 31,000 in England and Wales in 2012-12 from 60,000 typical in the 1950s, official data show.

Staddon's report said the decline was due to better home insulation, heating, health care and other non-climate factors with no link to a decline in the number of cold days.

"Winter cold severity no longer predicts the numbers affected," the authors wrote. "The correlation between the number of cold winter days per year and EWDs, which was strong until the mid-1970s, no longer exists."

HEATWAVES

Staddon's findings are at odds with a 2012 Climate Change Risk Assessment by the British Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) that said global warming would bring "some potential benefits, for example, a projected reduction in winter mortality."

Asked to comment on Sunday's report, a Defra spokesman said an updated climate assessment was due in 2017.

"We will continue to take account of the latest scientific evidence," he said.

Many governments are reviewing health spending priorities and summer heatwaves are often seen as a bigger threat than winter cold. U.N. studies say it is at least 95 percent probable that most warming in recent years is man-made.

Staddon said developed nations should avoid a radical shift in spending to heatwave protection, such as better air conditioning in homes for the elderly, from measures to ease cold such as subsidies for insulation or winter heating.

"Heatwave deaths will increase a lot but there will still be more winter deaths," he said. In 2003, the worst European heatwave in centuries killed up to 70,000 people, including about 3,000 in Britain.

Report available at: https://www.nature.com/doifinder/10.1038/nclimate2121

(Editing by Sonya Hepinstall)

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe