Energy efficiency can have negative impacts on public health

Some energy efficiency improvements could cost lives by increasing indoor radon exposure and the resulting risk of developing lung cancer. According to an article in the British Medical Journal, energy efficiency improvements could reduce home energy use and greenhouse gas emissions (which could lead to many health benefits).

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Some energy efficiency improvements could cost lives by increasing indoor radon exposure and the resulting risk of developing lung cancer.

According to an article in the British Medical Journal, energy efficiency improvements could reduce home energy use and greenhouse gas emissions (which could lead to many health benefits). But, improvements that decrease air exchange rates lead to elevated exposure to indoor pollutants, including radon.

After smoking, radon exposure is the most important risk factor in developing lung cancer. In the United States, it is responsible for an estimated 15,000-20,000 deaths from lung cancer each year. In Europe, an estimate 9% of all lung cancer deaths can be attributed to this air pollutant.


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.


In their paper "Home energy efficiency and radon related risk of lung cancer: modelling study",a group of British researchers discuss the co-impacts of altering the way that homes exchange indoor and outdoor air. They state that, while a project can be “good for energy efficiency, indoor temperatures in winter, and protection against outdoor pollutants, it has the potential to increase concentrations of pollutants arising from sources inside or underneath the home.”

Today, about 1400 cases of lung cancer in the United Kingdom are due to radon exposure. James Milner and his co-authors estimate that energy efficiency projects could lead to a 56.6% increase in average indoor radon concentration. The resulting rise in human exposure would result in 278 premature deaths (4700 life years lost) each year in the United Kingdom.

These risks could be offset by incorporating “purpose-provided ventilation” – in other words, by using fans and other equipment to carefully control indoor and outdoor air exchange. But, the use of these technologies could eliminate some of the energy savings of the original energy efficiency project. Furthermore, the authors note that “there is potential for a major adverse impact on health if such systems fail.”

Reference: James Milner, et. al Home energy efficiency and radon related risk of lung cancer: modelling study. British Medical Journal. 2014; 348 doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f7493 (Published 10 January 2014)

Photo Credit: Health pictogram from wikimedia commons

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe