Dangerous Temperatures Could Kill 50% More Europeans By 2100, Study Finds (theguardian.com) 110
Dangerous temperatures could kill 50% more people in Europe by the end of the century, a study has found, with the lives lost to stronger heat projected to outnumber those saved from milder cold. From a report: The researchers estimated an extra 8,000 people would die each year as a result of "suboptimal temperatures" even under the most optimistic scenario for cutting planet-heating pollution. The hottest plausible scenario they considered showed a net increase of 80,000 temperature-related deaths a year.
The findings challenge an argument popular among those who say global heating is good for society because fewer people will die from cold weather. "We wanted to test this," said Pierre Masselot, a statistician at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and lead author of the study. "And we show clearly that we will see a net increase in temperature-related deaths under climate change." The study builds on previous research in which the scientists linked temperature to mortality rates for different age groups in 854 cities across Europe. They combined these with three climate scenarios that map possible changes in population structure and temperature over the century.
The findings challenge an argument popular among those who say global heating is good for society because fewer people will die from cold weather. "We wanted to test this," said Pierre Masselot, a statistician at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine and lead author of the study. "And we show clearly that we will see a net increase in temperature-related deaths under climate change." The study builds on previous research in which the scientists linked temperature to mortality rates for different age groups in 854 cities across Europe. They combined these with three climate scenarios that map possible changes in population structure and temperature over the century.
What exactly are these "high" temps that kill? (Score:1, Insightful)
Are we talking well over 110F predicted?
I mean, in the US we have tons of people living in Arizona with extremely high temps.....and doing pretty well.
That's dry heat...we have areas like New Orleans, with avg highs in the low to mid 90's but is combined with extremely high humidity levels....yet, we seem to make it just fine.
I'm just curious what is extreme for over there that will kill people?
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe not everybody in Europe has A/C
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Something tells me that "issue" will quickly resolve itself if the temperatures consistently go above 35 degrees C for large portions of the summer.
Re:What exactly are these "high" temps that kill? (Score:5, Insightful)
How so? You think the most vulnerable groups (the poor, the homeless, and the elderly) have an insane amount of disposable income to suddenly go and buy AC units?
Re: (Score:1)
Where in Europe is Papago park? And if you don't know why I'm asking the question, maybe start again with the headline of this post and work down to find out where you slipped off topic.
Re: What exactly are these "high" temps that kill (Score:1)
You replied to a post who replied to a post who specifically called out Arizona. In other words, homeless people do it in Phoenix Arizona without AC.
Anything else?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: What exactly are these "high" temps that kill (Score:2)
I wouldn't necessarily draw that conclusion from that. They don't really mention anything other than cause and contributing cause. I suspect a lot, perhaps even a majority, in those statistics aren't even homeless. I'd dare say possibly people from out of state who hadn't acclimated, kids left in cars, people going on trails without regard for how much heat radiates off of rocks, doing hard labor, etc.
Fewer houses these days are built with the local climate in mind. By that I mean, not having much of a shad
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't necessarily draw that conclusion from that. They don't really mention anything other than cause and contributing cause. I suspect a lot, perhaps even a majority, in those statistics aren't even homeless.
If you click in further, you can get more stats.
Mostly Maricopa residents, mostly housed individuals, but homeless are insanely over-represented (they're like 14%)
Out-of-staters are probably also over-represented (I think they were like 20% or so) but are overall a minority.
Point is, though homeless people have per-capita one of the highest rate of heat-related mortality, though the largest group (by a huge margin, 60% or so) are just Maricopa residents with homes.
You should click though to the breakd
Re: (Score:2)
So, uhhh, na, the homeless aren't doing alright.
Re: What exactly are these "high" temps that kill (Score:2)
If they were, they wouldn't be homeless. You can say they're disproportionately affected by X bad thing for basically anything if we're being honest. Also note when I say acclimate, it doesn't really happen when people spend all day in houses with their thermostats set to 72 degrees. People commonly do that for years, and then ultimately retire a Canadian. They also wonder how I can stand keeping my thermostat at 80...What can I say? Always have.
Anyways I don't care what they do as long as they don't trash
Re: (Score:2)
If they were, they wouldn't be homeless. You can say they're disproportionately affected by X bad thing for basically anything if we're being honest. Also note when I say acclimate, it doesn't really happen when people spend all day in houses with their thermostats set to 72 degrees. People commonly do that for years, and then ultimately retire a Canadian. They also wonder how I can stand keeping my thermostat at 80...What can I say? Always have.
Oh, I agree with you... but certainly you must concede that a lack of shelter will lead to an increase in heat-related mortality on triple-digit temperature days....
Sure, a human with an infinite supply of water can handle that kind of heat in a low humidity setting essentially indefinitely... but the less resources you have, the easier it must be to hit the threshold for heat stroke. Not to mention a likely lower state of just general health, I imagine.
Anyways I don't care what they do as long as they don't trash the place. Ever since I've started diving I've become even more of a conservationist. It kind of boggles the mind how much megafauna is so close to us under water. If you want to see that on land, you have to go to pretty remote places. Wasn't always that way. Nowadays when people move near wildlife, especially larger cats and canines like coyotes, they start lobbying the government to "do something" about it. And then they wonder why they get a rodent problem later. I knew the coyotes would be walking around in my neighborhood in packs before I bought my house, and I see nothing wrong with it. But I'm not most people. And most people aren't divers.
I agree with you entirely here.
I have packs of coyot
Re: (Score:2)
Because again- human beings have some very strict requisites for surviving 100 degree heat. Lacking those, we will quickly succumb to it.
I'm not sure you give the human body enough credit. I've had some Mexicans telling me my gringo ass won't last in the heat when I'm out doing work in the heat. But they're used to whiteys being snowbirds. I'm definitely not a snowbird. I've been lasting as long as they do. But I've also seen them decline being invited inside to cool off in the AC even though it's available, something I won't do if I've been working my ass off in the heat for hours, but they seem to do often. Or at least, I wouldn't then, ca
Re: (Score:2)
AC just gets rid of the other requirements- namely- consumption of enough water, better cardiovascular health, etc.
100 degrees aren't universally fatal, and I didn't say they were, but it is a fact that a body in bad shape and/or without enough water, will quickly succumb to such heat. That's just physics. If you can't handle the load of increased evaporative cooling, or cannot provide the coolant for it- then you can't evaporatively cool- and your core
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, homeless people do it in Phoenix Arizona without AC.
You mean die from heat related illness? Yeah homeless people are affected in Arizona as well. That is kind of my point about AC units. Of the people who died from heatstroke in Arizona in 2023 OVER HALF WERE HOMELESS.
https://azcir.org/news/2024/07... [azcir.org]
Anything else?
That's my line. You've so far not made any point.
Re: (Score:2)
You might want to follow the talk I had with DamnOregonian.
Re: (Score:3)
Ultimately option three is the one that will be adopted. AC units are a difficult investment for those who are most affected by heat. You're talking largely about people who are struggling with the current energy bills as it is, the initial outlay is nothing compared to the cost of running the thing. It's one thing to install an AC system when you're paying 8c/kWh for electricity, quite another when you're paying 50c/kWh.
But why is option 3 the way to go? Well because that's already how they are going. Due
Re: (Score:2)
These days window units can be had cheaply...and it doesn't cost an arm and a leg to r
Re: (Score:3)
I don't believe a window air conditioner costs an "insane" amount of money, especially if bought secondhand.
Assuming you can afford to buy a window AC. And pay for the electrical upgrades needed to power it. And the electricity to run it. And assuming you have a suitable window to put it in. And assuming the electric grid can handle the load of everyone running their new ACs during a heat wave. And your AC doesn't break in the middle of a heat wave due to the strain of running it continuously.
And even if all that is true, you may find it can't cool your home very effectively. Window ACs aren't that powerful
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, many countries, even poor ones in the global south have figured it out.
But Europe is just incapable of this. So might as well try to control the temperature of the whole planet instead... much easier to accomplish. /s
Re: (Score:2)
It's not about "figuring it out". All our existing infrastructure is designed for the climate it's in. Everything from the design of entrances to buildings, to a building's ratio of surface area to volume, to the mixture of asphalt used to pave roads, depends on the climate. That's true everywhere in the world. When the climate changes, your infrastructure is no longer suitable and needs to be changed. We know how to do that, and it's incredibly expensive.
Preventing climate change is one of the best in
Re: (Score:2)
I think you over estimate the effect the spending has.
Bjorn Lomborg does a great job on the economics of this.
Basically hampering 10+% of our global GDP for barely a 0.0001% effect on "global temperatures" (which isnt even a thing).
Its nonsense.
Adaptation costs a fraction of that.
Re: (Score:2)
Basically hampering 10+% of our global GDP for barely a 0.0001% effect on "global temperatures" (which isnt even a thing).
Do those numbers sound even the least bit plausible to you? No, of course they aren't. That's just absurd.
Here is the actual data [wikipedia.org] on projected effects of different emissions scenarios. The difference between high and low emissions scenarios is huge, possibly as much as 3 C difference by 2100.
Re: (Score:2)
Those "predictions" are cute.
Re: (Score:2)
By "cute" do you mean "inconsistent with what I want to believe"? That's the consensus of the scientific community based on mountains of data. Your argument seems to be
1. It's not worth spending money to prevent climate change, because it will only have a tiny effect.
2. I know it will only have a tiny effect because I choose to ignore all predictions that say it will have a large effect.
Can you spot the flaw in that argument?
Re: (Score:1)
Something tells me that "issue" will quickly resolve itself if the temperatures consistently go above 35 degrees C for large portions of the summer.
A/C is not the easy fix [technologyreview.com] that many people think it is.
TLDR: Without major improvements A/C will make global warming worse; A/C units already produce enough heat to measurably boost urban temperatures, and they leak out potent greenhouse gases. Plus, billions of new A/C units will create one of the largest sources of rising electricity demand around the world; it is estimated that energy demand from cooling will triple, reaching 6,200 terawatt-hours by 2050—or nearly a quarter of the world’s total
Re: (Score:1)
Not everyone in the US has A/C either....but, it's a good thing to get.
I mean hell...what's the difficulty in getting a couple of window units for old buildings that don't have central A/C?
It's not expensive....
Re: (Score:2)
That's exactly what Chicago Public schools did with many of their old buildings (a few from as early as the 1880s in my experience): added a couple of "window shakers" in each classroom. Not the ideal situation, given the desire to keep ambient noise down in a learning environment.
But to answer your question, the difficulty was getting enough electricity. Not only running the conduit an
Re: (Score:2)
What special wiring?
You just plug it into a normal 110V wall socket....good to go.
Re: (Score:1)
Old people in Europe should go to university?
It seems you are missing the point that the university campus was an example of how to do air conditioning efficiently in large buildings that are in close proximity. Also, old people can certainly go to universities to cool off during the day during heat waves. This does seem to be a thing for some places in the USA. If there's a problem with keeping people in the area cool a university could open up unused lecture halls, conference spaces, sporting arenas, or whatever so there is a safe place to hang o
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
People lived without AC for millennia. It isn't a death sentence.
Re: (Score:2)
Usually, when talking about fatal heat you are talking about a combination of wet bulb temperature, duration, access to cooling facilities, and health.
Even when you simplify, it's still complicated.
At a wet bulb temperature of 35C, a healthy person will die in about 6 hours. That's above 70C on the American heat index... Which is likely reported as 160F.
However, not all people are fit. Not all people can limit exposure to under 6 hours. And some places are typically more humid than others.
US has Heat Deaths Too (Score:5, Insightful)
Europe also has far less air conditioning that the US and also the elderly are more susceptible than younger people and the average age of the US population is 38.5 vs 44.5 in the EU. So, as temperatures climb, Europe has more eldery people and less air conditioning and so is probably going to be more impacted...but the US will be affected as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
in the US we have tons of people living in Arizona with extremely high temps.....and doing pretty well
We aren't all blessed with youth and good health. Check this out:
Arizona heat deaths [azdhs.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, in the US we have tons of people living in Arizona with extremely high temps.....and doing pretty well.
The "I know people just fine in more extreme places" is an argument that shows a complete and total lack of critical thinking. Here's the thing, do you know any people in Arizona who don't have an AC unit in the house? I barely know people who do have an AC unit. 43C in Arizona just means people will spend the day indoors. 43C where I live mean people will end up in the emergency ward with heatstroke.
You make it just fine because you're setup to handle what is a normal event for you. Much of Europe is not.
F
Re: (Score:2)
In general- more than you (generic, not personally) realize.
Re: (Score:1)
I took a look at the study, since it's claimed findings are in stark contradiction to all previous data.
Took me about a minute of reading to find the first point of massive cherry picking of the data that would result in complete inversion of the outcomes from reality. They only count places with 50.000 or more people. Their data set is specifically 2016 edition of Urban Europe. I.e. they don't even pretend to be looking at total numbers, they only focus on urban centers, where power outages during cold wea
Re: (Score:2)
I suppose it makes a little sense though. Some years ago I had my AC fail on a particularly hot weekend and my apartment become insufferably warm, but at least I could take a periodic
Re: (Score:2)
People die from the heat in Arizona all the time:
https://mapazdashboard.arizona... [arizona.edu].
Louisiana too:
https://ldh.la.gov/assets/docs... [la.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: What exactly are these "high" temps that kill? (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Be thou gone, HERETIC! (Score:1)
You have questioned the True Faith. Nobody is supposed to ask for specifics, and nobody is supposed to notice the total Luddite and ahistorically ignorant pessimist attitudes enshrined in the religion of climate change.
All the climate change gloom and doom tied to warming presumes that human beings are so stupid and incapable that they will do NOTHING to avoid the problems... as the climate warms (assuming they are correct about warming), nobody will come up with any better air conditioning, nobody will mov
Re: (Score:2)
I see no rise in sea levels with my own eyes no matter how much people claim.
You don't see any sea level rise where you live, therefore it isn't happening anywhere? Perhaps that isn't the most robust argument?
Sea level rise varies by location [climate.gov] based on local geography, ocean currents, ground water changes, rebounding due to loss of glaciers, etc. In Alaska, the sea level is actually falling. In Louisiana, it's rising by more than an inch every three years. The global average rate is currently about an inch every five years and accelerating steadily.
Re: (Score:2)
You see no rise of sea levels with your own eyes, therefor it must be globally false?
You actually think that sea level is the exact same in all places across the globe, don't you?
Saudis can operate in high temps, therefor thousands of people won't die if it happens in fucking Colorado?
Heat related deaths have increased almost 700% since the early 2000s.
The sooner you fuckers die off, the better for all of us. Your stupidity, and you
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
We set a record in 2023 of over 2000 heat-related deaths in the US.
Re: (Score:2)
We got the first glimpse of this future in 2003 : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org] 80k dead. Mostly elderly.
One of the reasons is that we didn't have cultural knowledge on how to behave in such heat : shutting blinds, closing windows. Up till then, if the inside got hot, you opened all windows and equalize with the outside. When temperatures get to 30C +, that is no longer a workable solution, and the goal of your heat management isn't to cool down, but to prevent heating up.
Now, 20 years later, when I
Re: (Score:1)
Wet bulb temperatures over 35 C kill.
Re: (Score:1)
How dare we deport nice clean mexicans who came here illegally and import dirty indians that want to come legally, amiright?
Re: (Score:2)
Is this sarcasm? If the issue is the legality of the immigration, we can solve the entire problem by simply changing the law. It would be by far the easiest solution to implement.
Re: (Score:2)
I bring up Indians here on slashdot because we're tech workers and those are the ones we are going to notic
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about the Gen X-ers, but I can tell you that not all of us Boomers are either foolish or mean spirited, and certainly not both. Instead, we're the products of our upbringing, just as you're the product of yours. Much of what you dislike about us comes from the fact that our parents, members of the Greatest Generation, grew up during the Great Depression and if they ever managed to get past the compulsive frugalit
Re: (Score:2)
I expect those troubles to remain in Asia and a bit of Europe. Displaced poor from India and Bangladesh will have a hell of a time getting to Canada or the USA in greater numbers.
Who knows how much of the Americas might end up trying to move to the Great Lakes region, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Already happened here in Canada and it wasn't because India is uninhabitable.
Canada and India are both part of the British Commonwealth. I'm not sure if that gives citizens any special migration rights. But there are cultural ties in place.
Uninhabitable (Score:2)
I thought that the planet was going to be completely uninhabitable in 20 years. Everyone will be dead already.
Move To Siberia (Score:1)
Problem solved. Next whiny topic?
Re: (Score:3)
Before Siberia moves to you!
Nuclear fission, heat pumps, and synthesized fuels (Score:1)
Global warming has been studied to death as have the solutions we'd need to implement to stop making the problem worse and allow the planet to slowly soak up some of the excess CO2 and cool off.
We'll need more nuclear power plants to replace fossil fuel electricity production and provide industrial heat. Dwellings should have heat pumps where it is appropriate to minimize fossil fuel heating and allow people to better tolerate rising temperatures. Transportation fuels should be synthesized to lower CO2 em
20:1.5? (Score:5, Insightful)
The current cold:hot ratio is 20:1.
So in eighty years it will be 12:1?
Or will the cold deaths go down and it'll be 10:1?
Not sure when to panic, please advise.
Re:20:1.5? (Score:4, Interesting)
Or will the cold deaths go down
People who can't cope with the heat tend not to have a problem coping with the cold. For example my house doesn't have an air conditioning. It does however have central heating. It really doesn't concern me how cold it gets outside, only how hot.
In Australia the situation was reversed. The AC did a great job of keeping the place warm, but it was an old non-reverse cycle unit so it SUUUUUCKED in winter as we huddled in front of bar heaters in a poorly insulated house.
Re: (Score:2)
*cool, the AC did a great job of keeping the place cool. Actually warm works too. When it's 40C outside simply having the inside a warm 27C is already a benefit, especially since the AC dries the air too.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
The current cold:hot ratio is 20:1.
So in eighty years it will be 12:1?
Or will the cold deaths go down and it'll be 10:1?
Not sure when to panic, please advise.
I believe we're all supposed to remain in panic and go to foxnews.com and watch certified Fox news channels or media outlets for more information on how to behave up and through this upcoming event and lots more.
Bet ya 0:1 we're all set with a good source, now.
P.S. I believe we need to buy things that have nothing to do with the.... whatever it is we're worried about in order to be prepared. Or something...?
Er (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Who is "Europe"? Nationally the installation of AC units is on the rise. The people who are most vulnerable to heatstroke on the other hand either can't afford to install an AC unit, can't afford to run an AC unit, or can't hang an AC unit in their cardboard box of a house.
It's always worth looking at who dies of heat / cold related issues before questioning if they will (or even can) change their behavior.
Re: Natural Selection (Score:1)
Increased Rate? (Score:2)
What is the projected population of Europe in 2100, and how would this translate to, say, deaths-per-100K relative to today?
Re: (Score:2)
Cold is a far bigger killer than heat. Most people in europe would welcome a bit more warmth, especially in the winter. This is just more climate alarmism from the chicken little brigade.
Cold has been managed in Europe. It's why every house, even those occupied by the poorest of people has a heater but most houses don't have an AC unit.
Burn baby burn (Score:1)
Stop my family dying (Score:2)
While the effects of cold weather are many; hypothermia, dehydration, exhaustion, hunger (reduced cooking and eating), isolation, (in some countries) more attacks from polar bears and paradoxically heat-stroke (from too much clothing), hotter summers doesn't mean warm winters, even though that is what's happening at the moment.
This will affect the age-extremes of population: Babies and grannies, both having little economic value. A multitude of old people dying means lower healthcare and pension costs, an
Can we get some unbiased reporting please? (Score:3)
Reports saying how much worse it's going to be, without mentioning how bad it is now lose credibility.
80,000 is a big number.
But that's apparently in "worst-case scenario", which means 160,000 people already die?
It doesn't go far into the details, about its based on a per-capita projection. So the 50% increase includes population growth as well.
They also added in an aging population, which increases the risk.
That's 2,345,410 people between 2015 and 2099. They're 95% sure that number will be between 327,603 to 4,775,853
They basically said "we have no idea, but we think it's going to be this"
Someone took that study, picked out the worst-case figures, and created a click-bait article out of it
2100 is along way off. (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Most people not just Europeans will be dead by 2100 with good or bad weather.
I want to scientifically or logically counter-argue for information development, but history repeats itself and information isn't paid attention to after about 8-10 years... So I'd say you're right. Well, I mean people will probably burn to death before 2100 but it will be because they can't get along anymore; literally cannot.
*sticks arm through rear and up to mouth to make it flap*
We are going to be dead before then so it's not our problem. /s
In general.... (Score:2)
You can always put on more clothes when it's cold. Cooling down without artificial means is more challenging, especially if your windows aren't designed to open and circulate air through the house.
But most of this is irrelevant, since as soon as the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (used to be called the Atlantic conveyor belt stops, and the Gulf Stream stops bringing warm water to northern Europe, the UK and France in particular, are going to freeze solid.
Riiight (Score:2, Insightful)
Let's leave aside the question of climate predictions 75 years in advance, or the continual drumbeat of "climate panic". Just how well do you suppose people can predict technological and social change 70 years in advance? Consider: in 1950 - how accurately would people have predicted our current society? Our current technology?
This kind of study is nothing but publish-or-perish nonsense, deserving of zero attention.
Orly? (Score:2)
I can play this game too. Lefty's uninformed and unscientifically tested scam like carbon credits and idiotic energy policies are extremely likely to kill millions by 2100.
Skewed data. (Score:2)
I don't agree or disagree with the opinion based on the data.
I have a problem with a missing piece of data that skews a LOT of stuff we use population data for nowadays.
Okay, so with the number of people in the EU (say, 36M), and in 2100 the number being 36M; the historical possibility of death from disease and war outweighs temperature change. Disease and war evolve and change, and Human methods of dealing with it changes but methods of dealing with climate change can also evolve.
Point of data that people