How can attribute deaths to Global Warming already?

Question

We are hearing numbers of 150K dying every year because of global warming? How is that number reached? Since individual weather phenomena are not to be confused with climate, then how can the deaths these phenomena cause be attributed to global warming?

Are these only heat-related deaths, or does that include other extreme conditions?

Is this based on IPCC findings/models that do NOT show a correlation of daytime highs to AGW?

Is this net or gross? How many lives are spared by cooler or wetter weather?

Byderule - since you have blocked me from answering or even viewing your questions, I think it only fair that you not participate in mine.

And Bob, I think I'll create a separate AR4 question to adequately address your points. Thanks for bringing it up, though.

Thanks, Trevor, for at least attempting to provide a quantitative view, but it's going to be a little tough without seeing the actual study.

It still seems speculative, The one quantitative example cited, the SE Asia dengue outbreak was tied to weather, NOT climate - unless a study shows conclusively that this area's weather phenomena correlate to global warming.
One paradox at work that might be masked is that while modernization decreases infant/maternal mortality rates and increases life span, it also increases the rate of disease as well as the death rate. Anybody who doesn't understand this paradox, we can discuss it in another question, later...I have to rush to the ER...

Answer 1

I have not heard that claim before and would not just accept it unchallenged if I had. It would have to be a statistical estimation, there is no way it could be an actual count, because no single death can be said to have been caused by global warming. You know there are 3 kinds of, lies right? There are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Answer 2

The figure of 150,000 deaths per year is something of a conservative one and relates only to deaths from certain factors - namely malaria, diarrhea and malnutrition. The findings came from research conducted by the World Health Organisation and climatologists at Wisconsin University in 2005; the research was independent of the IPCC and comissioned by the WHO.

The full report was published in Nature but you need a subscription to access the website, there's a basic summary here from the Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/16/AR2005111602197.html

The figures doesn't include deaths from any of the factors you mentioned. If adverse weather events and heat related deaths are included the figure is substantially higher. Estimates vary between 0.5 and 1.5 million deaths a year, an accurate figure would seem to be in the order of 600 to 800,000 deaths a year.

Calculating deaths caused by certain diseases is a lot easier than trying to ascertain how many people have died due to adverse weather because the parameters are much more clearly defined.

To give one simple example, as temperatures increase they create new environments conducive to the spread of malaria. There's a good correlation between the two so it's possible to produce accurate mapping depicting malarial zones for any given temperature. Compare the maps showing what has happened with what should have happened and count the deaths in the unique zones and you have the number of deaths attributable to the spread of malaria. There is of course an awful lot more to it than that.

Answer 3

First of all, individual climates ARE affected by global warming, but not all exactly the same. So some areas are hotter and drier at times and this kills alot of old, sick and babies from just the heat. And then you have to consider that the same carcinogens that cause cancer also cause global warming, lowered fertility, and many other health problems. I would say other than eroding stormier coasts, global warming is MOSTLY a health problem. It's a fact that areas that had a handful of category 3 hurricanes every year are seeing 2-3 times as many in addition to sea level rise. These storms are also more likely to be catogory 4 or 5 as times go on. This kills thousands every year. So do fires and other extreme weather related problems. California expects sea level rise, stormier coasts, hotter and drier and more fires and heat stroke inland in the summer. Less snow and more rain in the winter, causing flooding and erosion. Plus hotter with faster snow melt so flooding in the spring. All these are individual local concerns.
Heat does cause more deaths in the summer than cold in the winter BECAUSE many mostly older people are unprepared for the heat. They lived in moderate climates that now experience periodic heat waves and they haven't added an AC or cooler. They are in denial. They try to go out and about. They are old or sick and suseptible. And young people don't get that just because they can beat the heat doesn't mean the baby can. People try to play in the heat and don't get just how hot it really is. ALSO there are systems in place to make sure the poor don't get their utilities turned off during the winter but no such system in place in the summer. So the poor are more likely to have heating in the winter than cooling in the summer.
Whereas the cold people know what to do with. They can add layers or turn up the heat or burn a log. You can't do that as easily with the heat.

Answer 4

You're basically right. It's speculative.

It's unlikely that's it's zero (or, as some suggested, positive; a peculiar claim for someone who thinks it's not real). Global warming is changing climate patterns, and certain species damage (example: amphibians) is highly likely to be related.

But a number like 150,000 implies we know far more than we do. Here's a more solid take on the issue:

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_51526.html

And here's a very nice qualitative analysis:

http://www.who.int/globalchange/climate/en/ccSCREEN.pdf

A fringe benefit of that one is the nicest graph I've ever seen of temperature over the last 20,000 years (yes it clearly shows the MWP and the LIA). It shows clearly how we've had a pretty stable climate from 10,000 years ago until very recently.

While I've got your attention:

You've been misinterpreting the IPCC report about the "likely" anthropogenic nature of warming on "each" of 6 continents. Here's what the report is saying:

"When we look at the overall global data it is very likely (edited down from virtually certain by the US and China) that warming is mostly anthropogenic.

The anthropogenic signal is so strong that even when we restrict the data and the analysis to EACH of six continents INDIVIDUALLY (thereby losing some statistical power), the result is that it is still "likely" to be mostly anthropogenic."

Answer 5

Well, a tree fell down and hit me in the head. I have drain bamage. Why did the tree fall? Well, it was raining when it should have been snowing and that was caused by anthropogenic changes in temperature. I think architects have something to do with it as well.

Answer 6

It is almost certainly true that any increase in heat related deaths will be met with a far greater reduction in cold related deaths which far outweigh heat related deaths but for some unknown reason the alarmists want to ignore that fact.

Answer 7

Good question. Numbers from the doom and gloom group never add up, but then I don't think you're supposed to run the numbers and actually check their work.

Look at the Chernobyl nuclear accident. The claims are that millions died because of that event, but only 56 deaths are attributed to the meltdown.

We hear of species lost that were never discovered. Huh? How does anyone know? Yet new species are discovered everyday.

Science has lost it's objectivity. It used to be that you didn't report facts until they were verified by someone outside your field. Now "facts" are reported before the next news cycle.

Answer 8

the figure given for global warming related deaths is 150.000 annually
a few years ago in Europe about 3000 died
the yearly figure is expected to be far more this year

Answer 9

You just have to have FAITH.

This is the essence of the Envirofundamentalist Church. "Thou shalt not question the teachings of the church, lest thou be condemned as a denier!"

Confess!!! Confess!!!

Cardinal Fang... bring out... THE COMFY CHAIR!!!!!

Answer 10

Check www.snopes.com for the correct info.