Land-Use Decisions Have Substantial Air Quality Health Effects.

Understanding how best to use limited land without compromising food security, health, and beneficial ecosystem functions is a critical challenge of our time. Ecosystem service assessments increasingly inform land-use decisions but seldom include the effects of land use on air quality, the largest environmental health risk. Here, we estimate and value the air quality health effects of potential land-use policies and projected trends in the United States, alongside carbon sequestration and economic returns to land, until 2051. We show that air quality health effects are of first-order importance in land-use decisions, often larger in value than carbon sequestration and economic returns combined. When air quality is properly accounted for, policies that appeared beneficial are shown to be detrimental and vice versa. Land-use-driven air quality impacts are largely from agricultural emissions and biogenic forest emissions, although incentives for reduced deforestation remain beneficial overall. Without evaluating air quality, we are unable to determine whether land-use decisions make us better or worse off.

Air quality-related health damages of food.

Agriculture is a major contributor to air pollution, the largest environmental risk factor for mortality in the United States and worldwide. It is largely unknown, however, how individual foods or entire diets affect human health via poor air quality. We show how food production negatively impacts human health by increasing atmospheric fine particulate matter (PM2.5), and we identify ways to reduce these negative impacts of agriculture. We quantify the air quality-related health damages attributable to 95 agricultural commodities and 67 final food products, which encompass >99% of agricultural production in the United States. Agricultural production in the United States results in 17,900 annual air quality-related deaths, 15,900 of which are from food production. Of those, 80% are attributable to animal-based foods, both directly from animal production and indirectly from growing animal feed. On-farm interventions can reduce PM2.5-related mortality by 50%, including improved livestock waste management and fertilizer application practices that reduce emissions of ammonia, a secondary PM2.5 precursor, and improved crop and animal production practices that reduce primary PM2.5 emissions from tillage, field burning, livestock dust, and machinery. Dietary shifts toward more plant-based foods that maintain protein intake and other nutritional needs could reduce agricultural air quality-related mortality by 68 to 83%. In sum, improved livestock and fertilization practices, and dietary shifts could greatly decrease the health impacts of agriculture caused by its contribution to reduced air quality.

Inequity in consumption of goods and services adds to racial-ethnic disparities in air pollution exposure.

Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) air pollution exposure is the largest environmental health risk factor in the United States. Here, we link PM2.5 exposure to the human activities responsible for PM2.5 pollution. We use these results to explore "pollution inequity": the difference between the environmental health damage caused by a racial-ethnic group and the damage that group experiences. We show that, in the United States, PM2.5 exposure is disproportionately caused by consumption of goods and services mainly by the non-Hispanic white majority, but disproportionately inhaled by black and Hispanic minorities. On average, non-Hispanic whites experience a "pollution advantage": They experience ∼17% less air pollution exposure than is caused by their consumption. Blacks and Hispanics on average bear a "pollution burden" of 56% and 63% excess exposure, respectively, relative to the exposure caused by their consumption. The total disparity is caused as much by how much people consume as by how much pollution they breathe. Differences in the types of goods and services consumed by each group are less important. PM2.5 exposures declined ∼50% during 2002-2015 for all three racial-ethnic groups, but pollution inequity has remained high.

Fossil Energy Use, Climate Change Impacts, and Air Quality-Related Human Health Damages of Conventional and Diversified Cropping Systems in Iowa, USA.

Cropping system diversification can reduce the negative environmental impacts of agricultural production, including soil erosion and nutrient discharge. Less is known about how diversification affects energy use, climate change, and air quality, when considering farm operations and supply chain activities. We conducted a life cycle study using measurements from a nine-year Iowa field experiment to estimate fossil energy (FE) use, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, PM2.5-related emissions, human health impacts, and other agronomic and economic metrics of contrasting crop rotation systems and herbicide regimes. Rotation systems consisted of 2-year corn-soybean, 3-year corn-soybean-oat/clover, and 4-year corn-soybean-oat/alfalfa-alfalfa systems. Each was managed with conventional and low-herbicide treatments. FE consumption was 56% and 64% lower in the 3-year and 4-year rotations than in the 2-year rotation, and GHG emissions were 54% and 64% lower. Diversification reduced combined monetized damages from GHG and PM2.5-related emissions by 42% and 57%. Herbicide treatment had no significant impact on environmental outcomes, while corn and soybean yields and whole-rotation economic returns improved significantly under diversification. Results suggest that diversification via shifting from conventional corn-soybean rotations to longer rotations with small grain and forage crops substantially reduced FE use, GHG emissions, and air quality damages, without compromising economic or agronomic performance.

Managing nitrogen in maize production for societal gain.

Highly productive agriculture is essential to feed humanity, but agricultural practices often harm human health and the environment. Using a nitrogen (N) mass-balance model to account for N inputs and losses to the environment, along with empirical based models of yield response, we estimate the potential gains to society from improvements in nitrogen management that could reduce health and environmental costs from maize grown in the US Midwest. We find that the monetized health and environmental costs to society of current maize nitrogen management practices are six times larger than the profits earned by farmers. Air emissions of ammonia from application of synthetic fertilizer and manure are the largest source of pollution costs. We show that it is possible to reduce these costs by 85% ($21.6 billion per year, 2020$) while simultaneously increasing farmer profits. These gains come from (i) managing fertilizer ammonia emissions by changing the mix of fertilizer and manure applied, (ii) improving production efficiency by reducing fertilization rates, and (iii) halting maize production on land where health and environmental costs exceed farmer profits, namely on low-productivity land and locations in which emissions are especially harmful. Reducing ammonia emissions from changing fertilizer types-in (i)-reduces health and environmental costs by 46% ($11.7 billion). Reducing fertilization rates-in (ii)-limits nitrous oxide emissions, further reducing health and environmental costs by $9.5 billion, and halting production on 16% of maize-growing land in the Midwest-in (iii)-reduces costs by an additional $0.4 billion.

Global, high-resolution, reduced-complexity air quality modeling for PM2.5 using InMAP (Intervention Model for Air Pollution).

Each year, millions of premature deaths worldwide are caused by exposure to outdoor air pollution, especially fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Designing policies to reduce these deaths relies on air quality modeling for estimating changes in PM2.5 concentrations from many scenarios at high spatial resolution. However, air quality modeling typically has substantial requirements for computation and expertise, which limits policy design, especially in countries where most PM2.5-related deaths occur. Lower requirement reduced-complexity models exist but are generally unavailable worldwide. Here, we adapt InMAP, a reduced-complexity model originally developed for the United States, to simulate annual-average primary and secondary PM2.5 concentrations across a global-through-urban spatial domain: "Global InMAP". Global InMAP uses a variable resolution grid, with horizontal grid cell widths ranging from 500 km in remote locations to 4km in urban locations. We evaluate Global InMAP performance against both measurements and a state-of-the-science chemical transport model, GEOS-Chem. Against measurements, InMAP predicts total PM2.5 concentrations with a normalized mean error of 62%, compared to 41% for GEOS-Chem. For the emission scenarios considered, Global InMAP reproduced GEOS-Chem pollutant concentrations with a normalized mean bias of 59%-121%, which is sufficient for initial policy assessment and scoping. Global InMAP can be run on a desktop computer; simulations here took 2.6-8.4 hours. This work presents a global, open-source, reduced-complexity air quality model to facilitate policy assessment worldwide, providing a screening tool for reducing air pollution-related deaths where they occur most.

Global food system emissions could preclude achieving the 1.5° and 2°C climate change targets.

The Paris Agreement's goal of limiting the increase in global temperature to 1.5° or 2°C above preindustrial levels requires rapid reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. Although reducing emissions from fossil fuels is essential for meeting this goal, other sources of emissions may also preclude its attainment. We show that even if fossil fuel emissions were immediately halted, current trends in global food systems would prevent the achievement of the 1.5°C target and, by the end of the century, threaten the achievement of the 2°C target. Meeting the 1.5°C target requires rapid and ambitious changes to food systems as well as to all nonfood sectors. The 2°C target could be achieved with less-ambitious changes to food systems, but only if fossil fuel and other nonfood emissions are eliminated soon.