←back to thread

233 points kamaraju | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.215s | source
Show context
alexmccain6 ◴[] No.43554079[source]
One of the most striking aspects of air pollution is how invisible yet pervasive its effects are. Unlike more immediate environmental disasters, air pollution slowly chips away at public health, reducing life expectancy and quality of life, often without dramatic headlines. The comparison to starvation as a "frailty multiplier" is an interesting one; pollution doesn’t always kill directly but makes people more susceptible to fatal conditions.

Regarding the reduction in SO₂ emissions from shipping fuel, I’d love to see more discussion on how international regulatory pressure (e.g., IMO 2020) managed to enforce compliance in an industry notorious for cost-cutting. Was it simply a case of the alternatives being feasible enough, or did global coordination and monitoring play a stronger role than usual?

replies(3): >>43554176 #>>43554420 #>>43554606 #
1. aeroman ◴[] No.43554606[source]
I think part of the IMO2020 compliance is that fines have actually been applied for ships that have broken previous similar regulations.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/26/cruise-ship-ca...

It turns out that the previous 2015 regulations around the USA and Canada were also largely followed, even offshore - this is despite there being little monitoring capability away from ports (I worked on this study).

https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/201...

I am not an economist, but I suspect part of the compliance is a case of 'as long as everyone is forced to do it', we are okay with it as everyone can/has to raise prices.