The UK’s short sighted approach to energy is damaging people’s health and costing the NHS £3.7 billion a year says Green Alliance study

A new approach to reducing energy use in transport, buildings and industry, could avoid of tens of thousands of early deaths and save the NHS at least £3.7 billion a year, according to a new study published by the think tank Green Alliance. 

The government is neglecting the health impacts of polluting vehicles and woefully inefficient homes through its narrow approach to energy and climate change, costing the NHS billions. [1]

Government efforts to reduce carbon emissions have relied almost exclusively on decarbonising energy supply: phasing out coal and supporting renewable energy. But focusing only on the supply side ignores the significant impact of high energy demand, not only on carbon emissions but also on people’s everyday lives. 

Lowering energy demand across the economy would not only make achieving net zero easier, it would also have considerable benefits for public health, in cleaner air and improved homes and public spaces. 

Examples of these benefits include: 

·         Shifting just 1.7 per cent of car journeys to active travel, like walking and cycling, could save the NHS £2.5 billion a year by reducing health problems like cardiovascular disease and diabetes. [2] That is nearly two per cent of the NHS’s entire budget. [3] 

·         Greener transport, using electric vehicles and more active travel, would help to prevent the 65,000 premature deaths every year estimated to be caused by air pollution. [4]

·         Improving home energy efficiency could save the NHS another £1.2 billion a year, spent on treating health problems attributed to cold homes, like pneumonia, heart attack and high blood pressure. It could also help to prevent 10,000 early deaths. [5] These savings are nearly twice the amount the government currently spends supporting home energy efficiency. [6] 

The study, based on research by CREDS, a collaboration of leading academics across 15 UK universities, says there are three actions the government should be taking to address the demand side of the energy equation:

1.       Reduce demand: taking measures to avoid unnecessary energy use, including reducing dependence on cars, and bringing in new infrastructure or business models that reduce the need for materials and products.

2.       Improve technical energy efficiency: mandating the use of technical solutions to reduce energy waste and loss by buildings, transport and products.

3.       Flex energy demand: aligning demand better with supply, for instance by using ‘time of use’ tariffs, to optimise the use of intermittent renewable energy.

Dr Terry Kemple, executive committee member of the UK Health Alliance on Climate Change, said:

“The UK Health Alliance on Climate Change welcomes this report. It shows that small changes in how we use energy – in our homes and when travelling – would have important benefits for our health, environment and economy.

“By lowering energy demand, for example by shifting less than two per cent of car journeys to cycling or walking, the government could improve the nation's health while simultaneously tackling the climate emergency. It would save the NHS over £2.5 billion every year in costs associated with conditions like cardiovascular disease and diabetes."

Professor Nick Eyre, CREDS director, said:

“Going to the effort of decarbonising all of the energy we currently use is not a sensible strategy to bring about a sustainable energy system unless we also take steps to cut demand. This needs to be a dominant part of energy system change.”

Libby Peake, head of resource policy at Green Alliance, said:

“The government’s approach to energy is self defeating. It ignores half of the equation and denies people considerable benefits. Not only would reducing demand help to reach carbon reduction targets earlier, it would also reduce infrastructure costs and benefit everyone – through cleaner air, more comfortable homes and healthier lives.”

ENDS

Notes for editors

[1] The research is published in a new report, Balancing the energy equation: three steps to cutting UK demand, available at: https://www.green-alliance.org.uk/resources/Balancing_the_energy_equation.pdf  

[2] See: Ricardo-AEA, 2013, Review of the impacts of carbon budget measures on human health and the environment

[3] NHS budgets in 2018/19 totalled around £ 140 billion, the majority of which was in England, £114 billion: https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN00724/SN00724.pdf 

[4] See: J Lelieveld et al, 12 March 2019, ‘Cardiovascular disease burden from ambient air pollution in Europe reassessed using novel hazard ratio functions’ in European Heart Journal, Volume 40, Issue 20. The research suggested 98 early deaths in the UK per 100,000 population. As the UK’s 2018 population was 66,435,600 according to ONS figures, that suggests 65,107 people will have died early because of air pollution. Cutting vehicles, especially in urban areas, will be vital to cut these deaths. Vehicles emit nearly a third of nitrogen oxides (NOx), including 80 per cent of NO2, and 11-12 per cent of particulate matter. See: Joanna H Barnes et al, August 2019, ‘Emissions vs exposure: increasing injustice from road traffic-related air pollution in the United Kingdom’ in Transportation research part D: transport and environment, volume 73 and Defra and DfT, July 2017, UK plan for tackling roadside nitrogen dioxide concentrations

[5] BRE, 2015, The cost of poor housing to the NHS. Excess cold is the number one hazard from poor housing to the NHS. The BRE report broke down costs according to Category 1 hazards in the housing health and safety rating system (HHSRS), and found that excess cold cost the NHS nearly £850 million out of a total £1.4 billion from these top hazards (60 per cent of the total). When HHSRS Category 2 and ‘worse than average’ hazards were calculated, the total figure rose to £2 billion. Although excess cold was not calculated independently in this total, assuming it was responsible for the same proportion of hazards (60 per cent) would mean cold would cost the NHS £1.2 billion a year. 

[6] See: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmbeis/1730/1730.pdf