Connect with us

Published

on

The overlapping crises of extreme heat and Covid-19 “severely stretched” an already overwhelmed healthcare system in the UK with “deadly consequences”, a new study finds.

The research, published in Nature Climate Change, estimates the number of heat- and cold-related deaths in England and Wales before and during the Covid-19 pandemic.

The study finds that pressure on the health system during heatwaves was as much as three times higher for the pandemic years than it was in the previous decade. The authors find a similar result during cold periods.

The number of heat-related deaths “shifted higher” in the Covid-19 years, the study says, suggesting that Covid “may have impacted temperature-related mortality during extreme weather events”.

The authors warn that “if health services are already operating at capacity because of one crisis, the additional health burden from another crisis can break the system entirely, endangering the lives of many people”.

One expert not involved in the study tells Carbon Brief that any future pandemic is likely to be a “syndemic”, where its impacts intertwine with those of a changing climate.

And as similar groups tend to be most vulnerable to both major disease outbreaks and extreme weather, anticipating and preparing for the co-occurrence of such events “would be lifesaving”, the study authors conclude.

Heat, cold and Covid

Extreme weather events and pandemics are among the most serious risks facing the UK, according to the UK National Risk Register. Since 2020, both have claimed thousands of lives in the UK.

Between the UK’s first documented Covid-19 case on 30 January 2020 and the end of 2022, around 190,000 people in England and Wales died of the virus, according to death certificates.

Over this two-year study period, the UK has also seen extreme hot and cold temperatures – from the coldest UK temperature in more than 20 years during February 2021 to the country’s first recorded instance of 40C heat in July 2022.

To assess the link between temperature and mortality, the authors produced “epidemiological models” that analyse exposure to different temperatures and human mortality in different regions of the UK.

Dr Eunice Lo is a research fellow in climate change and health at the University of Bristol and lead author on the study. She tells Carbon Brief that “heatstroke and heat exhaustion can occur quite rapidly” and that, in her models, “we expect the mortality outcome to be within three days of exposure to heat”. In contrast, it takes longer for cold snaps to cause mortality, she adds.

The plot below illustrates the example of London. The lowest point on the curve – indicated by a “relative risk” level of one – shows the optimum temperature, when people are at lowest risk of physiological harm from temperature extremes.

If the temperature rises above (red) or falls below (blue) the optimum temperature, the risk of temperature-related mortality increases. This is indicated by a relative risk level greater than one.

Cumulative relative risk of death in London for the overall population, using data from 1981-2022. Source: Lo et al (2024).

Cumulative relative risk of death in London for the overall population, using data from 1981-2022. Source: Lo et al (2024).

The authors developed a series of models for locations across England and Wales. The study estimates that, over the study period, almost 8,500 excess deaths were attributable to high temperatures and more than 125,000 deaths to cold.

The study points out that cold-related deaths are more common in the UK as “most days of the year are considered moderately cold”. As the planet continues to warm, heat-related deaths are expected to rise, while cold-related deaths will likely fall.

Lo tells Carbon Brief that factors including age and socioeconomic status also affect temperature-related mortality, but these were not included in the model.

Extreme temperatures

The chart below, from the study, shows a timeseries of daily deaths attributable to heat (red), cold (blue) and Covid-19 (purple) in England and Wales over the study period. The black line shows deaths in the UK from all causes. The right-hand section of the chart focuses on the July 2022 heatwave, when daily heat-related mortality peaked at 580 deaths – higher than at any time of over the previous decade.

Daily deaths attributable to heat (red), cold (blue) and Covid-19 (purple) between 30 January 2020 to 31 December 2022 in England and Wales. The black line shows deaths in the UK from all causes. Source: Lo et al (2024).
Daily deaths attributable to heat (red), cold (blue) and Covid-19 (purple) between 30 January 2020 to 31 December 2022 in England and Wales. The black line shows deaths in the UK from all causes. Source: Lo et al (2024).

Annual “all-cause mortality” in England and Wales was higher during the pandemic than it was in the preceding decade, as Covid-19 drove up mortality rates, the study finds.

The authors note that cold-related mortality “dominated” heat-related mortality in all months other than July, August and September – adding that spikes in cold-related mortality often coincided with spikes in deaths due to Covid.

There are a range of reasons for this. For example, low humidity in winter allows droplets containing the virus to spread further. And peoples’ immune systems are weaker in the winter due to a lack of vitamin D, making them more vulnerable to the virus.

The study also notes that, over the whole study period, “cumulative temperature-related deaths exceeded cumulative Covid-19 deaths by 8% in south-west England”. And while total temperature-related deaths did not exceed those from Covid in other regions, they did amount to 58% (East Midlands) to 75% (London) of Covid-19 deaths by the end of 2022.

The approach used in the study assumes that deaths caused by Covid-19 and temperature extremes are independent of each other. In other words, individuals are assumed to die either due to Covid or as a result of extreme temperature exposure, but not a combination of the two.

Nonetheless, the findings suggest that Covid “may have impacted temperature-related mortality during extreme weather events”, the study says. For example, “heat-related mortality shifted higher in the Covid-19 years”, compared to extreme events that were not affected by the disease, the authors note.

At the same time, “extreme heat may have exacerbated Covid-19 mortality”, the authors note, pointing out that on 19 July 2022 – the day that 40C heat was recorded – Covid caused 91 more deaths than the daily average over 10-25 July.

The results “highlight the complex interplay between extreme temperatures and the Covid-19 pandemic, as well as its implications on population health and health services capacity”, the study says.

Mapped

The study maps out Covid- and temperature-related deaths to see how they vary regionally.

The authors select 70 heatwave days and 70 cold days from the 30 January 2020 to 31 December 2022 study period. They then calculate regional mortality rates due to Covid, heat and cold during these days.

The maps below show the ratio of temperature-related deaths to Covid-driven deaths over the full study period (left), heatwave period (middle) and cold period (right). Numbers below zero, shown in grey, indicate that Covid-related deaths are higher than temperature-related deaths. Numbers above zero, shown in blue and purple, indicate that temperature-related deaths are higher.

Ratio of temperature-related deaths to deaths due to Covid over the study period (left), heatwave period (middle) and cold period (right). Source: Lo et al (2024).
Ratio of temperature-related deaths to deaths due to Covid over the study period (left), heatwave period (middle) and cold period (right). Source: Lo et al (2024).

During heatwaves, heat-related deaths far exceed deaths due to Covid-19 in almost all the regions studied. The study finds that the ratio of temperature to Covid-related deaths was highest in London at 2.7, where temperatures tend to be higher.

(This is likely due, in part, to the urban heat island effect – in which a combination of factors, such as buildings, reduced vegetation and high domestic energy use, cause urban areas to become hotter than more rural regions.)

This finding shows that “that even during the Covid-19 pandemic, heatwaves posed a serious threat to public health”, the study says.

Meanwhile, during cold snaps – when both cold-related mortality and deaths due to Covid spiked – Covid-related mortality was higher. The ratio ranges from 0.4 in east of England to 0.8 in south-west England.

The authors suggest that this is mainly due to “large surges in Covid-19 mortality following the first emergence of the coronavirus and the domination of the Alpha variant, both of which occurred in winter”.

The authors then performed the same heatwave and cold snap calculations for the decade preceding the pandemic, to provide a 2010-19 pre-Covid baseline.

The maps below show the ratio of average annual deaths per 100,000 people during the Covid study period to that during the preceding decade, during heatwaves (left) and cold snaps (right). Lighter green indicates that mortality rates in the Covid and pre-Covid periods were similar, while darker colours indicate that deaths during the Covid study period were higher.

The ratio of average annual deaths during the Covid study period per 100,000 people to that during the preceding decade, during heatwaves (left) and cold snaps (right). Source: Lo et al (2024).
The ratio of average annual deaths during the Covid study period per 100,000 people to that during the preceding decade, during heatwaves (left) and cold snaps (right). Source: Lo et al (2024).

The authors find that during pre-Covid heatwave days, heat-related deaths ranged from six to 14 people per 100,000. They add that during the Covid-19 study period, deaths due to heat and Covid-19 together range from 19 to 24 deaths per 100,000 people.

The authors assume that mortality broadly links to regional demand on health services. As such, they estimate that demand on regional health services was between 1.6 (London) and 3.2 (north-west England) times higher during the pandemic than in the previous decade.

By carrying out the same analysis, the authors find that during cold snaps, demand on health services was between 2.0 (south-west England) and 3.4 (east of England) times higher during Covid than in the previous decade.

The paper highlights “the deadly consequences of an already overwhelmed NHS severely stretched to function through the compound crises of extreme weather and Covid-19”, the authors say, adding:

“If health services are already operating at capacity because of one crisis, the additional health burden from another crisis can break the system entirely, endangering the lives of many people.”

Dr Kristina Dahl is senior climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists. In 2020, she was a co-author on a comment paper in Nature Climate Change on the compound risks of climate change and the Covid pandemic.

Dahl tells Carbon Brief that the results of this study highlight the need for “amplified public messaging to increase awareness of temperature-related risks”, for “stronger policies and protections around extreme weather”, and to “more adequately prepare public health systems for the co-occurrence of hazards”.

Co-occurring hazards

Despite the study treating temperature- and Covid-related deaths as independent, Lo tells Carbon Brief that “there is certainly a two-way interaction” between the two.

She explains that “a lot of vulnerabilities to temperatures and Covid-10 are shared”, noting that elderly people and those with pre-existing conditions are vulnerable to both extreme temperatures and viruses. This means that one could exacerbate the other, she warns.

She adds that many measures taken to reduce the spread of Covid may have contributed to a rise in temperature-related death. For example, closing social spaces, such as swimming pools and air-conditioned buildings, meant that many people “didn’t have as much of an escape” from the high temperatures in their homes, she says.

Dr Colin Carlson is an assistant research professor at Georgetown University’s centre for global health, science and security and another co-author on the Nature Climate Change comment paper.

Carlson, who studies the relationship between global climate change, biodiversity loss and emerging infectious diseases, tells Carbon Brief that “for the last two decades, we’ve been operating in a very limited framework with how we think about climate change and infectious disease”.

He adds that “going forward, every pandemic will probably be a ‘syndemic’ with a few climate change-related components”.

Lo notes that while this study focuses on the relationship between Covid-19 and extreme temperatures, it speaks to a larger point about the link between climate-related extremes and other hazards, as co-occurring crises can threaten healthcare and other key systems.

Similarly, Dahl warns:

“As climate-related extremes become more frequent, the likelihood that they will intersect with other crises – whether related to public health, social or political unrest, or other environmental problems – will increase.”

The post Dual impact of extreme heat and Covid-19 had ‘deadly consequences’ for UK appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Dual impact of extreme heat and Covid-19 had ‘deadly consequences’ for UK

Continue Reading

Climate Change

‘This is a fossil fuel crisis’, Greenpeace tells Senate gas tax Inquiry, citing homegrown renewables as path to energy security

Published

on

CANBERRA, Tuesday 21 April 2026 — Greenpeace Australia Pacific has slammed gas corporation war profiteering and environmental damage in a scathing Senate hearing today as part of the Select Committee on the Taxation of Gas Resources, urging fair taxation of gas corporations and the transition to secure, homegrown renewable energy to protect Australian households and the economy from future energy shocks.

Speaking at the hearing, Greenpeace said the US and Israel’s illegal war on Iran has laid bare the fundamental flaws of an energy system built on fossil fuel extraction, geopolitical power plays and corporate greed, and will be a defining moment for how the world thinks about energy security.

Greenpeace’s submission and full opening remarks can be found here.

Joe Rafalowicz, Head of Climate and Energy at Greenpeace Australia Pacific, said:

“This is not an energy crisis, it’s a fossil fuel crisis. The crisis we’re all facing lays bare the dangers of fossil fuel dependence, for our energy security, our communities, and for global peace and stability.

“Gas corporations like Woodside, Santos, Shell and Chevron — the same companies whose CEOs refused to front this Inquiry — are making obscene war profits, using the illegal war on Iran to price gouge, profiteer and push for more gas we don’t need — while people and our environment pay the price.

“Australians are getting smashed by soaring bills and the impacts of climate disasters — gas corporations should be paying their fair share to help this country, instead of sending billions offshore, tax-free.

“But we’re at a turning point — while gas corporations cynically push to open up more of our oceans and land to drilling for fossil fuels, our allies like the UK are doubling down on renewables in response to the fossil fuel crisis. Our trading partners in Asia are making the same reassessment of fossil fuels.

“Which is why the hearing today is crucial: an effective and well-designed tax on the gas industry’s obscene war time profits is a chance to channel funds to people and communities, fast-track the rollout of clean, secure homegrown wind and solar energy, while holding polluters accountable.

“Our dependence on fossil fuels leave us overexposed to the whims of tyrants like Trump — it’s in Australia’s national interest to end the fossil fuel chokehold for good and usher in the era of clean energy security.”

-ENDS-

Media contact

Kate O’Callaghan on 0406 231 892 or kate.ocallaghan@greenpeace.org

‘This is a fossil fuel crisis’, Greenpeace tells Senate gas tax Inquiry, citing homegrown renewables as path to energy security

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Rearranging the deck chairs!

Published

on

HOW WOODSIDE’S BROWSE GAS PROPOSAL THREATENS SCOTT REEF’S GREEN TURTLES AND PYGMY BLUE WHALES

Woodside’s North Rankin Complex offshore rig. © Greenpeace

Woodside’s Browse to NWS gas project is under assessment by the WA and Federal Governments right now. This is a project that involved drilling up to 50 gas wells around Scott Reef off the coast of WA. Gas would be extracted directly underneath Scott Reef and Sandy Islet and pumped through a 900-kilometre subsea pipeline to the NWS gas processing facility.

Woodside’s Browse gas project’s impact on Scott Reef’s marine habitats?

Scott Reef is one of Australia’s most ecologically significant marine environments, where green turtles breed, pygmy blue whales feed, and an array of at-risk species, including sharks, dolphins, whale sharks, rays, sawfish and sea snakes thrive. It is home to many threatened species, including some found nowhere else on Earth or in genetically isolated groups, magnifying its importance from a conservation perspective.

Scott and Seringapatam Reefs, far off the Western Australia Coastline. Woodside Energy has its eyes set on turning this marine sanctuary into a gas field. © Alex Westover / Greenpeace

This delicate reef’s ecosystem faces multiple threats if Woodside’s Proposed Project goes ahead, including seismic blasting, gas flaring, noise pollution, artificial lighting, pipe laying and fast-moving vessels. The reef also faces the risk of a gas well blowout, which could have catastrophic and irreversible consequences for the region’s reefs and marine parks. 

Greenpeace Australia Pacific has revealed the first images of fossil fuel company Woodside dredging to lay a pipeline for its Burrup Hub gas project. © Greenpeace / Alex Westover

Woodside’s woeful marine impacts management plan

To secure their approvals, Woodside had to develop a plan for how they would manage the significant risks to threatened green turtles and endangered pygmy blue whales if the project proceeds. We’ve had two independent scientists provide a technical assessment of Woodsides management plan for whales and turtles and their findings are gobsmacking.

Their assessment found that Woodsides management plans for these species misrepresents or does not assess the risks the Browse project poses to Scott Reef’s pygmy blue whales and green turtles. They’ve also surmised that if the project goes ahead the impacts contradict the Australian government’s own recovery plan for turtles and Conservation Management Plan (CMP) for Blue Whales.

The State and Federal Governments now have the opportunity to define their legacies on nature protection and save Scott Reef from Woodside’s dirty gas.

Technical Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Pygmy Blue Whale Management Plan

Prepared for Greenpeace Australia Pacific by Dr Ben Fitzpatrick of Oceanwise Australia with Dr Olaf Meynecke of Griffith University.

The full technical assessment is available HERE

A pygmy blue whale breaks the surface in the waters. © Paul Hilton / Greenpeace

Scott Reef is a vital feeding, foraging and resting habitat for pygmy blue whales.

Pygmy blue whales feed, forage and rest in the Scott Reef region every year. Scott Reef is recognised as a Biologically Important Area for the pygmy blue whale and is an important stop-over on their annual migration.

Woodside’s Browse gas project could delay or prevent the population recovery of the endangered pygmy blue whales that rely on Scott Reef, heightening their extinction risk.

  • Woodside’s management plan claims of “no credible threat of significant impacts” are not supported by scientific evidence.
  • The management plan relies on outdated whale population information.
  • Woodside has claimed it is unclear whether Scott Reef is a foraging habitat for pygmy blue whales, despite the presence of pygmy blue whales and significant concentrations of krill being documented in the area.
  • The PBWMP ignores the impacts of industrial noise on whale-to-whale communication. This is especially concerning as mother-calf pairs migrate through the Scott Reef Biologically Important Area shortly after calves are born. Mother-calf pairs rely on continuous, uninterrupted communications to maintain their connection.

Woodside’s Browse gas project could delay or prevent the population recovery of the endangered pygmy blue whales that rely on Scott Reef, heightening their extinction risk.

Technical Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Turtle Management Plan

Prepared for Greenpeace Australia Pacific by Dr Ben Fitzpatrick of Oceanwise Australia.

The full technical assessment is available HERE

Mating Green Turtles. © Wendy Mitchell / Greenpeace

Scott Reef is a vital nesting ground for unique green turtles.

The green turtles that nest at Scott Reef’s low-lying Sandy Islet sand cay and nearby Browse Island are genetically unique and are classified as ‘Extremely Vulnerable’ in Australia’s Recovery Plan for Marine Turtles.

Woodside’s Browse gas project could make Scott Reef’s unique green turtles extinct.

  • The Browse project would operate within 20 kilometres of nesting habitat that’s critical to the survival of Scott Reef’s genetically unique and vulnerable green turtle population.
  • Woodside’s Browse Turtle Management Plan (TMP) misrepresents the risks the Browse project poses to Scott Reef’s green turtles.
  • Claims in Woodside’s TMP about Scott Reef’s green turtle population size, nesting success and hatchling numbers are not backed by scientific evidence.
  • The TMP proposes gathering updated data after the Browse project is approved.
  • Woodside’s TMP proposes adding sand sourced elsewhere to Sandy Islet to counter subsidence and erosion, but fails to properly assess the associated risks.

To save Scott Reef and protect our oceans and animals, the State and Federal Governments must reject Browse.

Rearranging the deck chairs!

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Turtle Plan

Published

on

Technical Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Pygmy Blue Whale Management Plan

To secure their approvals, Woodside had to develop a plan for how they would manage the significant risks to threatened green turtles if the project proceeds. We’ve had two independent scientists provide a technical assessment of Woodside’s management plan for whales and turtles and their findings are gobsmacking.

Woodside’s Browse gas project could make Scott Reef’s unique green turtles extinct.

Woodside’s Browse gas project could delay or prevent the population recovery of the endangered pygmy blue whales that rely on Scott Reef, heightening their extinction risk.

Assessment of Woodside’s Browse Turtle Plan

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com