The Climate of World Environment Day 2007

Hallmark missed this one. It's not even on your calendar, although the United Nations would put it there if it could. We're talking about commemoration of World Environment Day, which celebrates it's 35th anniversary today.

Established by the United Nations General Assembly, it was created to focus world attention for at least 24 hours, each year, on sustainability and environmental stewardship. The host city for focal celebrations rotates each year. Tromsø, Norway, the 2007 venue, lies just north of the Arctic Circle—a fitting site for this year's theme: "Melting Ice—A Hot Topic."

Margaret Chan, the World Health Organization's Director-General, issued a statement—food for thought, if you will—on the subject of health in a changing climate. "Limiting the impact of climate change is about saving lives and livelihoods, as much as it is about protecting the natural environment," she says.

For perspective, she points out that an estimated 60,000 people—most of them in the developing world—die from climate-related natural disasters each year. However, the developed world is not immune. More than 35,000 people died in Europe's 2003 summer heat wave, and countless more lost their homes, jobs, and future as a result of Hurricane Katrina 2 years later.

However, Chan says, "Even these dramatic numbers do not adequately reflect the potential indirect impact of climate change on health. " She points to several global killers—malaria, diarrhea, and malnutrition, for instance—that "are highly sensitive to climatic conditions. . . . Without effective action to mitigate and adapt to climate change, the burden of these conditions will be greater, and they will be more difficult and more costly to control."

Earth's warming climate is already melting icecaps and glaciers. If allowed to continue, such huge releases of pent-up fresh water could submerge coastal areas where millions of people now live. A changing climate also means rains will likely become less predictable and surface moisture will evaporate more quickly. Together, she says, such developments risk seriously limiting "the quality and the quantity of drinking water, and eventually bringing drought."

Chan argues that "there are two things that we can and must do to respond to this challenge": strengthen public health systems, the first line of defence against climate-related health risks, and "remember that prevention is just as important as cure." She's talking here, about what has come to be known as the precautionary principle. Indeed, Chan maintains, "Many of the actions that are necessary to reduce our impact on the global climate can also reduce pollution and save lives now."

What kinds of actions? She recommends moving towards reliance on cleaner energy sources and more sustainable transport systems. I'm guessing this rules out gas-hogging SUVs and airline travel to short-haul destinations where good rail and road infrastructures exist. Americans might also adopt a tactic common in Europe: Walking whereever possible to the market, cinema, and restaurants?

Today's words from Dr. Chan have been offered as a counterpoint to Michael Griffin's at NASA, last week. These two individuals offer a yin and yang of informed discourse on the future of our responsibilities in affecting climate and the potential repercussions of investing in mitigating strategies sooner rather than later.