h333

Brenna Marshall

Gligorije Rakocevic

Ahmed Alhashmi

Mohammed Al Khalifa

Saif Alhajr

South Africa: Weekly Report #5

According to a report by the MoneySuperMarket in the UK, South Africa is facing serious air pollution (Pillay, 2017). The country generates 50% of the air pollution in the African continent, with a bigger percentage of this pollution coming from vehicle transportation and electricity generation. South Africa relies largely on coal to produce 97% of its energy, which results in high air pollution (Altieri & Keen, 2013). The fine particulate matter (PM) from coal burning is a lethal pollutant and high concentrations results to high mortality rates.

According to the Global Burden of Disease (GBD) 2012 statistics, ambient air pollution is responsible for 3 million deaths annually around the globe. Low and middle-income countries are affected the most, with developing countries like South Africa also facing a bulk of health concerns and loss of productivity due to high mortality resulting from high air pollution (Altieri & Keen, 2013). The exact human health and economic cost of pollution in South Africa has not been exactly quantified, but mortality rates are known. In 2012, GBD estimated that particulate matter in South Africa led to 1800 deaths on 2012. However, the International Growth Center (IGC) reported 3-4 times PM values than that reported by the GBD in the same year. New studies revealed that the health burden was more than reported by GBD. Using the Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP), IGC reported 27,000 premature mortalities resulting from high particulate matter concentrations, which was a very high number compared to the 1,800 deaths previously reported by GBD. Based on this report, it can be concluded that 7.4% of the deaths in South Africa are, as a result, of chronic exposure to particulate matter. These cases are more serious in the densely populated cities such as Cape Town, Johannesburg and Durban. According to the 2012 statistics, premature deaths erode the economy 6% of the country’s GDP, equivalent to $20 billion.

Based on a Comparative Risk Assessment, evidence synthesis, and expert evaluation for regional exposure and WHO country health statistics, the estimated total of environmental burden of disease that could be avoided by modifying South Africa’s environment is 16% (World Health Organization [WHO], 2009). There is also approximately 118,400 deaths per year and 69 DALYs per 1000 capita per year caused from environmental burdens. In the world, the lowest DALY is 13 and the highest is 289.

One risk factor for an environmental disease is water, sanitation and hygiene. The exposure of improved water was 88% while improved sanitation was 65%. Compared with Spain, they had 100% improved water and 100% improved sanitation (WHO, 2009). Comparing South Africa and Spain are really interesting to look at because the number of deaths per year from water, sanitation and hygiene in South Africa is an astonishing 12,300 deaths and 8 DALYs per 1000 capita, and Spain doesn't have the number of deaths per year listed, but they only have .2 DALYs per 1000 capita per year(WHO, 2009).

A second risk factor for environmental disease is indoor air. The country profiles for environmental burden of disease quantifies indoor air by solid fuel use (SFU). SFU is the largest source of indoor air pollution and includes the combustion of coal/biomass from cooking or heating. In South Africa, the SFU was 18%. There were also 3,200 deaths and 1.3 DALYs per 1000 capita per year from indoor air pollution. Comparing Sweden with South Africa, Sweden’s reported SFU was <5%. In South Africa, asthma is predominantly affected by the environment. Not only is asthma is one of the leading diseases in South Africa that is caused by the environment and has a rate of 2.8 DALYs per 1000 capita per year, it is also the highest rate of asthma in the world (WHO, 2009). The high percentage of SFU in South Africa could potentially be linked to the extremely high rate of asthma in the country.

One other reason there is such a high rate of asthma in South Africa could be from the outdoor air pollution. Although, the outdoor air pollution in South Africa is quite a bit better than in Ecuador, Ecuador’s rate of asthma is much lower. The annual mean of particulate matter, which is measured in micrograms per cubic meter of air (ug/m3), in South Africa is only 24 ug/m3, whereas in Ecuador it is 34 ug/m3 (WHO, 2009). With that said, there must be other contributing environment burdens that are causing such high rates of asthma in South Africa.

Another disease discussed in the Country Profile of Environmental Burden of Disease is intentional injury. This one is interesting because it isn’t caused by anything other than from purposeful human action, whether directed at oneself or others. South Africa’s intentional injury rate is 4.4 DALYs per 1000 capita per year (WHO, 2009). Colombia almost doubles South Africa with a rate of 7.5 DALYs per 1000 capita per year (WHO, 2009). This big of a difference in the rate of intentional injury, plus the fact that Colombia has the highest rate in the world for intentional injuries, could make one believe that South Africa’s environment is much safer and has much less criminal activity than Colombia.

World health organization has an estimation of a quarter of the burden of diseases are attributed to factors which are related to the environment. For instance, more than a third of sickness in kids younger than five a long time is because of environmental hazards. The three primary illnesses affected by natural elements are looseness of the bowels; respiratory Natural dangers have a more prominent inclination to ailments and jungle fever. In South Africa, ecological well being results of concern are Water-borne diseases, respiratory tract diseases, Lung diseases, Vector-borne ailments (like jungle fever), and Sustenance borne illnesses and Compound harming (Utembe, et al., 2015). There is also an increasing concern that these environmental factors have led to the increment of cancer which one of the diseases which is pausing as an international threat.

The pillars of the South African economy have since quite a while ago included mining of coal and farming. Even though these sources of the national economy have made riches for a section, they have additionally forced a heritage of natural destruction and exploitation on the absolute most unfortunate segments of the populace. Some prominent models outline more broad concerns. It has been shown by different surveys that lead damaging in children was more across the board in major towns. Late examinations keep on indicating natural harm around the sites of mining and poor families living around the mining plants. Specialists have likewise attracted thoughtfulness regarding poor pesticide the executives rehearses on ranches and the danger of long haul wellbeing results, suicide, and accidental harming in people living in rural areas (Ndlovu, et al., 2016). More as of late there has been developing caution, and expanded media consideration committed to huge scale corrosive mine seepage in a few sections of the nation (particularly in and around Johannesburg), and the potential difficulties for water quality and human introduction to poisonous substances. Solid analysis by ecological gatherings indicated there is a clear absence of governmental drive in addressing the issue and government's delay in intensifying a compelling reaction.

It is said that a healthy nation is a wealthy nation. But with all the health issues which are associated with the pollution of the environment through coal mining and the extensive farming in South Africa, it has been treating the economy of the country. Attaining sustainable development in a country, it requires recognition of the interdependencies between the environment, economic stability and the social well-being of the people living in. In South Africa, a lot of people are poverty-stricken, are facing the problem of degradation of the environment, and have limited access to water which is safe as well as the sanitation problem. This problem is pausing a very big problem for the people living here thus reducing the workforce of the country and ultimately the economy is at risk. Coal mining has been associated with a lot of health-related risks. There have been increased industrial actions from the workers in the mining industries who are mostly concerned with their health. Many have died due to diseases that have been associated with the air pollution in these mines. These mass actions have made the country to record heavy losses since they are mostly dependent on mining as their biggest economic source.

Increased health concerns are a major blow to the country because the state is forced to use a lot of resources in the health industry to treat all these diseases. In the long run, the government loses a lot of money which could have been used in the development of the country.

The environmental health crisis in South Africa has contributed to millions of children and adults in elementary and secondary schools get health issues and oftentimes a lot of harm caused to their education. This is because children are more susceptible to complications brought about by environmental hazards. While many employees such as those working in the mines are given protection from environmental and chemical hazards by the federal government, there are no measures that have been put forward for school going children. Chronic diseases such as asthma which mostly affects children since their lungs are still developing causes a high rate of absenteeism in schools which in turn pauses as a very big risk in the education sector (Roberts, Pellow, & Mohai, 2018).

As a way of solving all these problems which are linked to the environment, the government should ensure that the people are safe through coming up with measures addressing better hygiene of the people. This can be done through the provision and maintenance of efficient wastewater removal which will reduce the rate of water-borne diseases. The government should address the issue of air pollution, by coming up with policies which can fully address this. There should also be education given to the people informing them on how to interact with the environment and remain healthy. This will ensure that there are informed decisions which are aimed at improving the national understanding on how to reduce the impacts of the hazards related to the environment on vulnerable communities.

References

Ndlovu, N., Nelson, G., Vorajee, N., & Murray, J. (2016). 38 years of autopsy findings in South

African mine workers. American journal of industrial medicine, 59(4), 307-314.

Roberts, J. T., Pellow, D., & Mohai, P. (2018). Environmental justice. In Environment and

Society (pp. 233-255). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.

Utembe, W., Faustman, E. M., Matatiele, P., & Gulumian, M. (2015). Hazards identified and the

need for health risk assessment in the South African mining industry. Human &

experimental toxicology, 34(12), 1212-1221.

World Health Organization. (2009). Country Profile of Environmental Burden of Disease.

[online] Available at:https://www.who.int/quantifying_ehimpacts/national/countryprofile

/southafrica.pdf?ua=1

Altieri, K & Keen, S. (2013). The cost of air pollution in South Africa. International Growth

Center.

Pillay, K. (2017). South Africa one of the worst environmental polluters, research shows. IOL