Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach

I found an interesting article on weather-related deaths.

Deaths Attributed to Heat, Cold, and Other Weather Events in the United States, 2006–2010

Abstract
Objectives—This report examines heat-related mortality, cold-related
mortality, and other weather-related mortality during 2006–2010 among
subgroups of U.S. residents.
Methods—Weather-related death rates for demographic and area-based
subgroups were computed using death certificate information. Adjusted odds
ratios for weather-related deaths among subgroups were estimated using logistic
regression.

Here’s their money graph, click to enlarge. It shows the number of deaths by the age of the person dying.

A couple of notes. First, at all ages the deaths from cold are more common than deaths from heat. Second, almost no infants die from excess heat, but some die from excess cold.

SO … if the globe gets slightly warmer, that appears to be a net benefit, as there will be less lives lost. This is particularly true since the feared warming is projected to be mostly in the winter, in the night-time, in the extra-tropics.

I would think warmer winter nights would be very popular in say Vladivostok or Anchorage. I wonder if that benefit is included in the calculation of the so-called “social cost of carbon”?

w.

PS—When you comment, please QUOTE THE EXACT WORDS YOU ARE DISCUSSING, so we can all be clear on your subject.