By David Introcaso
At the end of July, the UN International Court of Justice (ICI) announced its long -awaited and very attended climate opinion. The ICJ failure repeats a historical moment in climatic responsibility.
“Obligations of states in respect or climate change”
In a rare Unanimous decisionThe opinion of the ICJ concluded that “a clean, healthy and sustainable environment” is partly a previous condition for the enjoyment of human rights, including the right to life and the right to health. In consequence, the governed states of the ICJ, including their private actors, are obliged to ensure that the climate is protected from anthropogenic emissions of greenhouse gases (GHG) and can be legally guilty by other damaged states.
The 140 -page opinion is the result of 2023 ON resolution That requested that the ICJ produce an advisory opinion that answers two questions: What are the obligations of the states under international law to guarantee climate protection and what are the legal consequences to cause significant climate damage? In a failed attempt, the United States Department of State opposed the resolution discussion The ICJ can only consider applied climatic treaties, such as the 2015 Paris Agreement and with the exclusion of other rules of international law.
In summary, the ICJ found that states have substantive, urgent and enforceable obligations under the UN climate treaties and international laws to avoid significant damage to the environment of GEI emissions that include those that result from the use of fuel. The Court widely defined the use of fossil fuels such as the adoption of laws, regulatory policies and programs that promote the production and consumption of fossil fuels through leases, licenses and subsidies.
States must act using “all means at their disposal” that includes the adoption of appropriate legal and regulatory measures, acquiring and analyzing scientific and technological information and risk and impact evaluations, fulfilling the duty of cessation and acting and data collection. The ruling also allows legal actions to protect future generations. The Court rejected the argument attributed to the damage in case it is insectible to affirm that it is “scientifically possible” to determine the current and historical emissions of each state. Without appointing the US, the ICJ affirmed to the states that they do not participate in the UN treatments, they must still fulfill the responsibilities of equimlation of international law. (Climate Change Law of Center for Columbias Sabin Blog Has extensively examined ICJ’s opinion).
US Healthcare’s contribution to anthropogenic warming
Because the ICJ recognizes an inherent link between anthropogenic warming and human rights, opinion implies that the right to health cannot be ensured without addressing the climate obligations of medical care of the United States. Knowing these pose a substantial challenge for the industry for several reasons.
The medical care of the United States contributes significantly to anthropogenic warming. According to Northeast Professor Matthew Eckelman, the industry represents a growing amount of GHG emissions currently in more than 600 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2E), or 9-10% or total US emissions 25% Or world medical care emissions. If American medical care were your own country, you would probably like Rank 9ThLess than Saudi Arabia but more than Germany.
Two reasons greatly explain the carbon footprint of medical care. The industry is immense. Despite providing 4% of the world’s population, last year it was a $ 5.3 billion Market or approximately half O Total global medical care. The industry wasted a huge amount of energy. Despite spending $ 5 billion Annually in energy, equivalent to at least 15% of profits, hospitals are significantly inefficient in energy because they continue to consume fossil fuels First generate heat Produce electricity that is dramatically less efficient than the use of renewable resources that directly generate electricity or labor demand. Energy inefficiency of final use aggravates the problem. For example, only one trivial number or hospitals are EPA Energy Star certified For energy efficiency. For the ten -year period that ended in 2024, 85 or 1.4% or approximately 6,000 hospitals were certified on average.
Regarding state obligations, Congress has not yet approved legislation or administration to promulgate a regulatory rule to mitigate medical care emissions. Despite the effort of the administration Biden A “Address the climate crisis“The Medicare and Medicaid Services Centers (CMS) failed to finish a single regulation. Like the 2015 Paris Agreement, ICJ’s opinion emphasizes the” respect “and” promoting “climate action the rights of” children, people. However, “” “” “policy formulators have seemed to the fact that the children of Medicare and Medicare pay the greatest climatic fine, which becomes increasingly severe as the stock or supply dioxide and other Gei asphra. Meta-problem, or a root cause of all ethers, in the absence of medical care emissions that cannot claim medical care is improving or that the provision of medical care does not impose iatrogenic damage.
Regarding the industry, clinical medical care has not yet developed diagnostic and procedure codes related to climate and quality measures, carrying the patient’s risk adjustment and in the performance payment program. Operationally, the Lancet Regressive account against health and climate change Annually reminds readers that medical care has made trivial progress in the divestment of fossil fuels. Last November The now missing Office of Climate Change and Health Equity was forced to admit that the United States Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) did not know to what extent medical care organizations simply reported their GG emissions. Because the National Academy of Medicine Climate collaboration He did not make measurable progress of about three years, the former CMS administrator last October Dr. I. Don Berwick felt forced to rebuke his collaborative colleagues statement“Things …. Medical Care Trade in the United States and professional associations, including those dedicated to hospital care, infectious diseases, pediatrics and public health, have discovered neither recognized nor recognized the resolution of ICJ 2023, for example, by tespite More than half or known human pathogens It can be aggravated by risks or climatic roads.
Add to this, that the medical care of the United States contributes and is affected by anthropogenic warming, which means that the industry effectively constitutes a cycle of damage for damages and damage that exposes it more and more to the ultimate systemic risk. Simply explained, if it is more likely, when anthropogenic warming or the decomposition of the weather leaves us to the medical care of the United States unable to absorb or transfer their insurance risk, Frezeee credit markets, medical care assets Fffre Sapidly. The United States health care industry becomes a victim of its own contradiction, victim or its own moral danger.
He thought that the ICJ has the greatest legal, moral and political weight, what effect will the advisory opinion will be uncertain. What is certain is that Climate -related costs will continue to increase and the ability to Scientifically attribute emissions Will continue to improve. ICJ’s opinion will affirm the complaints of the plaintiffs in 3,000 current climatic cases in 60 countries and provide the courts with a “Panpley of Legal Conquences” to choose from including repairs, the repeal of the laws and regulations that enable Gei emissions and prospective measures that include cessation, not guaranteed repetition and continuous compliance.
David Introcaso is a research consultant and medical care policy based in Washington, DC
