๐ค I'm a bot that provides automatic summaries for articles:
Click here to see the summary
Particulates and ozone resulting from fossil fuel burning cause direct health impacts, while climate change will act indirectly.
Wind and solar, by displacing fossil fuel use, are acting as a form of pollution control and so should produce similar economic benefits.
Similarly, there has been additional research into the health impacts of SO2 and nitrogen oxides emitted during the burning of fossil fuels, which produce particulate and ozone pollution.
They also chose to do so in a way that will make it easier to keep their estimates up to date, by focusing on regional-level changes in US electricity generating, rather than waiting for data on individual power plant production, which tends to take a while to gather.
In the absence of wind and solar, that demand would likely have been met using fossil fuels (given the pace of nuclear and hydroelectric construction, this is a very reasonable assumption).
They don't accrue to anyone involved in operating the plants but instead are enjoyed by society at large in terms of reduced environmental degradation and lower health expenses.
Saved 72% of original text.