International trade shapes global mercury–related health impacts

Abstract Mercury (Hg) is a strong neurotoxin with substantial dangers to human health. Hg undergoes active global cycles, and the emission sources there of can also be geographically relocated through economic trade. Through investigation of a longer chain of the global biogeochemical Hg cycle from economic production to human health, international cooperation on Hg control strategies in Minamata Convention can be facilitated. In the present study, four global models are combined to investigate the effect of international trade on the relocation of Hg emissions, pollution, exposure, and related human health impacts across the world. The results show that 47% of global Hg emissions are related to commodities consumed outside of the countries where the emissions are produced, which has largely influenced the environmental Hg levels and human exposure thereto across the world. Consequently, international trade is found to enable the whole world to avoid 5.7 × 105 points for intelligence quotient (IQ) decline and 1,197 deaths from fatal heart attacks, saving a total of $12.5 billion (2020 USD) in economic loss. Regionally, international trade exacerbates Hg challenges in less developed countries, while resulting in an alleviation in developed countries. The change in economic loss therefore varies from the United States (−$4.0 billion) and Japan (−$2.4 billion) to China (+$2.7 billion). The present results reveal that international trade is a critical factor but might be largely overlooked in global Hg pollution mitigation.

[1]  Haikun Wang,et al.  Global health impact of atmospheric mercury emissions from artisanal and small-scale gold mining , 2022, iScience.

[2]  Yanxu Zhang,et al.  Earth system modeling of mercury using CESM2 – Part 1: Atmospheric model CAM6-Chem/Hg v1.0 , 2022, Geoscientific Model Development.

[3]  Haifeng Zhou,et al.  Looping Mercury Cycle in Global Environmental-Economic System Modeling. , 2022, Environmental science & technology.

[4]  F. Simone,et al.  Will action taken under the Minamata Convention on Mercury need to be coordinated internationally? Evidence from an optimization study suggests it will , 2022 .

[5]  Reed C. Harris,et al.  Experimental evidence for recovery of mercury-contaminated fish populations , 2021, Nature.

[6]  V. Shah,et al.  Improved Mechanistic Model of the Atmospheric Redox Chemistry of Mercury. , 2021, Environmental science & technology.

[7]  Shuxiao Wang,et al.  Global Economic Structure Transition Boosts Atmospheric Mercury Emissions in China , 2021, Earth's Future.

[8]  Shuxiao Wang,et al.  Global health effects of future atmospheric mercury emissions , 2021, Nature Communications.

[9]  K. Feng,et al.  China's retrofitting measures in coal-fired power plants bring significant mercury-related health benefits , 2020, One Earth.

[10]  Yanxu Zhang,et al.  A Global Model for Methylmercury Formation and Uptake at the Base of Marine Food Webs , 2020, Global Biogeochemical Cycles.

[11]  Xuejun Wang,et al.  Significant elevation of human methylmercury exposure induced by the food trade in Beijing, a developing megacity. , 2019, Environment international.

[12]  Shuxiao Wang,et al.  Primary Suppliers Driving Atmospheric Mercury Emissions through Global Supply Chains , 2019, One Earth.

[13]  Angel Aguiar,et al.  The GTAP Data Base: Version 10 , 2019, Journal of Global Economic Analysis.

[14]  E. Hertwich,et al.  Tracing the Uncertain Chinese Mercury Footprint within the Global Supply Chain Using a Stochastic, Nested Input-Output Model. , 2019, Environmental science & technology.

[15]  Yanxu Zhang,et al.  A Coupled Global Atmosphere-Ocean Model for Air-Sea Exchange of Mercury: Insights into Wet Deposition and Atmospheric Redox Chemistry. , 2019, Environmental science & technology.

[16]  Wei Zhang,et al.  Trans-provincial health impacts of atmospheric mercury emissions in China , 2019, Nature Communications.

[17]  M. Lenzen,et al.  Environmental and social footprints of international trade , 2018, Nature Geoscience.

[18]  G. Janssens‑Maenhout,et al.  Evaluating EDGARv4.tox2 speciated mercury emissions ex-post scenarios and their impacts on modelled global and regional wet deposition patterns , 2018, Atmospheric Environment.

[19]  V. Karplus,et al.  Present and Future Mercury Concentrations in Chinese Rice: Insights From Modeling , 2018 .

[20]  Wei Zhang,et al.  Trade-Induced Atmospheric Mercury Deposition over China and Implications for Demand-Side Controls. , 2018, Environmental science & technology.

[21]  A. Schartup,et al.  A Model for Methylmercury Uptake and Trophic Transfer by Marine Plankton. , 2018, Environmental science & technology.

[22]  E. Sunderland,et al.  Decadal Changes in the Edible Supply of Seafood and Methylmercury Exposure in the United States , 2018, Environmental health perspectives.

[23]  E. Silbergeld,et al.  Modulators of mercury risk to wildlife and humans in the context of rapid global change , 2018, Ambio.

[24]  K. Schaefer,et al.  Permafrost Stores a Globally Significant Amount of Mercury , 2017, World Scientific Encyclopedia of Climate Change.

[25]  Yi-Ming Wei,et al.  Chinese CO2 emission flows have reversed since the global financial crisis , 2017, Nature Communications.

[26]  Xi Lu,et al.  Trade-driven relocation of air pollution and health impacts in China , 2017, Nature Communications.

[27]  D. Jacob,et al.  A new mechanism for atmospheric mercury redox chemistry: implications for the global mercury budget , 2017 .

[28]  Zifeng Lu,et al.  Total Mercury Released to the Environment by Human Activities. , 2017, Environmental science & technology.

[29]  R. Watson A database of global marine commercial, small-scale, illegal and unreported fisheries catch 1950–2014 , 2017, Scientific Data.

[30]  M. Brauer,et al.  Transboundary health impacts of transported global air pollution and international trade , 2017, Nature.

[31]  Bin Chen,et al.  Tracking mercury emission flows in the global supply chains: A multi-regional input-output analysis , 2017 .

[32]  Tasawar Hayat,et al.  An overview of mercury emissions by global fuel combustion: The impact of international trade , 2016 .

[33]  Manfred Lenzen,et al.  Substantial nitrogen pollution embedded in international trade , 2016 .

[34]  D. Jacob,et al.  Observed decrease in atmospheric mercury explained by global decline in anthropogenic emissions , 2016, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[35]  A. Giang,et al.  Benefits of mercury controls for the United States , 2015, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[36]  Steven J. Davis,et al.  Drivers of the US CO2 emissions 1997–2013 , 2015, Nature Communications.

[37]  G. Janssens‑Maenhout,et al.  Trend analysis from 1970 to 2008 and model evaluation of EDGARv4 global gridded anthropogenic mercury emissions. , 2014, The Science of the total environment.

[38]  D. Streets,et al.  Response of fish tissue mercury in a freshwater lake to local, regional, and global changes in mercury emissions , 2014, Environmental toxicology and chemistry.

[39]  Weidong Liu,et al.  Virtual atmospheric mercury emission network in China. , 2014, Environmental science & technology.

[40]  E. Budtz-Jørgensen,et al.  Economic benefits of methylmercury exposure control in Europe: Monetary value of neurotoxicity prevention , 2013, Environmental Health.

[41]  M. Karagas,et al.  Normal neonatal microbiome variation in relation to environmental factors, infection and allergy , 2012, Current opinion in pediatrics.

[42]  E. Budtz-Jørgensen,et al.  Calculation of Mercury’s Effects on Neurodevelopment , 2012, Environmental health perspectives.

[43]  A. Grandjean Dietary intake data collection: challenges and limitations. , 2012, Nutrition reviews.

[44]  Xinbin Feng,et al.  Mercury cycling in a flooded rice paddy , 2012 .

[45]  Manfred Lenzen,et al.  International trade drives biodiversity threats in developing nations , 2012, Nature.

[46]  D. Jacob,et al.  Global source-receptor relationships for mercury deposition under present-day and 2050 emissions scenarios. , 2011, Environmental science & technology.

[47]  Glen P. Peters,et al.  CONSTRUCTING AN ENVIRONMENTALLY-EXTENDED MULTI-REGIONAL INPUT–OUTPUT TABLE USING THE GTAP DATABASE , 2011 .

[48]  Elsie M. Sunderland,et al.  Anthropogenic impacts on global storage and emissions of mercury from terrestrial soils: Insights from a new global model , 2010 .

[49]  J. Hammitt,et al.  A probabilistic characterization of the health benefits of reducing methyl mercury intake in the United States. , 2010, Environmental science & technology.

[50]  Manfred Lenzen,et al.  UNCERTAINTY ANALYSIS FOR MULTI-REGION INPUT–OUTPUT MODELS – A CASE STUDY OF THE UK'S CARBON FOOTPRINT , 2010 .

[51]  C. Knightes,et al.  Sources of Mercury Exposure for U.S. Seafood Consumers: Implications for Policy , 2009, Environmental health perspectives.

[52]  E. Hertwich,et al.  Carbon footprint of nations: a global, trade-linked analysis. , 2009, Environmental science & technology.

[53]  R. Yantosca,et al.  Global 3‐D land‐ocean‐atmosphere model for mercury: Present‐day versus preindustrial cycles and anthropogenic enrichment factors for deposition , 2008 .

[54]  Tracey J. Woodruff,et al.  Dose–Response Relationship of Prenatal Mercury Exposure and IQ: An Integrative Analysis of Epidemiologic Data , 2007, Environmental health perspectives.

[55]  W. Fitzgerald,et al.  Methylmercury in freshwater fish linked to atmospheric mercury deposition. , 2006, Environmental science & technology.

[56]  C. Hammerschmidt,et al.  Methylmercury in mosquitoes related to atmospheric mercury deposition and contamination. , 2005, Environmental science & technology.

[57]  Prakash Shetty,et al.  The problem of accuracy in dietary surveys. Analysis of the over 65 UK National Diet and Nutrition Survey , 2000, Journal of epidemiology and community health.

[58]  C. Kroeze N2O from animal waste. Methodology according to IPCC Guidelines for National Greenhouse Gas Inventories. , 1997 .

[59]  C. Davidson,et al.  [Sources of mercury]. , 1993, Revue belge de medecine dentaire.