Friday, September 23, 2022

Pound falls below $1.10 for first time since 1985 following mini-budget

Sell-off as investors take fright at prospect of surge in government borrowing to cover huge tax cuts


Sterling was down by two cents agains the dollar to a fresh 37-year low.
 Photograph: Dado Ruvić/Reuters
Fri 23 Sep 2022 

The pound has fallen below $1.10 for the first time since 1985 as investors took fright at the prospect of a surge in government borrowing to pay for Kwasi Kwarteng’s sweeping tax cuts.

Issuing a punishing verdict on the chancellor’s “dash for growth”, traders sent sterling tumbling on Friday in a broad-based sell-off in response to the huge rise in public borrowing required to finance his plans.

Analysts at the US investment bank JPMorgan said the market reaction demonstrated “a broader loss of investor confidence in the government’s approach”, reflecting the damage to Britain’s standing in global markets.

Citi analysts said the chancellor’s tax giveaway, the biggest since 1972 , “risks a confidence crisis in sterling”.

The pound was down two and a half cents against the dollar to a fresh 37-year low of $1.0993 as fears over the future path for the public finances also triggered a surge in government borrowing costs. The fall below the symbolic $1.10 mark came after the chancellor announced £45bn of tax cuts directed at higher earners.

The FTSE 100 fell more than 2% to trade below 7,000 for the first time since early March, after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, while the cost of borrowing for the UK government on international markets rose by the most in a single day for more than a decade.

Two-year UK government bond yields – which are inversely related to the value of bonds and rise as they fall – jumped by as much as 0.4 percentage points to come close to 4%, reaching the highest level since the 2008 financial crisis.

Borrowing costs on 10-year bonds rose by more than 0.2 percentage points to trade close to 3.8%, continuing a dramatic climb under way since Liz Truss took over as prime minister earlier this month. At the start of September, yields on benchmark UK sovereign debt have risen by almost one percentage point, significantly more than for comparable advanced economies.

“[It’s] really hard to overstate the degree to which the Kwarteng budget has just wrecked the gilt market,” said Toby Nangle, a former fund manager at Columbia Threadneedle. Illustrating the scale of the turmoil, he said five-year gilt yields had moved by the most in a single day since 1993 - surpassing the Covid pandemic, the 2008 financial crisis, and 9/11.

Investors warned Britain’s experiment with Trussonomics comes at a challenging moment with a soaring US dollar, rising interest rates from global central banks, and with higher borrowing costs across advanced economies amid weaker economic growth and soaring inflation.

However, they said Britain was being singled out after years of the government damaging its reputation for sound economic management, compounded by the steps being taken by the new prime minister.

Gabriele Foa, a portfolio manager at Algebris Investments, said: “We are in a situation in which the UK government has lost a lot of credibility in the past three to four years and pushed the market’s patience in a lot of ways.

“[It’s about] Covid management, government instability, the management of Brexit. It is just a big, let’s say, series of concerns. The UK was in the first league, [but] it’s moving from first, to second to third. If you give some signs that you’re not reliable you move leagues.”

It comes after the Treasury said it would finance the chancellor’s tax cuts and the energy price guarantee for consumers and businesses with £72.4bn in additional UK government debt sales than planned for the current financial year.

Instead of the £161.7bn planned by the Debt Management Office in April, the Treasury said it would now sell £234.1bn of government bonds to international investors in 2022-23.

The change will mean investors are being approached to buy significantly more government debt than previously expected, and comes in addition to the Bank of England preparing to sell £80bn of gilts held on its balance sheet thanks to its quantitative easing programme.

Markets bet the Bank would be forced by Kwarteng’s support schemes to ramp interest rates above 5% by May next year – more than double the current rate of 2.25% – on the expectation they would add significantly to inflationary pressures.

Vivek Paul, a senior portfolio strategist at BlackRock, said: “The credibility of the UK is what markets are reacting to.

“Over time we will know if there will be a fundamental change. The jury is out, [but] the initial reaction from markets is not a ringing endorsement. Let’s put it that way.”

The moves come as the Bank responds to soaring inflation by raising interest rates, despite warning that Britain’s economy is already in recession.

Antoine Bouvet, a senior rates strategist, and Chris Turner, the global head of markets at the Dutch bank ING, said the conditions amounted to a “perfect storm” for the UK as global markets shun sterling and gilts.

“Price action in UK gilts is going from bad to worse. A daunting list of challenges has arisen for sterling-denominated bond investors, and the Treasury’s mini-budget has done little to shore up confidence.”

A look back to 1972, the last time tax cuts so big were brought in

At the time of Anthony Barber’s ‘dash for growth’ budget, a pint of milk cost 6p, Nilsson was top of the charts and Brian Clough was in his heyday at Derby County

Chancellor Anthony Barber outside 11 Downing Street in 1971. 
Photograph: William Lovelace/Getty Images

Martin Belam
THE GUARDIAN
Fri 23 Sep 2022


The Institute for Fiscal Studies has said Kwasi Kwarteng’s announcement on Friday amounts to the biggest tax-cutting budget since Anthony Barber’s on the 21 March 1972, just over 50 years ago. Here is a roundup of some of the prices you would have been paying, and things you might have been watching and listening to at the time.

Cost of living crisis, 1972 style

Barber’s budget was called the “dash for growth”, but the prices of everyday items seem laughably cheap by today’s standards. A pint of milk cost 6p in March 1972, butter was around 13p and a gallon of four-star petrol – leaded, naturally – would have set you back 35p or about 8p per litre. If you’d just bought a brand new Ford Cortina to fill up, the car would have cost you £963. The land registry suggests the average house price was £5,158. If you still couldn’t afford a car or a house, you could always drown your sorrows with a 14p pint of beer while smoking the packet of 20 cigarettes that had set you back around 25p inside the pub. Just 13 months after decimalisation, though, people could still be forgiven for getting confused about prices in “new money”.

A Ford Cortina would have set you back £973 in 1972.
 Photograph: David Newell Smith/The Observer

Television, when it was actually on


In an era when both BBC channels still had periods of “closedown” scattered through the day and parliament was not televised, on BBC One Brian Widlake presented an afternoon budget special entitled Budget Special 1972: Confidence or Crisis? with contributors including Brian Walden and Robin Day.

That meant children’s programmes were shifted over to BBC Two, where you could catch Tony Hart on Vision On and there was a Jackanory story to enjoy. Later that night on BBC One, Robert Hardy narrated a documentary about the British Empire and Barry Norman was reviewing movies in Film 72. Of course, to have enjoyed all that, you would have had to pay for your television licence, which was £7 for a black-and-white set and £12 if you wanted to watch in colour.

The sounds of t
he 70s

The No 1 single in the UK that week was Without You by Nilsson, a track that was also a No 1 in Ireland, Australia and the US. Also in the top ten were American Pie by Don McLean and Hold Your Head Up by Argent. Lindisfarne were top of the album charts with Fog on the Tyne, an album that spent over a year in the UK chart including four weeks in the top spot.
David Bowie performs Starman on Top of the Pops in 1972. 
Photograph: YouTube/GreatGuitarHeroes

The US singer-songwriter Judee Sill was the guest musician on the Old Grey Whistle Test on the day of the budget, while Thursday’s edition of Top of the Pops is one you will not have seen repeated on BBC Four recently, as it was presented by Jimmy Savile. It included the Chiffons, Olivia Newton-John, Labi Siffre and Tom Jones.

The Radio One DJ lineup on the day of the budget was a veritable who’s who of broadcasting, including Tony Blackburn, Jimmy Young, Dave Lee Travis, Johnny Walker, Terry Wogan, Annie Nightingale and John Peel. John Timpson and Robert Robinson were presenting the Today programme on Radio 4, while Radio 2 handled the coverage of the budget in the afternoon.
Clough’s glory days with Derby County

In football, Derby County were on their way to winning their first English Division One title under the genius management of Brian Clough. Ahead of the budget they beat Leicester 3-0, while Liverpool, their rivals for the title, thrashed Newcastle 5-0 . Leeds United were busy dispensing with Tottenham 2-1 in the FA Cup on their way to eventually winning it. In Scotland, Celtic were heading to the seventh of nine consecutive titles, while Glasgow Rangers would eventually lift the now-defunct European Cup-Winners Cup that year.

Brian Clough (left) and his assistant Peter Taylor show off the League Championship trophy to jubilant Derby County fans in May 1972. 
Photograph: PA Photos/PA

In rugby union, Scotland had won the Calcutta Cup 23-9 against England at Murrayfield the weekend before the budget, in a Five Nations tournament truncated by the political upheaval following Bloody Sunday in Northern Ireland that January, which meant Ireland’s home fixtures against Scotland and Wales were cancelled.

Elsewhere in sport, Eddy Merckx won both the Giro D’Italia and Tour de France, Jack Nicklaus was the highest earner on the golf circuit, Alex Higgins was world snooker champion, and Emerson Fittipaldi took the F1 crown.
Also in the news

Nasa launched Pioneer 10 in March on its way to study Jupiter before becoming the first human-made object to leave the solar system, and Apollo 16 was scheduled to head to the moon in early April. The Godfather had its premiere in New York before going on to be the highest-grossing movie of the year ahead of The Poseidon Adventure.

Nasa’s Pioneer 10 spacecraft. Photograph: Associated Press

Closer to home, just a few days after the budget London would impose direct rule on Northern Ireland, and the summer of 1972 was the last time you could legally leave school at 15. The age was raised to 16 from 1 September.
The more things change …

Some things remain surprisingly constant. When Barber stood up to make his budget speech, the third Doctor Who, Jon Pertwee, was part of the way through a six-part adventure pitting him against The Sea Devils – monsters that returned to celebrate their own own 50th anniversary in this year’s Doctor Who Easter Special starring the 13th Doctor, Jodie Whittaker.
And what happened to Anthony Barber?

Within months of his budget the chancellor was forced to float the pound, which led to a sharp decrease in its value and huge inflationary pressure on the economy, which failed to grow in the way his tax-cutting measures had been intended to stimulate. After industrial unrest, Ted Heath called a general election early in 1974 and Barber lost his job as chancellor as Harold Wilson was returned to office with a minority Labour government. Barber did not stand for re-election when Wilson called the second general election of 1974 in October in a bid to secure a majority, which he narrowly achieved. Barber went off to work in the world of banking, where at one point a certain John Major was under his tutelage.


UK 

‘A budget for the 1%’: government accused of huge tax cut for super-wealthy

Kwasi Kwarteng delivers his mini-budget statement on Friday. 
Photograph: Jessica Taylor/House of Commons/Reuters

The government stands accused of introducing a “simply staggering, huge tax cut for richer households” that will leave “the super-wealthy laughing all the way to the actual bank”, while allowing hundreds of thousands of already-struggling families to fall deeper into poverty.

On Friday, Kwasi Kwarteng, the chancellor, announced a string of tax giveaways and other measures that economists and campaigners claim will hugely benefit the super-rich at the expense of hardworking people.

The measures include:

  • Scrapping the 45p additional tax rate on earnings above £150,000.

  • Axing the cap on bankers’ bonuses.

  • Scrapping the planned rise in corporation tax to 25%.

  • Doubling the stamp duty “holiday” on property purchases to £250,000.

  • Allowing the overseas wealthy to shop duty free anywhere in the UK – not just at airports.

  • Axing the planned rise in national insurance contributions.

  • Tightening the benefits rules to make it harder for part time workers on universal credit.

The combined package of measures announced in the mini-budget means that someone who currently makes £1m will gain £55,220 a year, while someone earning £20,000 will be just £157 better off, according to calculations by the Resolution Foundation.

Torsten Bell, the chief executive of the thinktank, said the policies “amount to a simply staggering, huge tax cut for richer households”.

Bell described the mini-budget as socially divisive, and said almost 45% of the £45bn worth of tax cuts would “go to the richest 5% alone, who will be £8,560 better off”.

“In contrast, just 12% of the gains will go to the poorest half of households, who will be £230 better off on average next year.”

There are 3,519 bankers working in the UK making more than €1m a year (£880,000) according to the European Banking Authority (EBA). That is more than seven times as many as those in Germany, which has the second highest number of €1m-a-year bankers. The EBA figures show 27 UK bankers made more than €10m in 2019 (the latest year available).

Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, said: “The super-wealthy laughing all the way to the actual bank. While increasing numbers of the rest are relying on food banks – all thanks to the incompetence and recklessness of this failed UK government.”

Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies thinktank, said the abolition of the 45p tax rate on incomes over £150,000 was “a surprise” that “helps roughly highest income 1%.”

Johnson said combined the measures amounted to “the biggest tax cutting event since 1972”.

Alison Garnham, the chief executive of Child Poverty Action Group, described the budget as “a statement for the 1%” and said it was “more bankers’ bonuses than helping hungry kids”.

“Today was a vital opportunity to provide reassurance and support to those who need it the most,” she said. “But instead the government risks a collision with reality, and the 4 million kids currently living in poverty in the UK will be forced to pay the price.”

Frances O’Grady, the general secretary of the TUC, said: “The government was “making it easier for City bankers to help themselves – making it harder for workers to win better pay and conditions”.

Luke Hildyard, the executive director of the High Pay Centre, a thinktank that focuses on excessive pay, said: “By scrapping the bankers’ bonus cap and cutting tax on the richest 1% of the population, the government is doubling down on a failed economic strategy.

“The richest households in the UK already rake in more than the richest in most European countries.”

He said that instead of “bending over backwards for people who are already extremely well off”, the government should concentrate on “re-balancing income and wealth in favour of low- and middle-income earners”.

James Perry, a multimillionaire and founding member of Patriotic Millionaires, a campaign group calling for higher taxes on the very wealthy, described Kwarteng’s mini-budget as “an abdication of responsibility for sound financial management”.

Perry, who made a fortune from a frozen ready meals company, said that instead of scrapping the high rate of tax Kwarteng should have introduced more taxes on the wealthy.

“We have to deal with the phenomenon of extreme wealth, a vast pool of capital held by a very few. Policies like scrapping the bankers’ bonus cap and the top rate of income tax will do the opposite.

“When 70% of the public are saying it’s time to raise taxes on extreme wealth to invest in our country – and millionaire investors like me agree – why would the government not do the right and obvious thing and get on with it?”

Kwarteng scraps top 45% rate of income tax and cuts stamp duty


Chancellor abolishes cap on banker bonuses, cuts basic income tax and national insurance in mini-budget that favours top earners


Kwasi Kwarteng delivers sweeping cuts in latest mini-budget – video highlights

Phillip Inman and Rowena Mason
Fri 23 Sep 2022 

Kwasi Kwarteng has bet the government’s re-election in 2024 on the biggest tax cuts in 50 years after the UK chancellor announced reductions in the top 45% rate of income tax, national insurance and stamp duty worth £45bn.

Facing accusations of a “class war” mini-budget that rewarded the rich more than those on lower incomes, Kwarteng said his efforts to boost growth and energise the economy included helping all households after he brought forward a planned 1p cut in the basic rate of income tax from 2024 to next year.

The top 45p income tax rate on earnings of more than £150,000 a year will be scrapped, leaving the highest rate at 40p. The main income tax changes predominantly apply in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.


Kwasi Kwarteng announces ‘investment zones’ with huge tax cuts for businesses


The Treasury acknowledged after the budget that about 660,000 of the highest earners will benefit from the scrapping of the 45p rate, getting back on average £10,000 a year.

A Treasury spokesperson said the chancellor “disagreed” that it was a budget for the rich or that it was “trickle-down economics”, but the aim was that “growing the economy benefits everyone”.

A rise in national insurance of 1.25% brought in earlier this year will be reversed, saving households £330 a year.

Thresholds for paying stamp duty – which applies in England and Northern Ireland – will be increased, cutting the tax paid on purchasing homes.

The threshold at which first-time buyers begin to pay stamp duty will increase from £300,000 to £425,000, and the maximum value of a property on which first-time buyers’ relief can be claimed will also increase, from £500,000 to £625,000. The chancellor said the cuts would be permanent.

Kwarteng also confirmed that caps on bankers’ bonuses would be scrapped.

Promising a new era of growth, he said: “High taxes reduce incentives to work and they hinder enterprise.”

Against a backdrop of high inflation and forecasts that Britain faces a long recession, the chancellor cancelled a rise in corporation tax from 19% to 25% next year.

“In the context of the global energy crisis it is entirely appropriate for the government to take action,” he said, adding that “fiscal responsibility remains essential” and he would be allowing the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) to examine the Treasury’s spending plans before the end of the year. The OBR, which provides independent economic forecasts based on the government’s plan, was blocked from assessing the mini-budget by Kwarteng.

The Treasury, when asked why it could not produce OBR forecasts, claimed it would not be able to publish full forecasts in time. It admitted there were no forecasts for how much the growth plan would boost growth, or when Kwarteng hoped to reach the 2.5% growth target.

He is reviewing his fiscal rules but these will not be set out at this stage. The Treasury continued to insist it was not a budget, so therefore was not accompanied by the traditional distributional impact showing how the measures would affect the rich and the poor.

Labour described the mini-budget as a “menu without prices” that rewarded better-off households while gambling with the public finances.

Conservative backbenchers gave an extremely muted response to Kwarteng, unusually refraining from cheering or banging their seats behind the chancellor. Several Tory MPs told the Guardian they were worried about the political implications of giving tax cuts to the rich, while providing little help for most of the population with the cost of living beyond the 1p cut in income tax.

In contrast, Labour MPs were outraged by the measures and buoyed by the idea that voters would reject the Tories, with one shadow cabinet minister saying they thought it would “go down like a bucket of sick” in the “red wall” constituencies.

Leftwing Labour MPs Richard Burgon and Paula Barker said Kwarteng’s decision to skew tax cuts to the better-off amounted to a campaign of “class war”.

Financial markets were fearful about the extra borrowing needed to fund Kwarteng’s huge tax cuts, sending the pound plunging below $1.11 for the first time since 1985. The government’s borrowing costs jumped after the two-year borrowing rate doubled from last month to 4%.

Benchmark 10-year gilt prices also weakened, pushing up their yield to the highest since 2011.


British retailers welcome planned return of VAT-free shopping for tourists

Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said the tax cuts would cost £41bn in 2024 and £45bn in 2026, making the mini-budget the “biggest tax-cutting event since 1972”.
Recalling the Heath government’s attempt in the early 1970s to boost growth with huge tax cuts orchestrated by the then chancellor, Tony Barber, Johnson said: “Barber’s ‘dash for growth’ then ended in disaster. That budget is now known as the worst of modern times. Genuinely, I hope this one works very much better.”

Kwarteng also announced planned rises in beer, wine and spirit duties would be cancelled and said he would cut welfare benefits if unemployed people failed to comply with the requirements to search for a job.

He said it was outrageous that strikes were bringing vital services to a halt. He said he would bring forward legislation making it illegal to hold a strike from taking place until “talks have genuinely broken down”.

A sea change for plastic pollution: New material biodegrades in ocean water

Marine microorganisms found to feast on new polyurethane materials used in sustainable shoes

Peer-Reviewed Publication

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA - SAN DIEGO

Biodegradable shoe in ocean water 

IMAGE: A SUSTAINABLE BLUEVIEW SHOE BIODEGRADES IN OCEAN WATER AFTER 11 WEEKS. view more 

CREDIT: DANIEL ZHEN, ALGENESIS INC.


Plastics, now ubiquitous in the modern world, have become a rising threat to human and environmental health. Around the planet, evidence of plastic pollution stretches from grocery bags in the deep sea to microplastics in our food supplies and even in our blood.

Seeking solutions to counteract the rise in plastic trash, scientists at the University of California San Diego have developed new biodegradable materials that are designed to replace conventionally used plastic. After proving their polyurethane foams biodegrade in land-based composts, an interdisciplinary team of scientists including UC San Diego biologist Stephen Mayfield and chemists Michael Burkart and Robert “Skip” Pomeroy have now shown that the material biodegrades in seawater. The results are published in the journal Science of the Total Environment.

The researchers are working to address a plastic pollution problem now described as a global environmental crisis. In 2010, researchers estimated that 8 billion kilograms of plastic enter the ocean in a single year, with a steep escalation predicted by 2025. Upon entering the ocean, plastic waste disrupts marine ecosystems, migrates to central locations and forms trash gyres such as the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, which covers an area more than 1.6 million square kilometers. These plastics never degrade, but rather break up into ever-smaller particles, eventually becoming microplastics that persist in the environment for centuries.

Working with study coauthor Samantha Clements, a marine biologist and scientific diver at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, the UC San Diego researchers conducted a series of tests of their biodegradable polyurethane materials—currently used as foams in the first commercially available biodegradable shoes (sold by a spinoff company called Blueview)—at Scripps’ Ellen Browning Scripps Memorial Pier and Experimental Aquarium. The pier’s location provided scientists the access and a unique opportunity to test materials in the natural nearshore ecosystem, which is the exact environment where rogue plastics are most likely to end up.

The team found that an assortment of marine organisms colonizes on the polyurethane foam and biodegrades the material back to their starting chemicals, which are consumed as nutrients by these microorganisms, in the ocean environment. Data from the study suggest that the microorganisms, a mix of bacteria and fungi, live throughout the natural marine environment.

“Improper disposal of plastic in the ocean breaks down into microplastics and has become an enormous environmental problem,” said Mayfield, a professor in the School of Biological Sciences and director of the California Center for Algae Biotechnology. “We’ve shown that it’s absolutely possible to make high performance plastic products that also can degrade in the ocean. Plastics should not be going into the ocean in the first place, but if they do, this material becomes food for microorganisms and not plastic trash and microplastics that harm aquatic life.”

Shoes, including flip-flops, the world’s most popular shoe, make up a large percentage of plastic waste that ends up in the world’s oceans and landfills. To fully test and analyze their polyurethane materials, developed at UC San Diego over the last eight years, the study joined experts in biology, polymer and synthetic chemistry and marine science. Foam samples were exposed to tidal and wave dynamics and tracked for molecular and physical changes using Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy and scanning electron microscopy. The results showed that the material started to degraded in as little as four weeks.  The researchers then identified microorganisms from six marine sites around San Diego that are capable of breaking down and consuming the polyurethane material.

“No single discipline can address these universal environmental problems but we’ve developed an integrated solution that works on land—and now we know also biodegrades in the ocean,” said Mayfield. “I was surprised to see just how many organisms colonize on these foams in the ocean. It becomes something like a microbial reef.”

The full list of coauthors of the paper are: Natasha Gunawan, Marissa Tessman, Daniel Zhen, Lindsey Johnson, Payton Evans, Samantha Clements, Robert Pomeroy, Michael Burkart, Ryan Simkovsky and Stephen Mayfield. A U. S. Department of Energy grant (DE-SC0019986) to Algenesis Inc. supported the research.

Competing interest note: Burkart, Mayfield and Pomeroy are founders of and hold equity interests in Algenesis Inc., a company that could benefit from this research. Also, Gunawan, Tessman, Zhen, Johnson and Simkovsky are employees and shareholders of Algenesis.

The researchers studied polyurethane foams submerged at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography Pier.

CREDIT

Samantha Clements, Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego

A sustainable Blueview shoe is shown biodegrading in seawater after being submerged for 12 weeks.

CREDIT

Daniel Zhen, Algenesis Inc.

Disclaimer: AAAS and Eurek

Anthropogenic air pollution more significant than desert dust

In the Middle East, more than 90 percent of the fine aerosol particles that are detrimental to health and the climate originate from human-made sources

Peer-Reviewed Publication

MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE FOR CHEMISTRY

In 2017, an international team headed by the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry travelled around the Arabian Peninsula on a research vessel in a spectacular expedition. Various measuring instruments were kept on board to sample aerosol particles and trace gases such as ozone and nitric oxides. The researchers also discovered that the Suez Canal, the northern Red Sea and especially the Arabian Gulf are regional hotspots for ozone; the exceptionally strong concentration of ozone in these areas indicates that the harmful gas is also a problem in other densely populated regions of the Arabian Peninsula. Furthermore, the scientists found that concentrations of nitrogen oxides were significantly higher than the WHO guidelines.

"There are relatively few measurements from the region around the Arabian Peninsula and in the Middle East in general. That is why this research campaign is so important," says Sergey Osipov, an atmospheric physicist at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry in Mainz and the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST) in Saudi Arabia. “We used the data in atmospheric chemistry models in order to draw conclusions about general air quality and health consequences.”

Air pollution in the Middle East leads to high mortality rates

"The thresholds for particulate matter are constantly exceeded in the region, which is home to 400 million people," says Jos Lelieveld, director at the Max Planck Institute for Chemistry and project leader. “While the measurements have been performed several years ago, looking into the data more closely with new atmospheric modeling tools surprisingly showed that the health hazardous fraction of the pollution particles is almost exclusively human-made”. In addition to numerous researchers from Mainz, scientists from Kuwait, the Cyprus Institute, as well as from Saudi Arabia, France and the USA were also involved in the project. "The extreme air pollution results in an annual excess mortality rate of 745 people per 100,000. It has similar significance to other leading health risk factors, such as high cholesterol and tobacco smoking, and is also comparable to the mortality rate of COVID-19," adds the atmospheric scientist, who is also a professor at the Cyprus Institute in Nicosia. Given that anthropogenic air pollution is a key factor in climate change in the Middle East as well, measures to reduce emissions are all the more important, he said.