More warmist hyperbole? Maybe not...

More warmist hyperbole?  Maybe not...  Last night I read an article about possible short-term global warming mitigation strategies ($?) in the latest Science News.  These strategies are all things other than reducing carbon dioxide.  One statement in the article caught my eye as seeming unlikely:

Cleaning up methane, black carbon and other short-lived warmers requires no new technology and would improve air quality, an added benefit that could save millions of lives annually while boosting agricultural productivity.

Millions of lives annually?  Really?  Does air pollution kill that many people?  I was skeptical.

But in some quick searching around on the Intertubes, I found a lot of support for this assertion.  The estimates vary (see here, here, and here), but they're all in the millions of people annually.

So not hyperbole, it appears.  And that's more than enough reason to support the air pollution cleanup, without even considering the global warming mitigation aspect.

The worst air pollution I've personally experienced was in Mexico City – and I'm perfectly willing to believe that soup causes many premature deaths each year.  From what I'm reading, there are several cities in China that are substantially worse.  I would think those places would be trying to solve the problem already...