24 june 2021

Insta Curious:
Do you know What Approval Voting is? Read Here

Alternative Voting Systems

6/25/2020
Nearly every state uses a similar system for casting and counting votes—voters select one candidate per race on
a ballot and the candidate that receives the most votes wins. This is known as plurality voting or winner-take-all.

Plurality voting isn’t the only option, though. Ranked choice voting, approval voting and proportional
representation are described below.

As legislators consider these options, these questions may be useful:

▪ Can the current voting equipment accommodate such a system? If not, could an RFP for the next
generation of voting equipment include readiness for these options?
▪ What’s the best way to educate voters on the new system?
▪ Are there any other statutory changes needed to implement an alternative voting system?
For more information, contact NCSL’s Elections Team.

Ranked-Choice Voting
In a ranked-choice voting system, voters rank all the candidates for a given office by their preference—first
choice, second choice, etc. The votes are first tallied based on the first choice on every ballot. When ranked-choice
is used to elect one candidate (instead of multiple candidates in a multi-member district) the result is similar to
traditional runoff elections, but with just one trip to the polls. If no single candidate wins a first-round majority of
the votes, then the candidate with the lowest number of votes is eliminated and another round of vote tallying
commences. If a voter's first choice is eliminated, then the vote goes to the second choice and so on. Eventually
one candidate receives a majority (over 50 percent) and wins the election. This is also known as “instant-runoff
voting.”
For more information on ranked-choice voting, please visit NCSL's full page on ranked-choice voting.

Approval Voting
Approval voting is a system which allows voters to cast votes for as many candidates as they like in a given race
rather than just one single candidate. This allows voters to answer the question, “Do you approve of this person
for the job?” The votes are then tallied normally and the candidate that receives the most votes wins the election,
similar to plurality voting.

Approval voting will result in vote percentages that add up to more than 100 percent. Supporters argue that the
system better represents the degree of support for third parties, makes the system more resistant to tactical
voting or having third parties take away votes from major party candidates, and may lead to the election of more
moderate candidates. Opponents, however, contend that approval voting may be vulnerable to strategic voting, is
hardly used in competitive elections for this reason and could result in candidates that receive the first choice
support of more than 50 percent of voters losing to a candidate without a single first choice supporter.
Currently, approval voting is not widely used, but is used by the United Nations in a multi-round election to select
the secretary-general, and by some political parties and other private associations. In 2018, voters in Fargo, N.D.
approved a ballot initiative implementing approval voting for their municipal elections; the city held the nation's
first-ever approval voting election on June 9, 2020.
Proportional Representation
Proportional representation describes systems in which legislators are elected in multi-member districts rather
than single-member districts, and the number of seats won by like-minded group of voters (such as political
parties in a partisan election system) is proportional to the overall percentage of votes that those voters cast in
the election. For example, if there are 10 seats in a district and one party receives 50 percent of the vote then that
party receives five seats, another party receives 40 percent of the vote then that party receives four seats and a
third party receives 10 percent of the vote then that party receives one seat. To make proportional
representation possible, legislatures and other governing bodies would need to be restructured so that there
would be few or no single-member districts, as is most common currently.

The most common form of proportional representation used is party list voting, often associated with
parliamentary systems, but used in some presidential systems as well. Under the simplest form of party list
voting, each party nominates the number of candidates equal to the number of seats in that multi-member
district. Voters then indicate their preference for a party—not individual candidates—on the ballot. Parties then
receive a certain number of seats based on the vote and select candidates by their order on the ballot.

There are many variations of party list voting, including "mixed member" systems in Germany, where many
legislators are elected in single-member districts, and "open list" systems, as in Finland, where voters may vote
for individual candidates as well as for parties.

Party list forms of proportional representation is not used currently in the U.S. but is used by many countries
throughout Africa, Asia, Australia, South America and Europe.

The United States uses candidate-based forms of proportional representation in more than 100 localities, all for
candidates in multi-member districts. One such system is ranked choice voting (see above); cumulative voting
(where voters have the same number of votes as seats to be filled and can distribute them all to one candidate or
spread them amongst candidates) and limited voting (where voters have fewer votes to cast than seats to be
filled).

InstaLinks:
Prelims Link:

1. About the method.

2. Benefits.
3. What is First Past the Post system.
4. What is proportional representation system.

Mains Link:
Discuss the significance of ranked choice voting system.

Insta Curious:
Do you know Variants of Interest and Variants of High Consequence ? Read here

InstaLinks:
Prelims Link:

1. What is Covid 19?

2. What is mutation?
3. What is mRNA?
4. What is the RT- PCR test?
 5. What is genome sequencing?
6. What is a variant of concern?

Mains Link:
Discuss the concerns associated with mutations of Covid- 19 virus.

SARS-CoV-2 Variant Classifications and

Definitions
Updated June 23, 2021
Languages
Print

Key Points
email_03Get Variant Classification and Definition Updates
To receive email updates when a variant classification or definition changes, enter your
email address:

Email Address
What's this?
Submit

• Genetic variants of SARS-CoV-2 have been emerging and circulating around the world
throughout the COVID-19 pandemic.
• Viral mutations and variants in the United States are routinely monitored through
sequence-based surveillance, laboratory studies, and epidemiological investigations.
• A US government interagency group developed a Variant Classification scheme that
defines three classes of SARS-CoV-2 variants:
o Variant of Interest
o Variant of Concern
o Variant of High Consequence
• The B.1.1.7 (Alpha), B.1.351 (Beta), P.1 (Gamma), B.1.427 (Epsilon), B.1.429 (Epsilon), and
B.1.617.2 (Delta) variants circulating in the United States are classified as variants of
concern.
• To date, no variants of high consequence have been identified in the United States.
 • Laboratory studies suggest specific monoclonal antibody treatments may be less
effective for treating cases of COVID-19 caused by variants with certain substitutions or
combinations of substitutions in the spike protein.
o L452R is present in B.1.526.1, B.1.427 (Epsilon), and B.1.429 (Epsilon) lineages, as
well as the B.1.617 (Kappa, Delta) lineages and sub-lineages.
o E484K is present in B.1.525 (Eta), P.2 (Zeta), P.1 (Gamma), and B.1.351 (Beta), but
only some strains of B.1.526 (Iota) and B.1.1.7 (Alpha).
o The combination of K417N, E484K, and N501Y substitutions is present in B.1.351
(Beta).
o The combination of K417T, E484K, and N501Y substitutions is present in P.1
(Gamma).

Viruses constantly change through mutation. A variant has one or more mutations that
differentiate it from other variants in circulation. As expected, multiple variants of SARS-
CoV-2 have been documented in the United States and globally throughout this pandemic.
To inform local outbreak investigations and understand national trends, scientists compare
genetic differences between viruses to identify variants and how they are related to each
other.

Variant classifications
The US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) established a SARS-CoV-2
Interagency Group (SIG) to improve coordination among the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention (CDC), National Institutes of Health (NIH), Food and Drug Administration
(FDA), Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA), and
Department of Defense (DoD). This interagency group is focused on the rapid
characterization of emerging variants and actively monitors their potential impact on critical
SARS-CoV-2 countermeasures, including vaccines, therapeutics, and diagnostics.

• Variants of Interest (VOI) – View current VOI in the United States that are being
monitored and characterized

• Variants of Concern (VOC) – View current VOC in the United States that are being
closely monitored and characterized by federal agencies

• Variants of High Consequence (VOHC) – Currently there are no SARS-CoV-2 variants

that rise to the level of high consequence

Notes: Each classification of variant includes the possible attributes of lower classes (i.e.,
VOC includes the possible attributes of VOI); variant status might escalate or deescalate
based on scientific evidence. This page will be updated as needed to show the variants that
belong to each class. The World Health Organizationexternal icon (WHO) also classifies
variant viruses as Variants of Concern and Variants of Interest; US classifications may differ
from those of WHO since the importance of variants may differ by location. To assist with
public discussions of variants, WHO proposed using labels consisting of the Greek Alphabet,
i.e., Alpha, Beta, Gamma, as a practical way to discuss variants by non-scientific audiences.
The labels assigned to each variant are provided in the tables below.

See Variant Proportions in the U.S.

Variant of Interest
A variant with specific genetic markers that have been associated with changes to receptor
binding, reduced neutralization by antibodies generated against previous infection or
vaccination, reduced efficacy of treatments, potential diagnostic impact, or predicted
increase in transmissibility or disease severity.

Possible attributes of a variant of interest:

• Specific genetic markers that are predicted to affect transmission, diagnostics,

therapeutics, or immune escape
• Evidence that it is the cause of an increased proportion of cases or unique outbreak
clusters
• Limited prevalence or expansion in the US or in other countries

A variant of interest might require one or more appropriate public health actions, including
enhanced sequence surveillance, enhanced laboratory characterization, or epidemiological
investigations to assess how easily the virus spreads to others, the severity of disease, the
efficacy of therapeutics and whether currently authorized vaccines offer protection.

Current variants of interest in the United States that are being monitored and characterized
are listed in the table below. The table will be updated when a new variant of interest is
identified.

Selected Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Interest

B.1.525 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: A67V, 69del, 70del, 144del, E484K, D614G, Q677H, F888L

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20A/S:484K

WHO Label: Eta

First Identified: United Kingdom/Nigeria – December 2020

Attributes:

• Potential reduction in neutralization by some EUA monoclonal antibody treatments 7, 14

• Potential reduction in neutralization by convalescent and post-vaccination sera 22

B.1.526 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: (L5F*), T95I, D253G, (S477N*), (E484K*), D614G, (A701V*)

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20C/S:484K

WHO Label: Iota

First Identified: United States (New York) – November 2020

BEI Reference Isolatec: NR-55359external icon

Attributes:

• Reduced susceptibility to the combination of bamlanivimab and etesevimab monoclonal

antibody treatment; however, the clinical implications of this are not known. 7 Alternative
monoclonal antibody treatments are available.14
• Reduced neutralization by convalescent and post-vaccination sera 22, 24

B.1.526.1 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: D80G, 144del, F157S, L452R, D614G, (T791I*), (T859N*), D950H

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20C

First Identified: United States (New York) – October 2020

Attributes:

• Potential reduction in neutralization by some EUA monoclonal antibody treatments 7, 14

• Potential reduction in neutralization by convalescent and post-vaccination sera22

B.1.617 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: L452R, E484Q, D614G

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20A

First Identified: India – February 2021

Attributes:

• Potential reduction in neutralization by some EUA monoclonal antibody treatments 7, 14

• Reduced neutralization by post-vaccination sera 25, 26

B.1.617.1 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: (T95I), G142D, E154K, L452R, E484Q, D614G, P681R, Q1071H

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20A/S:154K

WHO Label: Kappa

First Identified: India – December 2020

Attributes:

• Potential reduction in neutralization by some EUA monoclonal antibody treatments 7, 14

• Potential reduction in neutralization by post-vaccination sera 26

B.1.617.3 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: T19R, G142D, L452R, E484Q, D614G, P681R, D950N

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20A

First Identified: India – October 2020

Attributes:

• Potential reduction in neutralization by some EUA monoclonal antibody treatments 7, 14

• Potential reduction in neutralization by post-vaccination sera 26

P.2 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: E484K, (F565L*), D614G, V1176F

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20J

WHO Label: Zeta

First Identified: Brazil – April 2020

Attributes:
• Potential reduction in neutralization by some EUA monoclonal antibody treatments 7, 14

• Reduced neutralization by post-vaccination sera 22, 23

Footnotes for Variants of Interest

Top of Page

Variant of Concern
A variant for which there is evidence of an increase in transmissibility, more severe disease
(e.g., increased hospitalizations or deaths), significant reduction in neutralization by
antibodies generated during previous infection or vaccination, reduced effectiveness of
treatments or vaccines, or diagnostic detection failures.

Possible attributes of a variant of concern:

In addition to the possible attributes of a variant of interest

• Evidence of impact on diagnostics, treatments, or vaccines

o Widespread interference with diagnostic test targets
o Evidence of substantially decreased susceptibility to one or more class of
therapies
o Evidence of significant decreased neutralization by antibodies generated during
previous infection or vaccination
o Evidence of reduced vaccine-induced protection from severe disease
• Evidence of increased transmissibility
• Evidence of increased disease severity

Variants of concern might require one or more appropriate public health actions, such as
notification to WHO under the International Health Regulations, reporting to CDC, local or
regional efforts to control spread, increased testing, or research to determine the
effectiveness of vaccines and treatments against the variant. Based on the characteristics of
the variant, additional considerations may include the development of new diagnostics or
the modification of vaccines or treatments.

Current variants of concern in the United States that are being closely monitored and
characterized by federal agencies are included in the table below. The table will be updated
when a new variant of concern is identified.

Top of Page

Selected Characteristics of SARS-CoV-2 Variants of Concern

B.1.1.7 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: 69del, 70del, 144del, (E484K*), (S494P*), N501Y, A570D, D614G,
P681H, T716I, S982A, D1118H (K1191N*)

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20I/501Y.V1

WHO Label: Alpha

First Identified: United Kingdom

BEI Reference Isolatec: NR-54000external icon

Attributes:

• ~50% increased transmission 5

• Potential increased severity based on hospitalizations and case fatality rates 6
• No impact on susceptibility to EUA monoclonal antibody treatments 7,14
• Minimal impact on neutralization by convalescent and post-vaccination sera 8,9,10,11,12,13,19

B.1.351 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: D80A, D215G, 241del, 242del, 243del, K417N, E484K, N501Y,
D614G, A701V

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20H/501.V2

WHO Label: Beta

First Identified: South Africa

BEI Reference Isolatec: NR-55282external icon

Attributes:

• ~50% increased transmission16

• Significantly reduced susceptibility to the combination of bamlanivimab and etesevimab
monoclonal antibody treatment,7 but other EUA monoclonal antibody treatments are
available 14
• Reduced neutralization by convalescent and post-vaccination sera 8,12,18,19,20

B.1.427 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: L452R, D614G

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20C/S:452R

WHO Label: Epsilon

First Identified: United States-(California)

Attributes:

• ~20% increased transmission 21

• Modest decrease in susceptibility to the combination of bamlanivimab and etesevimab;
however, the clinical implications of this decrease are not known.7 Alternative monoclonal
antibody treatments are available.14
• Reduced neutralization by convalescent and post-vaccination sera 21

B.1.429 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: S13I, W152C, L452R, D614G

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20C/S:452R

WHO Label: Epsilon

First Identified: United States-(California)

Attributes:

• ~20% increased transmission 21

• Reduced susceptibility to the combination of bamlanivimab and etesevimab; however,
the clinical implications of this decrease are not known.7 Alternative monoclonal antibody
treatments are available.14
• Reduced neutralization by convalescent and post-vaccination sera 21

B.1.617.2 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: T19R, (G142D*), 156del, 157del, R158G, L452R, T478K, D614G,
P681R, D950N

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20A/S:478K

WHO Label: Delta

First Identified: India

Attributes:

• Increased transmissibility29
• Potential reduction in neutralization by some EUA monoclonal antibody treatments 7, 14
• Potential reduction in neutralization by post-vaccination sera 21

P.1 (Pango lineageexternal icon)a

Spike Protein Substitutions: L18F, T20N, P26S, D138Y, R190S, K417T, E484K, N501Y, D614G,
H655Y, T1027I

Name (Nextstrainexternal icon)b: 20J/501Y.V3

WHO Label: Gamma

First Identified: Japan/Brazil

BEI Reference Isolatec: NR-54982external icon

Attributes:

• Significantly reduced susceptibility to the combination of bamlanivimab and etesevimab

monoclonal antibody treatment,7 but other EUA monoclonal antibody treatments are
available 14
• Reduced neutralization by convalescent and post-vaccination sera 15

Footnotes for Variants of Concern

Variant of High Consequence

A variant of high consequence has clear evidence that prevention measures or medical
countermeasures (MCMs) have significantly reduced effectiveness relative to previously
circulating variants.

Possible attributes of a variant of high consequence:

In addition to the possible attributes of a variant of concern

• Impact on Medical Countermeasures (MCM)

o Demonstrated failure of diagnostics
o Evidence to suggest a significantly reduction in vaccine effectiveness, a
disproportionately high number of vaccine breakthrough cases, or very low
vaccine-induced protection against severe disease
o Significantly reduced susceptibility to multiple Emergency Use Authorization
(EUA) or approved therapeutics
o More severe clinical disease and increased hospitalizations
A variant of high consequence would require notification to WHO under the International
Health Regulations, reporting to CDC, an announcement of strategies to prevent or contain
transmission, and recommendations to update treatments and vaccines.

Currently there are no SARS-CoV-2 variants that rise to the level of high consequence.
Top of Page

Treatment considerations for healthcare providers

Substitutions of Concern for SARS-CoV-2 Monoclonal Antibody Therapies

In the United States, there are three anti-SARS-CoV-2 monoclonal antibody treatments with
FDA Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) for the treatment of COVID-19: bamlanivimab plus
etesevimabexternal icon, casirivimab plus imdevimab,external icon,
and sotrovimabexternal icon.

CDC’s national genomic surveillance program identifies new and emerging SARS-CoV-2
variants to determine implications for COVID-19 diagnostics, treatments, or vaccines
authorized for use in the United States. Sequences with similar genetic changes are
grouped into lineages, and multiple lineages can have the same substitutions. For example,
the E484K substitution is found in lineages B.1.351, P.1, B.1.526, and many others. Genomic
surveillance efforts provide the capability to detect viruses that have reduced susceptibility
to treatments more quickly.

In laboratory studies, SARS-CoV-2 variants that contain certain substitutions in the spike
protein cause a marked reduction in susceptibility to bamlanivimab and may have reduced
sensitivity to etesevimab and casirivimab. The L452R substitution found in the B.1.427 and
B.1.429 lineages has been shown to cause a significant reduction in susceptibility to
bamlanivimab and a modest decrease in susceptibility to the combination of bamlanivimab
and etesevimab, although the clinical implications of this modest decrease are not
known. 7 The E484K substitution found in the B.1.351, P.1, and B.1.526 lineages also results
in a marked reduction in susceptibility to bamlanivimab, as well as the combination of
bamlanivimab and etesevimab.7 Laboratory studies also suggest that the K417N and K417T
substitutions, which are present in the B.1.351 and P.1 variants, respectively, along with the
E484K mutation, reduces virus susceptibility to casirivimab, although the combination of
casirivimab and imdevimab appears to retain activity.14 There is no reported reduction in
susceptibility of variants to sotrovimab.28

The table below shows the national and regional unweighted proportions of SARS-CoV-2
that contain the L452R or E484K substitution, individually, as well as the unweighted
proportions of SARS-CoV-2 that contain the combination of K417N, E484K, and N501Y
substitutions or the combination of K417T, E484K, and N501Y substitutions. As new data
become available, additional substitutions may be added to the table below. The national
and regional proportions provided in the table below will be updated weekly.

Resources
Monoclonal Antibody COVID-19 Infusionexternal icon

Statement on Anti-SARS-CoV-2 Monoclonal Antibodies EUA | COVID-19 Treatment

Guidelines (nih.gov)external icon

InstaLinks:
Prelims Link:

1. What is IFC- IOR?

2. What is the Regional Maritime Information Fusion Centre (RMIFC)?
3. Who established European-led mission in the Strait of Hormuz (EMASOH)?
4. Locate Persian Gulf and strait of Hormuz.

Mains Link:
Discuss how observer status at the Indian Ocean Commission helps India secure its strategic objectives.
Pdf on Indian ocean commission

Better life index by oecd(org . for economic cooperation and development) created in may
2011

the OECD constructed a so-called "Better Life Index" (BLI) which complements income and life satisfaction with nine
other dimensions of well-being: housing, jobs, community, education, civic engagement, environment, health, work-life
balance, and safety.

Norway Australia Iceland Canada Denmark tops for first 5 positions in index.

Insta Curious:
Do you know what Tied Selling is? Read Here

What Is Tied Selling?

Tied selling is the illegal practice of a company providing a product or service on the condition
that a customer purchases some other product or service. It is frequently used in reference to
banks and is sometimes referred to as coercive tied selling.

Tied selling is also associated with the sales practices of product tying or bundling, which may
be legal in some contexts. Tied selling may also be referred to as a "tying arrangement" or a
"tying agreement."

KEY TAKEAWAYS

• Tied selling, which is against the law, occurs when a company conditions the sale of a
product or service only if that customer purchases some other product or service.
 • In the U.S., "tied-in" selling or "tied" products are addressed by both the Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).
• Tied selling may be used as a means of price discrimination in that it may help banks (or
other companies) consolidate a customer's business within a single provider.
How Tied Selling Works
Tied selling is related to the practice of "tying," the often-illegal arrangement where, in order to
buy one product, the consumer must purchase another product that exists in a separate market.
Tying may be applied more broadly than tied selling, which refers specifically to a banking
practice and is a more common term in Canada.

Tied selling in a banking context is often referred to as "coercive tied selling." Tied selling is
addressed in Canada's Bank Act: "A bank shall not impose undue pressure on, or coerce, a
person to obtain a product or service from a particular person, including the bank and any of its
affiliates, as a condition for obtaining another product or service from the bank."1

In the U.S., tying falls under the wider legal umbrella of illegal competition that was originally
censured by the Sherman Antitrust Act and refined in later acts. Tying as a practice, as well as
"tied-in" selling or "tied" products, is addressed by both the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ).2 3

Tied Selling vs. Tying vs. Bundling

Tied selling differs from bundling, which combines products and can afford consumers lower
prices than if items were purchased individually, and preferential pricing, which is better pricing if
a customer uses more of a company's goods or services. The distinction between tying (illegal)
and bundling (legal within limits) is an important one for businesses to understand.

Tied selling may be used as a means of price discrimination in that it may help banks (or other
companies) consolidate a customer's business within a single provider. It may also stymie
competition by giving larger, full-service companies an edge over smaller, single-service
providers or those with more limited product lineups, such as with startup companies.

In the context of bundling, tying may be beneficial to a consumer, providing discounts for
bundling related products (such as fast-food value meals that are cheaper than if their
component parts were purchased separately or more favorable rates, fees, or terms for banking
products when multiple service services are used).

Bundling or tying may also provide a better service or product experience for consumers, such
as if a computer manufacturer limits the use of a specific type of peripheral hardware or software
because aftermarket options may create errors or damage their product.

Tied Selling Example

An illegal example of tied selling would be when your bank's mortgage specialist tells you that
you qualify for a home mortgage but the bank will approve it only if you transfer your
investments to the bank or its affiliates.

Compete Risk Free with $100,000 in Virtual Cash

Put your trading skills to the test with our FREE Stock Simulator. Compete with thousands of
Investopedia traders and trade your way to the top! Submit trades in a virtual environment
before you start risking your own money. Practice trading strategies so that when you're ready to
enter the real market, you've had the practice you need. Try our Stock Simulator today >>

InstaLinks:
Prelims Link:

1. About CCI.
2. Highlights of the Competition Act and amendments to it.
3. About NCLT and its jurisdiction.

Mains Link:
Discuss the roles and functions of CCI.

Insta Curious:
Do you know what Super Pollutants or Forcers are? Read here

Super pollutants are one of the most underappreciated but dangerous contributors to climate
change. Also known as short-lived climate pollutants, or forcers, super pollutants are potent
noncarbon-dioxide global warming contaminants. They are also dangerous for human health and
diminish agricultural productivity.

Reducing carbon dioxide—the primary greenhouse gas emitted from the burning of fossil fuels for
energy and transportation—is necessary for achieving the long-term greenhouse reductions we
need. However, it is impossible to achieve the total greenhouse gas reductions scientists agree are
necessary for avoiding dangerous temperature increases without also limiting super
pollutants. Not only are super pollutants shorter-lived, but they also remain in the atmosphere for
a shorter time than carbon dioxide; therefore, reducing these pollutants now can help reduce
temperatures in the near term. In addition, the reduction of super climate pollutants can be easier
than the reduction of carbon dioxide since none of them, unlike CO2, are a byproduct of our
primary sources of energy.

Definitions

Black carbon is the second-largest greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide. It is a major element of soot,
which is one of the most deadly forms of widespread air pollution. Soot is linked to heart attacks and
strokes, cancer, developmental effects in children, and premature death. Black carbon is produced by
the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, biofuels, and biomass in transportation industries; wildfires
and agricultural burning; domestic cooking; natural-gas-fueled power generators; and other industries.
Black carbon leads to decreased agricultural productivity because it influences the formation of clouds
and disrupts participation patterns, and it rapidly increases the rate of ice melt in the Arctic.
Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas that is 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Natural gas
and petroleum industries are the largest emitters of methane in the United States, accounting for 30
percent of U.S. emissions. Enteric fermentation from livestock accounts for 23 percent of U.S. methane
emissions and landfills account for 17 percent. Coal mining and wastewater treatment also contribute
to U.S. methane output. Methane contributes to the creation of tropospheric ozone, which can
dramatically reduce crop yields.

Hydrofluorocarbons, or HFCs, are manufactured for use in refrigeration, air conditioning, insulation,
solvents, aerosol, and fire-protection products. They are hundreds to tens of thousands of times more
potent than carbon dioxide. Developed and produced as substitutes to ozone-depleting substances
(that are being phased out in the Montreal Protocol), these gases are the fastest-growing greenhouse
gases across the world.

This background brief focuses on three super pollutants that are some of the largest contributors
to global warming: methane, black carbon, and HFCs. It explains the sources of these pollutants,
their prevalence, and why fast action to reduce them is imperative for protecting public health and
avoiding the disastrous impacts of global warming.

Super pollutant global warming potential and lifetime

The best way to understand the comparative global warming effects of super pollutants versus
carbon dioxide is to understand their global warming potential, or GWP. GWP is a measure of the
relative warming potency of a greenhouse gas over a period of time compared to carbon dioxide.
HFCs, for example, have a global warming potential of between 140 and 11,700, meaning they are
more than a hundred times and up to tens of thousands of times more potent than carbon dioxide.

But even though they are much more powerful than CO2, super pollutants lose their warming
power in the atmosphere much faster than CO2. Half of CO2 pollution continues to cause
increased temperatures for 50 to 100 years after being emitted, and 20 percent remains for
thousands of years. In comparison, black carbon is hundreds to thousands of times more potent
than CO2 as a contributor to global warming, yet it leaves the atmosphere in a matter of days or
weeks. HFCs only stay in the atmosphere for 15 years on average, yet they can be tens of
thousands of times more potent than CO2.

The following table lists the GWP and atmospheric lifetime of the three main super pollutants.
While these pollutants account for far less of the total amount of annual greenhouse gas emissions
than CO2, they nonetheless cause 40 percent of warming, or “radiative forcing.”

Radiative forcing, known as the “greenhouse effect,” occurs when solar radiation that passes through
cloud cover reflects off of the Earth’s surface and is absorbed by clouds and greenhouse gases, or
GHGs, in the atmosphere. Increased levels of GHGs reradiate upward and downward, warming the
surface of the Earth.

Why are super pollutants important?

Warming is having real and deadly impacts, particularly as a driver of trends in extreme weather.
Global average temperatures have already increased more than 0.8 degrees Celsius over the past
100 years, and most of this increase has been a result of human-induced emissions since the
industrial revolution. The internationally accepted goal to limit temperature increase caused by
humans is to hold the increase to a rise of no more than 2 degrees Celsius, or 3.5 degrees
Fahrenheit, over preindustrial levels; scientists agree this is necessary to avoid the worst impacts of
global warming.

While long-term temperature stabilization is dependent on reductions in CO2, immediate

reductions of super pollutants can provide rapid relief from extreme climate-related impacts by
creating measurable decreases in temperature in the short term. Even if aggressive actions to cut
CO2 were taken tomorrow, they would not have an impact on temperature decrease for many
decades.

For example, a January 2012 study published in Science by an international team of 24 scientists
and led by NASA climate modeler Drew Shindell, estimated the effects of initiating 14 methane and
black carbon control measures. Combined with other greenhouse gas reductions, the study
concludes that these measures would reduce total projected warming by half a degree, prevent 0.7
million to 4.7 million annual deaths, and increase annual crop yields 35 million to 130 million metric
tons due to ozone reductions in 2030 and beyond.

According to the study, rapid reduction of other super pollutants, primarily HFCs, could significantly
increase these temperature savings. These reductions can be achieved at a relatively low cost.
Reducing a metric ton of methane, for instance, costs around $250, while the benefit is worth $700
to $5,000.

Sources of super pollutants

Black carbon is a component of soot, the common term for PM 2.5 pollution—particulate matter
that is 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller, which is about 30 times smaller than an average
human hair.

In 2005 the United States emitted 64,000 tons of black carbon, representing about 8 percent of the
world’s total black carbon emissions. Global emissions are approximately 8.4 million tons, making
the United States the eighth-largest global emitter. Domestic sources of black carbon—a product of
the incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, biofuels, and biomass—are broken down by the
following:

• 52 percent of black carbon emissions are from mobile sources—mainly trucks—and 93

percent of that total is from diesel engines.

• About 35 percent is due to biomass burning—wildfires, agricultural and prescribed burning,

residential heating and cooking, wood-fired boilers, and charbroiling.

• About 7 percent is emitted from the generation of energy and power, primarily natural gas

combustion.

• 1 percent is from industry, and 3.6 percent comes from residential sources such as

woodstoves and furnaces.

Soot is one of the deadliest forms of widespread air pollution. Long-term exposure to soot when it
enters the lungs and bloodstream is linked to heart attacks, strokes, respiratory problems, cancer,
higher incidence of infant mortality and low birth weight, and premature death.

Black carbon leads to decreased agricultural productivity because it influences the formation of
clouds and disrupts rainfall patterns. It is estimated that black carbon may be the second-leading
contributor to global warming after CO2. Black carbon is also a significant driver of the rapid
depletion of year-round ice formations in the Arctic Ocean. Soot deposits on ice reduce the natural
albedo effect, whereby the white surface of the arctic ice reflects solar radiation. As a result, those
parts of the Arctic Ocean that are polluted the most by black carbon will melt faster.

Methane is a greenhouse gas that is 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide, but it only remains
in the atmosphere for about 12 years after it is emitted. The United States emitted 587.2 million
metric tons of CO2 equivalent of methane in 2011. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, or EPA, this accounted for approximately 9 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in
2011.

Natural gas and petroleum industries are the largest emitters of methane in the United States,
accounting for 30 percent of U.S. emissions. Enteric fermentation from livestock accounts for 23
percent of U.S. methane emissions, and landfills account for 17 percent. Coal mining, manure
management, and wastewater treatment also contribute to U.S. methane output. In addition,
methane contributes to the creation of tropospheric ozone, which can dramatically reduce crop
yields.

In April 2012 the EPA issued new regulations that will limit methane emissions from natural gas
wells. The EPA estimates that once the rules are fully implemented, they will result in an annual
methane reduction of about 19 million to 33 million tons of CO2 equivalent and save $440 million
from “climate-related benefits such as avoided health impacts, crop damage, and damage to
coastal properties.”

Hydrofluorocarbons are greenhouse gases that are hundreds to tens of thousands of times more
potent than carbon dioxide. The average atmospheric lifetime for most commercially used HFCs is
less than 15 years. HFCs, unlike other super pollutants, are manufactured by humans and not
found in nature. They are most commonly produced for refrigeration, air conditioning, insulating
foams, solvents, aerosol products, and fire protection.

HFCs are the fastest-growing greenhouse gas in the United States and globally. Fluorinated gases,
including HFCs, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride, made up 2 percent of U.S. greenhouse
gas emissions in 2010. HFCs are projected to grow by nearly 140 percent through 2020 in large part
because they are being used as substitutes for ozone-depleting substances, or ODS, that are being
phased out under the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer. According to
the EPA, U.S.-fluorinated gas emissions increased by about 61 percent between 1990 and 2011. The
increase was driven by a 249 percent increase in emissions of HFCs since 1990 after they became a
common substitute for ozone-depleting substances.

Why the United States should act now

By reducing the release of super pollutants, the United States has the opportunity to accomplish
the following: quickly decrease global warming pollution; limit temperature increase caused by
climate forcers; improve health impacts caused by soot and extreme heat conditions; improve
global annual crop yields; and buy some time on passing the 2 degree Celsius threshold.
The United States has fortunately been a leader on advancing international agreements to reduce
super pollutants. For the past four years, the United States, Mexico, and Canada have proposed a
plan to phase down emissions under the Montreal Protocol. In February 2012 the United States
helped launch the Climate and Clean Air Coalition to Reduce Short Lived Climate Pollutants, which
now includes the European Union and 30 countries that are working together to share the best
solutions to reduce these gases. But more international support is needed to advance these
efforts. In addition to engaging foreign governments at a leadership level on these measures, the
most important thing that the United States can do is to lead by example.

The United States has made some progress in reducing super pollutants. Corporate Average Fuel
Economy, or CAFE, standards encourage low global warming potential substitutes for HFCs by
allowing car and light truck manufacturers to generate credits toward compliance by using
alternative refrigerants for model year 2012–2016 vehicles. There are several voluntary programs
in place that allow state and local governments to work with companies and the EPA to reduce
methane emissions. Natural Gas STAR, for example, encourages oil and natural gas companies to
adopt technologies and practices that reduce methane emissions. As a result of voluntary methane
partnership programs, total U.S. methane emissions in 2005 were more than 11 percent lower than
emissions in 1990.

Advancing domestic initiatives to reduce these gases now could encourage more international
cooperation on super pollutants, which would result in a rapid decrease of atmospheric warming
and a reduction of the risk of extreme climate impacts. The saved lives and improved agricultural
production that results from reducing super pollutants provide ample reason to act now.