Disclaimer: CSM is an adamant anti-smoker. I have seen three family members die hideous painful deaths directly attributable to smoking
So if everyone who smokes quit cold turkey tomorrow, what beneficial effects would that have on for example, the amount of particulate matter released into the atmosphere, CO and CO2 emissions, global warming, etc? Could it say, be equivalent to shutting down a Chinese coal burning generating plant? Taking a number of vehicles off the road? Not really looking for answers like “well the individual will be healthier now so he is more likely to walk rather than drive to McDonalds now for his burger so less emissions from that one person but he ate beef raised on a farm 100 miles away so it evens out”, or “now the newly unemployed tobacco industry worker has to drive around looking for work so that adds pollution”.
Something like “it can be estimated that x tons less of crap would get released every day and that would be a significant amount”.
I imagine that an overall healthier and more productive society with less work days lost due to sickness can be also quantified but I will stick to one debate for today.
The cigarettes in one pack of cigarettes weigh about one ounce. So, a pack-a-day smoker uses about 365 ounces of cigarettes per year, not even 25 pounds
Assume there are 40 million US smokers so if they all quit their pack-a-day habit it would mean 40 million X 25 pounds = one billion pounds of tobacco not smoked each year.
A typical mature tree weighs, maybe, 10000 pounds with one hundred thousand mature trees weighing about one billion pounds.
So, one billion pounds of tobacco not burnt would be like 100,000 mature trees not gone up in smoke.
I am guessing Social Security in some way would be affected as people live longer? Not so much now as previous decades when smoking was more prevalent.
A number of major companies whose primary business is peddling tobacco would quickly go out of business. Depending on your point of view, you may or may not consider this a plus. (I’d be on the “plus” side.) The shareholders in said companies would probably be unhappy, too.
All their employees would lose their jobs, which would undoubtedly be rough on many of them.
Our prisons are now tobacco-free, and incoming inmates withdraw from nicotine just fine; no riots, no lockdowns, no trips to seg from it. They just endure and get over it.
I think the number of pounds of tobacco and equivalent to weight of trees growing needs to be changed. Tobacco is dried when processed, correct? So “raw” tobacco should weigh more.
And seeing as forest fires have been mentioned, a significant percentage are started by humans, and an equally significant amount by discarded cigarettes.
The gist of my question was with regards to environmental impact worldwide.
Thanks to the replies so far.
There would also be the spin-off lay-offs, as demand for lighters goes way down. People would be able to taste their food again, so certain restaurant chains would go out of business overnight.
As I understand it, most of the food companies are already owned by the same mega-conglomorates as most of the tobacco companies. And people aren’t going to quit food cold turkey any time soon.
(insert your own joke about three days after Thanksgiving)
Haven’t a lot of them already had to, since smoking rates are much lower than 40-50 years ago? I know they export some, but did that make up for the big drop in US consumption?
I believe that many Ontario tobacco farmers have switched to growing filberts. At least I seem to remember reading that somewhere.
A lot fewer people would be making disgusting noises in public. Constantly clearing the throat, coughing, etc. I have yet to meet a smoker who did this and claim it wasn’t caused by smoking.
American tobacco companies would shift even more of their marketing to third world countries. That’s what happened when tobacco usage began to drop dramatically. Since most of the tobacco market is overseas, the economic event would be substantially less than people imagine.
Statistical health cost benefits would be delayed by a decade at least, but would drop off slowly from about six months after the great smoke out. Within twenty years it would be statistically insignificant.
The population would increase other recreational self poisoning in other areas. New self poisons would be developed. Ten to twenty years from then, new statistically significant general health problems would become a problem.
The OP is asking if the whole world stopped smoking, not just the US. Last I checked, third world countries were part of the whole world.
We’ve already done that, what with the variety of stuff used in vape pens.
Thanks for the info yabob. So the US exports of tobacco have more than doubled in just the last 5 years. Sounds like your typical American tobacco farmer doesn’t have to worry about alternative crops for now. Unfortunately.
If I understand the OP, the question is what the environmental effects would be if there were worldwide universal cessation of smoking tobacco.
As noted above, tobacco smoke is not a particularly important pollutant as far as the larger environment is concerned. It has a disproportionate effect on humans, primarily smokers and those exposed to second-hand smoke, because of proximity and the fact that smoking often is done indoors. But it does not have a big effect on wild animals, vegetation, etc.
The biggest environmental impact might be that land would no longer be used to any significant degree to grow tobacco. Tobacco is not a particularly land-intensive crop (quite the reverse really), but it is very hard on the land that it does use. Smoking cessation would free up that land for other uses that would be more productive and less harmful to the soil. Tobacco also involves the use of particularly harsh pesticides, so avoiding those would have a positive environmental effect.