The linked PNAS paper quantifies the externalized human health costs of fossil fuels. At the same time the authors of the paper live in a world with longest healthy life span in human history, by far--- a direct result of exploiting the energy stored in fossil fuels. Obviously.
First world environmentalists live in this surreal echo chamber where it makes sense to them to vilify the producers of the cheap energy they consume daily. Who is the polluter here? I doubt that a single one of them is personally at risk for the energy poverty they are focused on creating for the world’s poor.
Those Extinction Rebellion folks with the beautiful red gowns and white faces helpfully illustrate the problem; the apocalyptic focus on CO2 is somewhat out of balance. It’s what Hans Rosling calls “the single perspective instinct”, a preference for single causes and single solutions. To quote Rosling:
“Unlike with climate change, we don’t need predictions and scenarios. We know that 800 million are suffering right now. We also know the solutions: peace, schooling, universal basic health care, electricity, clean water, toilets, contraceptives, and microcredits to get market forces started.”
Sorry for the rant, but I sense you have a balanced take on these energy issues.