The team calculated that if every vehicle in the nation were powered by hydrogen instead of fossil fuels, the reduction in respiratory ailments and asthma would reduce fatalities by at least 6000 per year.

The study challenges many traditional objections to the development of hydrogen as a long-term replacement for fossil fuels, examining the issue from a different angle that incorporates the economic and social savings that would accrue from a switch to hydrogen. Rather than focussing purely on disputes over the relative carbon dioxide emissions of the two fuel types, the study looks at the benefits from eliminating the plethora of other harmful compounds emitted by fossil fuels and not present in hydrogen.

Ralph Ciccerone, president-elect of the National Academy of Sciences, believes an examination of the health benefits might be more useful in convincing US politicians about the benefits of hydrogen fuels, rather than discussing the contentious issues of global warming and environmental pollution.

“It’s an interesting angle,” he said.

The study creates a hypothetical situation where the US replaces all fossil fuel vehicles with hydrogen-fuelled ones and considers the different ways in which the hydrogen required might be obtained, running separate simulations for the different feedstock used for hydrogen production. Irrespective of the base fuel source, the team found that air quality improved and brought commensurate health benefits.

In addition to reducing base mortality, the incidence of minor ailments caused by air pollution would radically decrease, saving the US economy large sums in lost productivity from sick workers. Although the team acknowledges that their study does not provide an open road map for the creation of a hydrogen economy, they hope that their findings could help make hydrogen an attractive proposition for lawmakers.

“It’s not that nobody cares about these things,” said lead researcher Mark Jacobson. “It’s just that nobody knows about them.”