If you have ever wondered whether the air you breathe is safe, you are not alone. A new public map suggests that roughly 1.6 billion people live with dangerous exposure to pollution from fossil fuel operations, at the same time the world heats up from the gases those fuels release. The interactive tool pinpoints clusters of industrial sites that emit large amounts of fine particulate pollution, linking those emissions to nearby neighborhoods and downwind communities. It offers a clear view of a dual crisis, rising global temperatures and toxic air, that plays out city by city.
Climate Trace’s new platform integrates satellite and sensor data to track plumes of PM2.5 and other hazardous pollutants across more than 2,500 urban areas. The data shows that about 900 million people live downwind from especially high-emitting facilities, where pollution travels with prevailing winds and settles over homes, schools, and workplaces. These super-emitters include large power plants, oil refineries, busy ports, and mining operations that collectively account for a disproportionate share of local air quality problems. By layering emissions records with population exposure and wind patterns, the tool translates abstract numbers into visible health risks that residents and decision-makers can act on.
Why PM2.5 is the health warning to watch
Carbon dioxide drives global heating, but it is not directly toxic at the levels emitted by industry. PM2.5 is different. These microscopic particles form when coal, oil, and other fuels burn, and they can lodge deep in the lungs and move into the bloodstream. Exposure is linked to heart disease, stroke, respiratory illness, and reduced birth weight. The health burden is severe, with millions of premature deaths attributed to fine particulate pollution each year, and communities located downwind of fossil fuel facilities bear the brunt day after day.
Because PM2.5 harms health quickly, cutting emissions at the largest sources can deliver immediate local benefits. The new map helps identify which facilities offer the fastest path to cleaner air. It also makes plain that climate policy and public health protection rise or fall together. Reducing fossil fuel combustion curbs both global heating and the particles that most directly damage human health.
Where exposure is most concentrated
Ten metropolitan areas are highlighted for exceptionally high exposure from nearby super-emitters. Cities such as Karachi, Guangzhou, Seoul, and New York appear on the list, underscoring the reach of industrial pollution across continents and income levels. In each case, the map shows how wind carries emissions from power stations, refineries, terminals, or heavy manufacturing into dense urban neighborhoods. The result is a day-to-day reality of haze, elevated asthma risk, and higher medical costs.
The timing is notable. The release comes as global attention turns to New York for the UN General Assembly and as Brazil prepares to host the Cop30 climate summit. By placing local exposure on a global stage, the tool invites cities and nations to align climate diplomacy with on-the-ground pollution cleanup that people can feel in their lungs.
Politics, policy, and a shifting narrative
In the United States, advocates are reframing fossil fuel pollution as an immediate public health threat. They argue this approach counters efforts to roll back climate action by focusing on harm that is visible and measurable now. The current administration has moved to dismantle federal climate programs, cancel renewable energy initiatives, and promote a climate report widely criticized by scientists. During remarks at the UN General Assembly, the president dismissed climate science, drawing swift pushback from experts. At the same time, administration messaging has signaled openness to some anti-pollution measures, including cleanup of waste and landfill emissions, although no clear plans have been laid out. Environmental groups warn that weakening the EPA and scaling back clean air and water safeguards contradicts any stated ambition to reduce pollution.
Al Gore, a co-founder of Climate Trace, has long emphasized the tight linkage between fossil fuel combustion, climate disruption, and harmful air pollution. The creators of the mapping tool say their priority is identifying the most exposed communities so that responses can be targeted and accountability improved. By showing who is downwind and who is most at risk, the map provides a new basis for policy decisions and public pressure.
How communities and leaders can use the tool
For residents, the platform offers a transparent way to locate nearby pollution sources and visualize how emissions move across neighborhoods. Local leaders can use this information to prioritize enforcement and mitigation at the facilities that would yield the greatest health gains. Regulators can direct monitoring, penalties, and investment toward super-emitters, while planners can steer development away from exposure corridors. The data can also support litigation, public health advisories, and corporate commitments that hinge on clear evidence of harm.
Investors and businesses may find the tool valuable as well. Concentrated emissions create regulatory, legal, and reputational risks, which can affect project approvals and access to capital. Companies that cut emissions at large sources quickly may win community trust and reduce those risks, while also contributing to broader climate goals.
What this means for the path ahead
Reframing fossil fuel pollution as a public health emergency could widen support for emissions reductions and strengthen international cooperation. Cutting pollution at the largest industrial sources offers a direct way to protect millions of people, save lives, and deliver visible improvements in air quality. Transparency, however, is only the first step. Robust regulatory frameworks and consistent enforcement are essential to turn data into cleaner air.
The new mapping resource shines a light on where harm is most acute and who bears it. With clear evidence of exposure for billions and identifiable super-emitters, governments and industry have actionable opportunities to reduce both climate and health risks. The question is not whether we can see the problem, it is whether we will act on what is now in plain view.