canopy

Just one piece of advice. Make sure the village selected is not located in a national forest. It could be a village of encroachers and developing it could be a crime. I would make two stops. The land department and the PEA and ask both why there is no electricity there and mention your plans.

Perhaps operator error. I and the people I know had no such problems and in fact strongly prefer the old materials. Paper based stuff worked a lot better than the plastic. I find the plastic bags rip too easily or spring a leak. Not really reliable enough for my liking even under ideal conditions.

4 hours ago, jonclark said:

there needs to be a suitable alternative(s) as the first stage

1) A lot of people are old enough to remember the days before plastic bags. We all know what the suitable alternatives are and they work real well. So on to the 2nd stage.

2) Plenty of places around the world have banned plastic bags. It works. Discussing reductions and you thinking it will eventually solve itself wastes time and unnecessarily pollutes the environment and harms the ecosystem and people. We can make all the plastic bags disappear this year with a ban then move on to the next pressing issue. Other places in the world have already done just that.

1 hour ago, pokerface1 said:

Anyone know of a country that has solved the plastic bag problem

This is the exact question Thailand needs to ask because the answer is too many to list. Take Kenya or California for example. And they didn't do it by reducing or charging money for plastic bags. They just made plastic bags illegal. In Kenya getting caught carrying a plastic bag is a million baht fine. In California if you need a bag they will be happy to sell you a RECYCLED PAPER bag, not plastic. Thailand talking about reduction or charging money for plastic bags is total nonsense that doesn't actually solve anything. All they have to do is make them illegal like other countries and they will all go away. Thailand will never wake up. Instead committees will be debating and blabbering for centuries rolling out these laughable ideas everyone knows are useless from the start.

7 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Their ‘alternative’ is to sell expensive canvas bags to shoppers, for 200-400 baht.

Canvas? Baloney! All of the alternative bags I have seen for sale are made of some combination of polyester, nylon, and other plastics. These create all the same problems with factory pollution and disposal as one use bags. What a cruel joke they play on the people.

In my area in 2018 I was surprised some tradesmen do it for just 70 baht/sqm for labor. They still use mortar beds here. Almost have to as uneven as slabs tend to be. My observation is tiles tend to sit good and flat but their grout jobs could use some work.

4 hours ago, webfact said:

the province was “in the process of fuel management”. This entails “Ching Pao” – prescribed burning

So the best they have come up with is to spend all their money to set new fires in order to "reduce" smog. That's just genius. What about planting fire resistant vegetation or other techniques to make these firewalls? Then run the leaf blower periodically to keep it clear as needed. All they really need to do is check forestry management elsewhere in the world and choose a good option. There is no need for these close minded brainstorming sessions where all they do is come up with more fires as a solution which are harming the forests they are supposed to be protecting and choking the entire population.

KK is technically Isaan. But as you drive north of Bangkok air quality gets progressively worse. It's all relative; air is bad, just a matter of how bad. Nowhere is good for health conscious people. The "far north" like Chiang Mai, Chaing Rai, and Mae Hong Son does tend to peg the needle for the worst air of all of Thailand.

x

Air quality picture today. KK is 164. CM area 180 or so. Bangkok 65 or so. Lower numbers are better. Red/purple are more serious concerns.

good quality ones at blue-inter.com which is a distributor for Blum hinges.

I don't think what has been posted so far is strong enough. Be aware the air in both places is unhealthy for roughly half the year. You'll both see, feel, and read about the bad air. Often it's a little worse than world health organization standards and sometimes it's downright hazardous even on thailand's watered down scale. If you want to spend time outdoors and have open windows, stay clear of the north of Thailand if your health is important. Otherwise button up the house, buy a good air purifier, wear a mask when outside, and avoid exercise. If you don't believe this then make a trip to right now. The air quality is downright awful and will get worse in the coming months. Bangkok air is way better. Sad, but true.

1 hour ago, Aussie999 said:

They burn sugarcane before harvesting because the cane is too leafy to cut easily.

As mentioned earlier when the buyers started policies refusing to buy any burnt cane the farmers obliged and harvested it green, sold it green, then went back to the fields and burned them afterwards anyway. If these harvesters are not the type that till the stalks back into the earth I would imagine burning will continue just as badly as before and there are going to be a lot of red faces. People need to understand farmers burn because they enjoy it, not because they have to from corn to rice to sugar to you name it.

Protecting the forests is a good thing. But one problem with hiking as the method for detection is recent studies show that when animals detect the presence of humans they switch to a nocturnal existence, no matter how inconspicuous or short that contact may be. We should not stress animals and endanger their existence in order to protect them when less intrusive ways exist. And the main problem is just how small of an area a person on foot can cover. With millions and millions of rai of forestland there is simply no way this approach will ever protect very much of the forests. It's a drop in the bucket approach.

Drones with infrared sensors can monitor enormous areas of a forest, cost a lot less money than a person, do not disturb the wildlife so much and can be very effective day or even late at night. Drones can even follow poachers movements right back to their vehicles, keeping footage along the way as evidence gathering and allow the poachers to be busted before exiting the premises.

50 years ago hikes would have been about the best one could do, but better ways exist today and are becoming better all the time. I wish they would step back, create a goal to (1) protect all of the Thai forests, not just selected bits (2) minimizes the impact on the forest life,  and (3) minimize cost per unit of area to maximize coverage then have a rethink. I don't think it's an impossible goal and would be willing to bet technology companies would come running to them from all directions with free products as all over the world people would love to see this happen and be a part of it.

21 hours ago, JayBird said:

How about somewhere with high altitude? Any good high mountain places?

Mountains are typically in the north of Thailand where the worst of the smoke problem is. I am about 1000 meters up. The air appears somewhat better visually, but some smog is certainly still evident. If you are an active outdoor person concerned with health I can't recommend high altitudes amid smoggy places.

6 hours ago, uhuh said:

The biggest culprit is not rice, it is sugar cane

Thai's will burn everything, not just rice or sugar. Every crop, every pasture, every forest, every bit of plastic, everything is burnt. Even if growing fruit trees they are known to gather all the dead branches and leaves to make big fires out of them. They just love to burn and they don't care.

15 hours ago, kannot said:

Cant  get workers round here even when paying 5-600, 

YOU can't. That is the difference. No one else is paying those kind of high prices and farms are everywhere operating just fine. It's plain as day to anyone who looks around. Stop making up stories to try to hide your personal failures.

In my area field workers get 7000 baht a month. That works out to about 250 a day. That's not much. I hire by the day rather than have permanent workers and pay a daily wage of 400 baht. I don't use chemicals or poisons of any kind. Most people that work for me pull weeds all day long. Some men do it, a lot of women, some kids, even some elderly. It's a job anyone can do and I am pleased to give them the pocket money.

I have yet to see an area go dormant due to a labor shortage. The reason a lot of people go to the big city for work is there are no jobs in the country. You wouldn't by chance have a GPS coordinate so we could independently verify all the land going vacant around you?

21 hours ago, mok199 said:

anyone and everyone who cares about clean air

Unfortunately not. Do you really think the millions of people regularly burning plastic in their yard give a hoot about clean air? They don't. I live in the countryside. It's a burning culture. Thai's love burning their trash, their fields, the forests, their food leftovers, their recyclable plastic bottles, just everything for no particular reason. I've asked some people why they burn and get a blank face as they realize they have no explanation, they just do it. I haven't met anyone who cares about the air quality in the least bit. I agree with you elsewhere in the world there are many that do actually care and not only that they are doing great things about it. I even provided a clickable link about the city of hamburg going car free. Thailand is the wrong place to be if you care about clean air. It's sad, but the truth must be seen. Two points I want to make is (1) clean air should never be shouldered on the backs of the poor meanwhile the rich get a free pass (2) it appears agricultural burning is the main culprit so focusing on vehicle / factory pollution, while useful and admirable, will mean Thailand will continue to be blanketed with terrible air as the most rampant and unnecessary pollution is being completely ignored.