CM air pollution not so bad

[Genericnic]

My friend is in Beijing this evening and just sent me the current AQI. I've seen it really bad in Chiang Mai but nothing close to this and not in Bangkok either. Something to keep in mind and be thankful for in the upcoming burning season.

 

David

 

Sent from my SM-N950F using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

 

 

[theguyfromanotherforum]

Yeah, great comparison.

 

Maybe compare it with Uranus too.

Edited January 12, 2019 by theguyfromanotherforum

[mrmillersr]

So when the PM 2.5 levels are 8 to 10 times or more above a defined safe level, which they will be in CM soon, be thankful people.  It could be worse.

 

Seriously, what an idiotic statement to make.  Maybe his next post will be "Hey be happy it's only stomach cancer you have, it could have been lung cancer." 

[elektrified]

Did you watch the news tonight about the pollution levels in Bangkok and see the images? I guess not.

[MickeyMaow]

February is the worst, brutal for about 3 weeks

[jonwilly]

I normally go south to the seaside during March.

 

john

[Tarteso]

Like every years, I’m ready to run from Chiang Mai at the moment the pollution’s levels grow up, and spend my time in some place of the coast’s beaches.

 

Nothing to do in CM ...changue of scenery.

 

[canthai55]

All Whiners, Snivelers and Complainers should be packed up and on their way to Antarctica.

All over the world - air, water, soil pollution increasing.

Get over it.

 

[theguyfromanotherforum]

1 hour ago, canthai55 said:

All Whiners, Snivelers and Complainers should be packed up and on their way to Antarctica.

All over the world - air, water, soil pollution increasing.

Get over it.

 

 

Funny, every time there is pollution problem here I check a map of Toronto - the most polluted city in Canada. Yesterday it was 5, today a little higher. So maybe stop posting nonsense and I'll move out when I please.

 

 

 

 

[MrBrad]

Reminds me of when I was bemoaning the traffic congestion in Chiang Mai a few years ago, a Thai tried easing my concern with, "It's not as bad as the traffic in Bangkok."  I felt much better hearing that.

[JimShorts]

At over 180 Today the air in Bangkok is the 9th most polluted in the world.  Even worse then Beijing and Shanghai. The air in Chiang Mai is also worse today then Beijing.  (note: not all cities participate) 

 

 

https://www.airvisual.com/world-air-quality-ranking

 

Edited January 13, 2019 by JimShorts

[canthai55]

1 hour ago, theguyfromanotherforum said:

 So maybe stop posting nonsense and I'll move out when I please.

 

I gotta get a new map - did not know Toronto was in LOS.

Don't forget your long johns 555

 

 

 

 

 

[theguyfromanotherforum]

6 minutes ago, canthai55 said:

I gotta get a new map - did not know Toronto was in LOS.

Don't forget your long johns 555

 

And Beijing is not in Thailand, but nothing worry, you really outsmarted me with your post.

 

555?

 

Such a rich Thai vocabulary. You must fit great with the locals. Bought a buffalo yet?

 

Owned! 

Edited January 13, 2019 by theguyfromanotherforum

[spidermike007]

The astonishing aspect of all of this, is that Thailand is one of the few nations, that is still promoting diesel vehicles. Most of the world is discouraging diesel. It is not worth the environmental devastation. If you walk into any BMW dealership, most of the cars on the floor area are diesel. It seems inane to me. 

 

Also, two things to consider about the post. One is that Beijing is a poor comparison, being one of the most consistently filthy cities on earth, when it comes to the air quality. And two, is that China is perhaps the most progressive nation on earth, at this moment in time, when it comes to the aggressive pursuit of alternative forms of energy. One can easily argue they do not have a choice. But, at least there is effort being made. Can the same be said for Thailand? 

Edited January 13, 2019 by spidermike007

[cardinalblue]

Syria bombing not too bad if you consider Hiroshima....

 

clean air should be measured in absolute terms.....not relative 

[zib]

http://slim.keff.org/air/

 

South Phuket if someone is interested ????

[orchis]

Be thankful. Sending thoughts and prayers next?

 

[bojo]

I gotta say: I lived in CM from 2007 for a couple of years and everyone ONLINE used to moan about pollution back then too..........

Yes, you can see the fires burning for miles as you drive up from Lampang area on the road from BKK.

Yes, in March, I remember my nostrils alive (well kind of warm) whilst driving a bike at speed in town.

Yes, pollution/warming etc is an insurmountable issue worldwide and needs far more than serious attention.

But did it affect my living in CM at all? Not at all and nor did i hear fellow expats and locals bang on about it? .................     Not really, merely a figment of one's imagination (bias exaggeration, coz I the love CM lifestyle; it's got alot going for it, if one makes worldwide comparisons)

CM air polution isn't great but the city's advantages far outweigh some slash n burn traditions and a few soon to be replaced by electric tuk tuks

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

17 minutes ago, bojo said:

But did it affect my living in CM at all? Not at all and nor did i hear fellow expats and locals bang on about it? .................     Not really, merely a figment of one's imagination (bias exaggeration, coz I the love CM lifestyle; it's got alot going for it, if one makes worldwide comparisons)

CM air polution isn't great but the city's advantages far outweigh some slash n burn traditions and a few soon to be replaced by electric tuk tuks

 

If you knew anything about the topic, you'd know that excessive air pollution, in CM or elsewhere, DOES affect your living. PM2.5 is a silent killer. It causes many thousands of deaths annually in Thailand as well as even larger numbers of respiratory illnesses, etc etc. The impacts aren't just acute, but also long-term and progressive. It's bad for your body, bad for your health, and bad for your life -- whether you know it or not.

 

[mikey88]

Can anyone give a serious comment on the reliability of the AQI website...?

I’d be appreciative of any knowledge you might have.

i have a friend making very big life decisions based on that data...I just wonder if we know for sure about it’s accuracy..

[bojo]

24 minutes ago, TallGuyJohninBKK said:

 

If you knew anything about the topic, you'd know that excessive air pollution, in CM or elsewhere, DOES affect your living. PM2.5 is a silent killer. It causes many thousands of deaths annually in Thailand as well as even larger numbers of respiratory illnesses, etc etc. The impacts aren't just acute, but also long-term and progressive. It's bad for your body, bad for your health, and bad for your life -- whether you know it or not.

 

Well aware

[SuperTed]

2 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

The astonishing aspect of all of this, is that Thailand is one of the few nations, that is still promoting diesel vehicles. Most of the world is discouraging diesel. It is not worth the environmental devastation. If you walk into any BMW dealership, most of the cars on the floor area are diesel. It seems inane to me. 

 

Also, two things to consider about the post. One is that Beijing is a poor comparison, being one of the most consistently filthy cities on earth, when it comes to the air quality. And two, is that China is perhaps the most progressive nation on earth, at this moment in time, when it comes to the aggressive pursuit of alternative forms of energy. One can easily argue they do not have a choice. But, at least there is effort being made. Can the same be said for Thailand? 

Thailand will gladly pursue clean energy . . . if someone pays them to do it, and it does not scare the generals. 

 

When you think about it, not a very high bar.

 

China, India and America are killing the world. If they don't reform instantly we are all stuffed. Anything Thailand does in this regard is a "quality of life" adjustment. It would be nice, but it does not affect the outcome.

 

Nations like Thailand, reliant on seaside tourism, should be backing the UN science and demanding compensation from the big three polluters for loss of business. But that's another topic.

 

Crop burning is a very unsophisticated farming technique. Sad that the agricultural university graduates have been unable to convince the Thai farmers of that. 

[Odysseus123]

26 minutes ago, SuperTed said:

Thailand will gladly pursue clean energy . . . if someone pays them to do it, and it does not scare the generals. 

 

When you think about it, not a very high bar.

 

China, India and America are killing the world. If they don't reform instantly we are all stuffed. Anything Thailand does in this regard is a "quality of life" adjustment. It would be nice, but it does not affect the outcome.

 

Nations like Thailand, reliant on seaside tourism, should be backing the UN science and demanding compensation from the big three polluters for loss of business. But that's another topic.

 

Crop burning is a very unsophisticated farming technique. Sad that the agricultural university graduates have been unable to convince the Thai farmers of that. 

Total cop out from a Thai apologist-as usual.

 

It is ALWAYS somebody else.

 

Whilst they sit on top of their mountains of garbage and their polluted seas and moan and moan "but we are too poor.."

 

 

[canthai55]

The worlds taste for meat based protein is also a concern.

 

They found large differences in environmental impact between producers of the same product. High-impact beef producers create 105kg of CO2 equivalents and use 370m2 of land per 100 grams of protein, a huge 12 and 50 times greater than low-impact beef producers. Low-impact beans, peas, and other plant-based proteins can create just 0.3kg of CO2 equivalents (including all processing, packaging, and transport), and use just 1m2 of land per 100 grams of protein.

http://www.ox.ac.uk/news/2018-06-01-new-estimates-environmental-cost-food#

Makes what SE Asia produces small - very small - potatoes indeed.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

1 hour ago, mikey88 said:

Can anyone give a serious comment on the reliability of the AQI website...?

I’d be appreciative of any knowledge you might have.

i have a friend making very big life decisions based on that data...I just wonder if we know for sure about it’s accuracy..

 

There are multiple sources of AQI data out there... The Thai government (Pollution Control District) has a website for it, there's AQICN.org, and then there's sites that gather and report private sensor data.

 

In looking at any data, you want to make sure it's reporting at least PM2.5 based AQI values. In the past, in a lot of areas, the Thai government didn't have PM2.5 sensors, so their data was only for PM10, and so the readings and warning levels were misleadingly low.

 

Based on comparing its data with my own PM2.5 readings at home, the AQICN.org website data for PM2.5 is pretty reliable most of the time. And if they're getting readings that are oddball for some reason, their system will actually omit that sensor and its data reporting until it gets straightened out.

 

Also, you need to be aware that the Thai government uses a different AQI scale than the U.S. and much of the rest of the world, that tends to have higher threshhold levels. The Thai PCD reports AQI values using the Thai government's scale. The AQICN.org site and others typically use the U.S. EPA AQI scale, which is probably the defacto standard to use and pay attention to.

 

Any way you cut it, however, the bottom line is that pretty much every year, from say December until March or so, the air quality typically is very bad (into the red / unhealthy levels) in BKK, CM and elsewhere.

 

 

[totally thaied up]

When I drive now into town on my bike, from a distance out on the superhighway, I can see the smokey haze directly about the heart of Chiang Mai.

 

Does not matter really what time of year, but there is a haze. The only time there is no haze is after heavy rain.

 

If I go into the Maya area (and look directly at the Red Cars), as I sit having a coffee say within the Nimman area, all I see is billows of deep black, black smoke coming from these Red Cars. I have friends living in this area and many have repository problems now.  From never-ending runny noses to slight coughs and just looking at the amount of smoke being pumped into just that area from these cars sitting at lights constantly, it cannot be good for your health at all. Sure when the burning season comes, it is much worse but just looking at some of my friend's health living on Huay Kaeo Road for several years and the allergies they suffer from now is not good. The levels are mostly high all the time, so it just cannot be from the burning off.

[Unify]

7 hours ago, canthai55 said:

All Whiners, Snivelers and Complainers should be packed up and on their way to Antarctica.

All over the world - air, water, soil pollution increasing.

Get over it.

 

I would characterize your post as whining and complaining. When are you leaving?

[Unify]

17 minutes ago, totally thaied up said:

The levels are mostly high all the time, so it just cannot be from the burning off.

I would agree. Outside of burning season, the AQI levels in CM seem to run 50-110, unless it has rained in the last day or so. That's certainly not as bad as some parts of the world, but it brings an increase risk of stroke, heart problems, and dementia, as well as the obvious problems allergy and asthma sufferers.

 

So, when it gets up to 200 or so, I'd guess that 50-110 of that is the 'normal' background pollution.

 

[TallGuyJohninBKK]

7 minutes ago, Unify said:

I would agree. Outside of burning season, the AQI levels in CM seem to run 50-110, unless it has rained in the last day or so. That's certainly not as bad as some parts of the world, but it brings an increase risk of stroke, heart problems, and dementia, as well as the obvious problems allergy and asthma sufferers.

 

So, when it gets up to 200 or so, I'd guess that 50-110 of that is the 'normal' background pollution.

 

 

On the US EPA AQI scale for PM2.5 used by AQICN.org (but not the Thai PCD, which has its own different scale):

 

an AQI of 50 to 100 means "moderate" air quality.

101-150 is unhealthy for sensitive groups, including older folks.

151 and above is unhealthy for everyone!

 

 

 

 

[totally thaied up]

 

13 minutes ago, Unify said:

 

So, when it gets up to 200 or so, I'd guess that 50-110 of that is the 'normal' background pollution.

That is saying it perfectly. During burning offseason, it is just added to the normal amount and just thinking about that is not good. The burning is not good but I think the massive increase in traffic compounds the problem a lot. Of course, we have village people burning off their rubbish as well at times but that is not the main cause. I mean, when they burn the mountains off in Lumphun, they do it so they can go collect mushrooms after the burn-off. Many of those fires are started by locals so they can collect mushrooms later to sell. In many cases, it comes down to monetary gain.