Rise in temperatures linked to air pollution, say experts

[webfact]

Rise in temperatures linked to air pollution, say experts

By PRATCH RUJIVANAROM 
THE NATION

 

File photo

 

CLIMATE CHANGE and air pollution are interrelated, say environmental experts as they call for the authorities to take simultaneous and urgent action to tackle these problems and avoid serious consequences.

 

Academics and experts from UN Environment Programme (UNEP), Chiang Mai University and Geo-Informatics and Space Technology Development Agency (GISTDA) all pointed out that the rising global temperatures and air pollution are closely related, as one problem creates the perfect environmental conditions that worsen the other problem. 

 

Asst Professor Somporn Chantara, head of Chiang Mai University’s Environmental Science Research Centre, disclosed that the aggravation of the seasonal smog in the North this year is a vivid example of the connection between air pollution and climate change.

 

 

Somporn said that judging by the factors related to the seasonal smog in the North over the past five years, it has been noticed that changing climate conditions each year had a larger influence on the severity of the smog this year than previously thought. 

 

“Considering empirical evidence, air-pollution database and hotspot count, it is safe to say that the PM2.5 smog situation in the North during this dry season will be considerably more severe than the previous two years, and more closely matched to the air pollution in 2014 and 2015,” she noted. 

 

“From this observation, we notice that the smog period tends to be shorter and milder during wetter and cooler years like 2016 to 2018, while in hotter and drier years like 2014, 2015 and this year, the smog |situation is prolonged and more serious.” 

 

She said the reason behind this is simply because it is more difficult to start a fire in wet weather conditions, and even tougher for wildfires to spread, while it is very easy for fires to ignite and spread in hot and dry weather.

 

Since February, the people in the North have been living in hazardous conditions, as the level of very fine PM2.5 particulate matter in the air is far beyond the safe standard during most of the day. 

 

The Air Quality Health Index of PM2.5 level in Chiang Mai’s Samoeng district measured beyond 700 micrograms per cubic metre of air, which is seriously hazardous to people’s health. 

 

Anusorn Rangsipanich, acting specialist at GISTDA, said that from New Year’s Day to April 23, the number of hotspots in North’s nine provinces had already hit 8,551, which is twice as many as the number of hotspots in the same period last year. 

 

Anusorn said humans are to blame for nearly every wildfire, identified as hotspots from satellite surveillance, and insists these wildfires are closely connected to the smog and climate change, as the higher the number of hotspots, the greater the shift in climate conditions. 

 

The tradition of burning forest waste to forage for forest products, and the slash-and-burn farming technique, are the two major sources of the PM2.5 smog problem in the North, and is also, in turn, emitting large quantities of greenhouse gases and further aggravating climate change. 

 

Somporn disclosed that the accumulation of PM2.5 particles in the air also affects the precipitation pattern, as a dense cloud of smog impedes the formation of rain clouds, lowers the amount of rain and eventually makes the area more arid. 

 

The Foundation for Agricultural and Environmental Conservation said if every maize farm in Thailand used the slash-and-burn method, it will not just boost PM2.5 levels, but will also release 2,812 tonnes of carbon and 6.25 million tonnes of carbon dioxide, which is equal to the emission of 1.32 million cars.

 

However, the foundation said that not using the slash-and-burn technique on just 400,000 rai (64,000 hectares) will reduce the emission of carbon by 160 tonnes and CO2 emission by 356,000 tonnes.

 

Hence, it urged farmers to opt for more environmentally friendly methods to get rid of leftover organic materials on their farms, such as making fertiliser from farm waste instead of burning it. 

 

In an article published last Tuesday, UNEP said that though climate change and air pollution seem to be very different issues, they are indeed “two sides of the same coin”. 

 

The article said that since humans are consuming more than ever before, we are polluting the air with many kinds of pollutants, such as carbon and greenhouse gases.

 

UNEP also cited the Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change’s report, which said that fine particles such as PM2.5 and carbon can affect the climate by absorbing the heat from sunlight, warming the atmosphere and disrupting cloud formation.

 

However, UNEP’s climate change expert Niklas Hagelberg said the close connection between air pollution and climate change also means if we can control one problem, it will help relieve the other problem, especially when we already have the technology to control air pollutants. 

 

“When addressing air pollution, we also address a critical and easy-to-implement solution to climate change. Short-lived pollutants are negative in every sense, and we have proven technology and policies to economically and immediately reduce air pollution,” Hagelberg said.

 

“We should continue cutting down on the release of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide as well.”

 

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/national/30368565

 

-- © Copyright The Nation 2019-04-30

[Chicken George]

With no rains forcast this smoke pollution will probably last till the end of June! Madness!!

[sweatalot]

high time to do something in particular in the North of Thailand

Edited April 30, 2019 by sweatalot

[PatOngo]

5 hours ago, webfact said:

Rise in temperatures linked to air pollution

Yes, I can see the correlation....The hotter it gets, the more rubbish we burn!

[Khun Paul]

Thai culture dictates ignore all laws and hope for the best . Wonderful ! 

[mok199]

Life in Thunderdome,just got a bit hotter

[hotchilli]

7 hours ago, webfact said:

CLIMATE CHANGE and air pollution are interrelated, say environmental experts as they call for the authorities to take simultaneous and urgent action to tackle these problems and avoid serious consequences.

So squirting water skywards didn't do the job then?

[connda]

2 hours ago, sweatalot said:

high time to do something in particular in the North of Thailand

They have been doing something...they have been ignoring the problem.

[Krataiboy]

OK, Einstein. We'll believe you. . . until we don't.

 

THE UNIVERSE MIGHT BE A BILLION YEARS YOUNGER THAN WE THOUGHT

https://www.apnews.com/fac50d45a19f4239848b1712cfd22c3

 

Scientists were a little bit off target with their calculations, according to a new study by a Nobel Prize winner. 

 

Then there's this, published in The Oxford Student  today: "Dr Young-hae Chi, Professor at Oxford’s Oriental Institute, believes in a strong correlation between climate change and alien abductions".

 

For some inexplicable reason, the University has declined to give the prof a debating platform to explains his theory.

 

Next they'll be telling us we've only got six years, not twelve, to save the world from burning to a crisp.

Edited April 30, 2019 by Krataiboy

[BEngBKK]

A Thai solution would be to start a BIG BIG fire so the heat from the fire could lift the dirt away......

[sawadee1947]

6 hours ago, sweatalot said:

high time to do something in particular in the North of Thailand

Yeah, Ich send the Rain maker planes..????????????

[Wilsonandson]

Don't plants need carbon dioxide to live?
Carbon dioxide is not the enemy it's been made out to be. It's actually plant nutrition that helps regrow rainforests, food crops and wetlands. In fact, higher CO2 levels in the atmosphere would make the planet more lush and abundant in terms of plant life, forests, trees and food crops.

[Bill Miller]

CO2 can only be utilized to a certain extent by plantlife, which daily is being reduced in enormous amounts to further the search for mineral wealth. and pasture lands to produce more billions of burgers, Mr. Trump. At least that is who I first heard spouting this simplistic and entirely incorrect drivel.

[BritManToo]

2 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:

CO2 can only be utilized to a certain extent by plantlife, which daily is being reduced in enormous amounts to further the search for mineral wealth. and pasture lands to produce more billions of burgers, Mr. Trump. At least that is who I first heard spouting this simplistic and entirely incorrect drivel.

Average atmospheric CO2 is 500ppm, best for a greenhouse is 1500ppm which may increase yields by 30%.

So the plants would like 3x the current CO2 levels to grow at their best rate.

 

It isn't hard to check this stuff out before posting complete BS!

https://fifthseasongardening.com/regulating-carbon-dioxide

[rickudon]

Ah, Britman, does it also point out that to Utilise this extra CO2 the plants also need optimum amounts of fertiliser, water and sunlight? And the correct temperatures - try growing tomatoes at 40 degrees centigrade, do rather poorly. Unfortunately outside of the greenhouse optimum conditions often do not exist.

 

And then we have the negative effects of extra CO2 .... depressed growth of aquatic animals, higher temperatures that may affect some lifeforms, acidification and the problems mentioned at the start of this thread. We meddle with nature at our own risk.

[nauseus]

Why are you all on about CO2 again? The mad burning is not helping but the main issue with it that is black carbon and particulate matter pollution and the resulting direct damage to living things.

 

The main reason for rising temperatures is that it's now the peak of the bloody hot season here!

Edited April 30, 2019 by nauseus

[Wilsonandson]

All you liberal lefty environmentalists should play this game together.

Edited April 30, 2019 by Wilsonandson

[DrTuner]

When somebody starts pushing the climate change agenda as hard as it's being pushed now I get more and more skeptical. Usually when there's a real problem the solutions are found quickly and make sense. I smell profiteering.

[Bill Miller]

13 hours ago, BritManToo said:

Average atmospheric CO2 is 500ppm, best for a greenhouse is 1500ppm which may increase yields by 30%.

So the plants would like 3x the current CO2 levels to grow at their best rate.

 

It isn't hard to check this stuff out before posting complete BS!

https://fifthseasongardening.com/regulating-carbon-dioxide

I aree it is not hard to check this stuff out before posting <deleted>, Mr. Britmantoo

Your citation is Primus, from a gardening site rather than a scientific source, and Secundus , dated from 2014. Not exactly au currant, eh?

It is a popular theme with climate change deniers and resource robber barons, sll of whom also neglect my point that increased CO2  levels make little beneficial impact on a vanishing plantscape. The deliberate eradication of the rainforest ecosystem has more import than an outdated theoretical benefit of increased carbon dioxide concentrations; when the plants are torn out by the roots, cut down, and/or burned in situ where is your net gain?

https://news.stanford.edu/pr/02/jasperplots124.html

 

[Bill Miller]

The usual group is out denying that anything is happening;

"Its hotter because of the season!"

The article is, in part, about the fact that the hot seasons are hotter than they used to be. I don't know any way to state it more simply.

As to other deniers, if some are yelling emphatically that your house is on fire, will you take that as a reason to sit back snd continue watching "Duck Dynasty" or whatever is now popular on the aptly named "Boob Tube"? ????

[nauseus]

2 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

The usual group is out denying that anything is happening;

"Its hotter because of the season!"

The article is, in part, about the fact that the hot seasons are hotter than they used to be. I don't know any way to state it more simply.

As to other deniers, if some are yelling emphatically that your house is on fire, will you take that as a reason to sit back snd continue watching "Duck Dynasty" or whatever is now popular on the aptly named "Boob Tube"? ????

If you are referring to my post, Bill, then my remark about seasonal heat was in response to the headline, which after reading the story seems to be rather misleading. There is little reference to temperature within the text. Yes, you can fairly say that hot seasons (as well as average temperatures) are hotter than they used to be in Thailand (as well as many other countries). The data is recorded, available and I have not tried to deny this. What the article did not mention was, that, coincident with the increased burning and higher temperatures, the average wind speeds, cloud cover and humidity have dropped in the Chiang Mai area.

[Felt 35]

Rise in temperatures linked to air pollution, say experts

I'm waiting for the "TV business experts" to deny that climate change and pollution, included rise in temperatures and more extreme weather when it first are "bad weather" are manmade.........????

[BritManToo]

4 hours ago, Bill Miller said:

Your citation is Primus, from a gardening site rather than a scientific source, and Secundus , dated from 2014. Not exactly au currant, eh?

I believe gardeners, they're just trying to grow crops and have little political agenda.

Odd to see you think people with greenhouses would need different CO2 levels over a 5 year period.

Lets see you link to any greenhouse growers sites claiming 3x the CO2 does't work.

I'm just gonna put you on ignore, I've never had much luck convincing flat earthers the world is round.

 

Edited May 1, 2019 by BritManToo

[Bill Miller]

2 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I believe gardeners, they're just trying to grow crops and have little political agenda.

Odd to see you think people with greenhouses would need different CO2 levels over a 5 year period.

Lets see you link to any greenhouse growers sites claiming 3x the CO2 does't work.

I'm just gonna put you on ignore, I've never had much luck convincing flat earthers the world is round.

 

Thank you. I consider "ignore" from persons of questionable reading comprehension attainments somewhat of an honour.

[Wilsonandson]

George Carlin - Saving the Planet
Not only funny but true.

[WeekendRaider]

it's a major mistake to refer to this as caused by "pollution" because for most of us we think of "dirty energy" such as burning coal.  however, burning coal is responsible not just for Co2 emissions but also PM and aerosols that have a negative forcing.  negative meaning a cooling effect basically, by reflecting light to space. 

they are shown on the IPCC chart.  and probably are underestimated.

the higher temperatures have been linked to higher concentration of CO2 as a green house gas in the atmosphere.  but Co2 is not "pollution" in most folks minds.  and it isn't to most scientists either.  but it is a GHG.  it normally cannot be seen at all or smelled, is omnipresent and all powerful.  it also accounts for why we have air to breath, and for all of our food.  a change in it's atmospheric concentration about 7 to 8 million years ago may account for why our ancestors left the trees and acquired extreme dexterity by freeing up their arms, this resulting in weapons, tools, fire, cooked food, larger brains and human spoken language.

 

notice something.  anything of great importance we usually have a name for.  yet for Co2 all we have is a chemical name.  but think on that again.

 

not seen.

all powerful.

accounts for life "as we know it".

hmmmm.... maybe it does have a non chemical name.  and that would be an epiphany for 2 or 3 billion people still alive today that could be just as dangerous as Climate itself is.  and it is.

it requires a lot of study.  it is not about the Earth gradually becoming hotter.

 

you will also learn it is not about "ice melting in 2100 something".  that, along with those CORSIA offsets in 2027 that everyone knows about (not) are a political agenda to avoid taking real action.  and sounds good to WW2 Baby Boomers so they can feel they have "responsible feelings" but not to worry too much.  or do anything to scale.  and so we have done nothing. 

stuff like solar panels are 2 steps back before taking one step forward, for instance.  they have to be manufactured and installed..... which involves significant GHG emissions... and unlike coal and oil they have no negative forcing effect.  etc etc etc  it's really quite complicated.        
       

Edited May 1, 2019 by WeekendRaider

[Wilsonandson]

it's a major mistake to refer to this as caused by "pollution" because for most of us we think of "dirty energy" such as burning coal.  however, burning coal is responsible not just for Co2 emissions but also PM and aerosols that have a negative forcing.  negative meaning a cooling effect basically, by reflecting light to space. 

they are shown on the IPCC chart.  and probably are underestimated.

the higher temperatures have been linked to higher concentration of CO2 as a green house gas in the atmosphere.  but Co2 is not "pollution" in most folks minds.  and it isn't to most scientists either.  but it is a GHG.  it normally cannot be seen at all or smelled, is omnipresent and all powerful.  it also accounts for why we have air to breath, and for all of our food.  a change in it's atmospheric concentration about 7 to 8 million years ago may account for why our ancestors left the trees and acquired extreme dexterity by freeing up their arms, this resulting in weapons, tools, fire, cooked food, larger brains and human spoken language.
 
notice something.  anything of great importance we usually have a name for.  yet for Co2 all we have is a chemical name.  but think on that again.
 
not seen.
all powerful.
accounts for life "as we know it".

hmmmm.... maybe it does have a non chemical name.  and that would be an epiphany for 2 or 3 billion people still alive today that could be just as dangerous as Climate itself is.  and it is.

it requires a lot of study.  it is not about the Earth gradually becoming hotter.
 
you will also learn it is not about "ice melting in 2100 something".  that, along with those CORSIA offsets in 2027 that everyone knows about (not) are a political agenda to avoid taking real action.  and sounds good to WW2 Baby Boomers so they can feel they have "responsible feelings" but not to worry too much.  or do anything to scale.  and so we have done nothing. 

stuff like solar panels are 2 steps back before taking one step forward, for instance.  they have to be manufactured and installed..... which involves significant GHG emissions... and unlike coal and oil they have no negative forcing effect.  etc etc etc  it's really quite complicated.        
       

Not just solar panels, windmills are a step back too. No windmills will ever generate as much energy as was invested in building them. That is a windmill could spin until it falls apart and never generate as much energy as was invested in building it.

Man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated.

[nauseus]

28 minutes ago, Wilsonandson said:

Not just solar panels, windmills are a step back too. No windmills will ever generate as much energy as was invested in building them. That is a windmill could spin until it falls apart and never generate as much energy as was invested in building it.

Man-made global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated.

I don't think I'll take your opinion as fact unless you can justify those claims. 

 

[happy chappie]