Corona virus has all the attention in the local and worldwide news right now.  The Thai air pollution has been horrible and at dangerous levels throughout the Kingdom recently. 
Corona has killed zero in Thailand that we know of. Probably will kill several, maybe hundreds before totally under control.

Air pollution already kills thousands and will escalate given current conditions.  Those not ‘killed’ will lead changed lifestyles.  Restricted outdoor activities most of the time and the need to wear masks. Government response to both crises seems to be motivated by immediate financial impact to tourism and business, not necessarily in that order.  Refusing to temporarily stop Chinese travel to Thailand, like most other countries have, can only be a result of greed. Temporary only means a few weeks or months.  BUT, the govt has at least tried to implement some measures to combat the spread of the virus.  Airport screenings, mask and gel distribution, etc are helpful and are, at least, some sort of response to the problem.  Short term negative effect on non-Chinese tourism will be significant, but not devastating.

 

Air pollution, however, could be totally, long term, devastating to tourism as well as the health of residents.  No short or long term measures are in place to combat a problem that is worsening by the day..  it may already be too late to ‘fix’ this before the health or economic impact is felt, but it certainly will be too late if we wait for the impact.  Thailand is/was a wonderful, beautiful place to visit or live, and that will not be so very soon.  
 

Coronavirus will pass as have many other outbreaks. Air pollution won’t pass without dramatic, bold leadership directives that most of the informed public may support (I hope). What is the alternative if the public, business, and gov’t don’t try to fix this?

Though I agree that pollution is a big problem with existential elements. 

Pollution is localized and not contagious (not self replicating), where the virus has the potential to infect all humanity. 

Well, if you are alone and no people around you, the risk to get the virus is nearly zero - but you have to breeze. If you always wear a mask, the risk is also zero. Or to say it in another way: without mask you always have to breeze the bad air but the risk to get the virus is very small (to get the flu from a US or European tourist is much higher).

 

To breeze bad air is like smoking 10 cigarettes per day and lung cancer you can´t heal. The Coronavirus isn´t deadly for people in normal condition.

33 minutes ago, coldmike said:

Corona has killed zero in Thailand that we know of.

Exactly ! That we have been told about. You think they will encourage more tourists by declaring it ? 

31 minutes ago, sirineou said:

Though I agree that pollution is a big problem with existential elements. 

Pollution is localized and not contagious (not self replicating), where the virus has the potential to infect all humanity. 

Agree, pandemic is scary, but this one is not very deadly 2-3% mortality.  A truly lethal pandemic would be scary and I’d hope the Thai gov’t would act swiftly to close the borders and protect the citizens (and visitors????) influenza, dengue, and malaria hurt many more healthy people than the current corona virus.

Now that we have had the 4th outbreak in the last 6 months, dengue is high on my list around my neighborhood.

 

16 minutes ago, RichardColeman said:

Exactly ! That we have been told about. You think they will encourage more tourists by declaring it ? 

Some of my family support one side and most support the other, but they all agree on one thing, the TOTAL mistrust of the Gov’t and anything they say.

52 minutes ago, coldmike said:

What is the alternative if the public, business, and gov’t don’t try to fix this?

If none of the above are willing to fix the problem, the only alternative is to live with it or leave!

The "government" is "compromised" unwilling to do anything constructive it appears, possibly the same people that own the "government" also own or control the media, until there is a lot more media attention that stirs up the public to do something, not a lot is going to happen!

We, the general public, traditionally rely on the media to inform us of what is happening and help fight the wrongs in government, that is no longer happening, not only in Thailand but pretty much worldwide.

 

4 minutes ago, coldmike said:

Agree, pandemic is scary, but this one is not very deadly 2-3% mortality.  A truly lethal pandemic would be scary and I’d hope the Thai gov’t would act swiftly to close the borders and protect the citizens (and visitors????) influenza, dengue, and malaria hurt many more healthy people than the current corona virus.

The problem with this virus is that we don't really know yet. So perhaps we are overreacting , in fact i hope we are overreacting and this thing fizzlesles out, but with this things it is prudent to err on the side of caution. 

Let's keep our fingers crossed. 

4 minutes ago, sirineou said:

The problem with this virus is that we don't really know yet. So perhaps we are overreacting ,

So true.  China is SO forthcoming with their reporting and Thailand almost as equally un-forthcoming, we really don’t know.  We do know, though, that the air we have to breath in Thailand is not good right now and will shorten our lives.  

both could kill or not....same same...choose your poison...sex can kill...lack of sleep can kill..too much of anything can kill or hurt....

44 minutes ago, coldmike said:

Air pollution won’t pass without dramatic, bold leadership directives that most of the informed public may support (I hope). What is the alternative if the public, business, and gov’t don’t try to fix this?

This is what some people have been saying since Earth Day in 1970.  Wind, solar, and geothermal power will never be able to supply the ever increasing power demand realistically though.  Here in Thailand the burning of sugar cane fields and rice fields can be stopped, but would take a huge labor force and monetary input from government, subsidies for non-burning would be my suggestion.  Farmers would have to remove and transport the sugar cane while "green".  The rice straw and corn stalks would have to be removed manually, transported and mulched.  The green method of harvesting sugar cane has been successful in Brazil. 

 

If scientists find an energy source that is non polluting and all power plants and  transportation is run on it, then air pollution will be reduced dramatically.  Nuclear power plants at one time were thought to be the answer, yet are very expensive to build and operate, and of course potentially dangerous (Chernobyl)

The population numbers which increase the need for energy every year has never slowed and likely will never slow.  Birth rate is currently 2.5 times the death rate, and almost a billion more people every 10 years (currently 7.7 Billion) .will be living on earth using electricity and driving cars.

   

This is why people like Greta Thunberg are important philosophically, yet they have no economically viable alternatives to give governments, businesses, or the public.  If you reduce CO2 emission, you will reduce air pollution, but to do that you need to reduce the number of power plants burning coal, diesel, and LPG.  Then there are 1.25 Billion cars registered worldwide and production is around 90 million more cars every year, of which only 3 million of those are electric.  You never know when a breakthrough will be discovered though.

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0115857/  

 

13 minutes ago, mike787 said:

both could kill or not....same same...choose your poison...sex can kill...lack of sleep can kill..too much of anything can kill or hurt....

Certain types of sex, drugs, or others are choices; breathing is not.

17 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

Nuclear power plants at one time were thought to be the answer, yet are very expensive to build and operate, and of course potentially dangerous (Chernobyl)

Misoperated.

Just like to clarify that. As was Three Mile Island.

There are hundreds of nukes being operated safely as we speak.

10 minutes ago, Skallywag said:

This is what some people have been saying since Earth Day in 1970.  Wind, solar, and geothermal power will never be able to supply the ever increasing power demand realistically though.  Here in Thailand the burning of sugar cane fields and rice fields can be stopped, but would take a huge labor force and monetary input from government, subsidies for non-burning would be my suggestion.  Farmers would have to remove and transport the sugar cane while "green".  The rice straw and corn stalks would have to be removed manually, transported and mulched.  The green method of harvesting sugar cane has been successful in BrazI

Skallywag, I agree we need ‘alll of the above’ approach.  Wind and solar are doing great in parts of Europe and USA. Both should work better in Thailand.  Govt needs to seriously criminalize burning and help farmers monetarily with alternatives 

1 hour ago, sirineou said:

Though I agree that pollution is a big problem with existential elements. 

Pollution is localized and not contagious (not self replicating), where the virus has the potential to infect all humanity. 

Hate to break it to you but the ramifications of global pollution is already affecting/infecting all humanity.

2 minutes ago, coldmike said:

Skallywag, I agree we need ‘alll of the above’ approach.  Wind and solar are doing great in parts of Europe and USA. Both should work better in Thailand.  Govt needs to seriously criminalize burning and help farmers monetarily with alternatives 

You do realise burning crops is essentially carbon neutral?

 

2 hours ago, coldmike said:

Certain types of sex, drugs, or others are choices; breathing is not.

NO, dead (pun intended) wrong sir!  Breathing is a choice mate! Think!

What’s Worse? Coronavirus or Air Pollution?

The Air pollution by Coronavirus! ????

18 hours ago, metempsychotic said:

Hate to break it to you but the ramifications of global pollution is already affecting/infecting all humanity.

 affecting and infecting are two different things IMO. No doubt, Pollution is a grave concern, but the virus is an Immediate concern.

While some here think the government needs to throw taxpayer money at farmers to stop burning the Thai government has done it correctly.  They have started paying less for cane that has been burnt.

I think they are synergistic.  The virus is not serious if you are fit and healthy, and the pollution is not great, but will takes years to cause ill health.

 

But a virus that effects the lungs plus high levels pollutants could mean that by working together more people will be sick.

 

But am I the only who's a bit disappointed that the new virus is not the super-deadly zombie apocalypse touted by the press?

 

Overpopulation is the real reason we have rapid spread of the virus and poor air quality.

 

21 hours ago, CNXexpat said:

Well, if you are alone and no people around you, the risk to get the virus is nearly zero - but you have to breeze. If you always wear a mask, the risk is also zero. Or to say it in another way: without mask you always have to breeze the bad air but the risk to get the virus is very small (to get the flu from a US or European tourist is much higher).

 

To breeze bad air is like smoking 10 cigarettes per day and lung cancer you can´t heal. The Coronavirus isn´t deadly for people in normal condition.

Breathe, not breeze. Just saying.

Coronavirus isn't just going to go away in a few months. It is out there now, uncontained, and we have to live with like we do Influenza. And we just do not know enough about it to really rate the seriousness to an individual over there lifetime.

 

Air pollution is nasty but usually only kills indirectly over a long time. Also it is relatively easy to reduce the risk to you - masks, filtered air, avoiding polluted areas, change behaviour or just move. You have some control.

Very little control with coronavirus - you can reduce the chance of getting infected a bit, but mainly just luck. You could go to another country - but it will probably get there as well.

The chances of being infected with WuFlu is extremely small. I'd be more worried about:

 

'Flu. (kills hundreds of thousands annually) Vaccine reduces the risk by 60% but has to be modified twice a year as the 'flu virus mutates.

 

Dengue fever. (almost 40,000 cases in Thailand in 2019 with 43 deaths) No vaccine or cure.

 

Zika. (kills 1% of those infected and is particularly dangerous to pregnant women) No vaccine

 

and of course polution.

1 hour ago, rickudon said:

Coronavirus isn't just going to go away in a few months. It is out there now, uncontained, and we have to live with like we do Influenza.

SARS, which was a similar coronavirus, lasted around 5 months then vanished. WuFlu is probably going to take longer but I believe it will go the same way.

 

These viruses usually die out with effective containment along with the body's immune system to adapt.

12 minutes ago, HHTel said:

SARS, which was a similar coronavirus, lasted around 5 months then vanished. WuFlu is probably going to take longer but I believe it will go the same way.

 

These viruses usually die out with effective containment along with the body's immune system to adapt.

Yes - you can become immune to the coronavirus, and people who had a dose of the 4 previous coronavirus outbreaks may already be immune (or at least have lesser symptoms) but you can't become immune to pollution.

4 hours ago, rwill said:

They have started paying less for cane that has been burnt.

They always have! they have done nothing but guarantee Ethanol for "Green" fuel! & plenty of profit for their "friends!

According to press reports the BMA ordered all construction work to halt in Bangkok this week to ease the haze issue. ????

 

Anyone notice even a slight pause in construction in Bangkok?  I certainly didn't.

Microplastics in the air can't be good.

 

However Corona beer seems like the greatest threat to clean water. 

 

You might classify it as "water pollution".

 

--Heineken "Beer"