Burning Continues And Air Quality Issues

[Priceless]

I have not read this whole thread from the start, so am not sure if someone has mentioned this. I have been in Chiang mai for 6 years now, and it seems to be that air pollution from burning is a lot worse than when I came here first. It used to be bad for a few weeks in April / May, but not it seems to be bad last and this year so far) from January all the way through to June. Has the amount of burning increased, or are there other factors at play?

Well, it may seem so, but in actual fact the air quaity has improved (i.e. average pollution level gone down) for the last few years. If we look at the 32 months since mid-year 2005, 27 of them have had pollution levels below the average for the corresponding months from 2000-2008, while "only" five have been above those averages. (Unfortunately one of those "above" months was March of last year, which was horrible!) Let us hope that this is a positive trend and not just a random variation

Earlier in this thread someone pointed out that there is a lot of burning going on in Lamphun and Lampang, and I ventured a guess that this may be the cause of the very bad pollution here in CM yesterday and today. What is a certainty is that seriously improving the situation requires cooperation between the different cities/towns/villages, provinces and the central government in Bangkok. However, every journey begins with a single step, so let's be thankful for what is being done here in Chiang Mai

BTW, human memory is a funny thing. You say in your post that "it used to be bad for a few weeks in April / May". In actual fact, May has so far this decade been one of the best months of the year, the really bad ones being February and (particularly) March.

/ Priceless

[tigerbeer]

don't know about you guys but my eyes are getting really sore and watery from the pollution today.

[moneyshot]

Today does seem particularly bad.

Definitely the worst I have seen since moving here 6 months ago.

[Priceless]

Today does seem particularly bad.

Definitely the worst I have seen since moving here 6 months ago.

Whether it is the worst probably varies with your exact location, but yesterday and today are definitely among the worst so far this year. At the PCD's "Chiang Mai" site the PM-10 level was (in the 24-hour period ending at 9:00 AM today) 119.7 ug/m3, whereas at Uparaj College it was a whopping 145.7 ug/m3

Let's hope for some wind and no inversion Rain would probably be too much to ask for

/ Priceless

[mobs00]

Today does seem particularly bad.

Definitely the worst I have seen since moving here 6 months ago.

Whether it is the worst probably varies with your exact location, but yesterday and today are definitely among the worst so far this year. At the PCD's "Chiang Mai" site the PM-10 level was (in the 24-hour period ending at 9:00 AM today) 119.7 ug/m3, whereas at Uparaj College it was a whopping 145.7 ug/m3

Let's hope for some wind and no inversion Rain would probably be too much to ask for

/ Priceless

I have seen the figures and follow these threads, but I would be very interested in seeing independent figures ragarding the air pollution here.

We all know the negative effect on tourism pollution causes so I would be curious to see if the actual numbers provided by the goverment were accurate.

China is a perfect example of biased figures. Stations in Beijing were moved from polluted areas to less polluted ones and I believe the actual number of stations were also reduced. This is because they need to meet certain requirments for the upcoming Olympics.

[slapout]

shoomer, In the past few years the population of Chiang Mai has increased by a large factor. Traffic has also increased due to the aforementioned factor. Rice paddy burning as a cause of pollution should have decreased just due to paddy land being coverted to houseing, but its still getting a lot of fingers pointed at it. Burning of neighborhood trash and vehicles may be more the culprits than we think.

[moneyshot]

Today does seem particularly bad.

Definitely the worst I have seen since moving here 6 months ago.

Whether it is the worst probably varies with your exact location, but yesterday and today are definitely among the worst so far this year. At the PCD's "Chiang Mai" site the PM-10 level was (in the 24-hour period ending at 9:00 AM today) 119.7 ug/m3, whereas at Uparaj College it was a whopping 145.7 ug/m3

Let's hope for some wind and no inversion Rain would probably be too much to ask for

/ Priceless

I should have written 'appears' to be the worst.

From here in Maejo, the smog is visible from a short distance away.

On a positive note, the sunsets are quite impressive.

[Priceless]

Today does seem particularly bad.

Definitely the worst I have seen since moving here 6 months ago.

Whether it is the worst probably varies with your exact location, but yesterday and today are definitely among the worst so far this year. At the PCD's "Chiang Mai" site the PM-10 level was (in the 24-hour period ending at 9:00 AM today) 119.7 ug/m3, whereas at Uparaj College it was a whopping 145.7 ug/m3

Let's hope for some wind and no inversion Rain would probably be too much to ask for

/ Priceless

I have seen the figures and follow these threads, but I would be very interested in seeing independent figures ragarding the air pollution here.

We all know the negative effect on tourism pollution causes so I would be curious to see if the actual numbers provided by the goverment were accurate.

China is a perfect example of biased figures. Stations in Beijing were moved from polluted areas to less polluted ones and I believe the actual number of stations were also reduced. This is because they need to meet certain requirments for the upcoming Olympics.

Wonderful, we have the seeds of a new conspiracy theory thread!

/ Priceless

[Ricardo]

Last year, which was totally unusual, most tourists avoided Chiang Mai for about 6 months when the real air pollution problem lasted something like one week.

Here in Mae Jo, it lasted something like 6 weeks, last year. So one simply has to mention this, when talking to prospective tourists or new residents, despite the negative effect on tourism. Out of fairness and honesty to the people you are briefing.

This year the on-set has been delayed, by at least a few weeks, thanks to a couple of unseasonal showers in late-February & early-march. Lovely ! We had clean air & good sunsets.

But we now have thick smoke, with visibility of a few hundred metres, so I would expect it to be for at least a few weeks duration, until the rains arrive early.

No matter how much of a 'booster' you are, or whatever your stake in tourism, you can't talk this problem out of existance, as I'm sure the authorities would like to do. Only real action will/may reduce the problem.

[mobs00]

Today does seem particularly bad.

Definitely the worst I have seen since moving here 6 months ago.

Whether it is the worst probably varies with your exact location, but yesterday and today are definitely among the worst so far this year. At the PCD's "Chiang Mai" site the PM-10 level was (in the 24-hour period ending at 9:00 AM today) 119.7 ug/m3, whereas at Uparaj College it was a whopping 145.7 ug/m3

Let's hope for some wind and no inversion Rain would probably be too much to ask for

/ Priceless

I have seen the figures and follow these threads, but I would be very interested in seeing independent figures ragarding the air pollution here.

We all know the negative effect on tourism pollution causes so I would be curious to see if the actual numbers provided by the goverment were accurate.

China is a perfect example of biased figures. Stations in Beijing were moved from polluted areas to less polluted ones and I believe the actual number of stations were also reduced. This is because they need to meet certain requirments for the upcoming Olympics.

Wonderful, we have the seeds of a new conspiracy theory thread!

/ Priceless

No conspiracy, it is well known that similiar situtations have been influenced in the past.

[Priceless]

Today does seem particularly bad.

Definitely the worst I have seen since moving here 6 months ago.

Whether it is the worst probably varies with your exact location, but yesterday and today are definitely among the worst so far this year. At the PCD's "Chiang Mai" site the PM-10 level was (in the 24-hour period ending at 9:00 AM today) 119.7 ug/m3, whereas at Uparaj College it was a whopping 145.7 ug/m3

Let's hope for some wind and no inversion Rain would probably be too much to ask for

/ Priceless

I have seen the figures and follow these threads, but I would be very interested in seeing independent figures ragarding the air pollution here.

We all know the negative effect on tourism pollution causes so I would be curious to see if the actual numbers provided by the goverment were accurate.

China is a perfect example of biased figures. Stations in Beijing were moved from polluted areas to less polluted ones and I believe the actual number of stations were also reduced. This is because they need to meet certain requirments for the upcoming Olympics.

Wonderful, we have the seeds of a new conspiracy theory thread!

/ Priceless

No conspiracy, it is well known that similiar situtations have been influenced in the past.

Have you got any supporting evidence? (I mean from Thailand, not from China.)

I do not claim to have any evidence to the contrary, it just sounds a bit far-fetched to my ears. What I have seen of the PCD figures so far, they seem to co-variate rather well with people's subjective impressions (though absolute levels often differ a lot, as can be expected).

/ Priceless

[mobs00]

Do you have any evidence that proves their figures are accurate?

If we all believed what we were told where would that leave us?

I just try to find all available information before I draw any conclusions and the only available figures I have found so far have been from the government (PCD).

[cmsally]

I think we can safely say it's bad at the moment. Headaches and sore throats starting to appear in our household.

Almost changed my scheduled trip to UK and brought it forward but then saw all the snow they are having

Snow would be good but might be a bit of a shock to the system.

[Priceless]

Do you have any evidence that proves their figures are accurate?

If we all believed what we were told where would that leave us?

I just try to find all available information before I draw any conclusions and the only available figures I have found so far have been from the government (PCD).

No I don't, apart from the above-mentioned co-variance with different people's subjective experiences. I have also looked at figures (yearly averages) from other places, outside of Thailand, and the results that PCD publish seem reasonable. This is certainly no proof, but may possibly be seen as circumstantial evidence.

I fully agree with you that a second (and possibly third) source would be very nice to have. However, considering the limited resources that are available, I think that a denser network of measuring stations across Thailand would be of even greater value. Remember that two thirds of the provinces don't have any measurements at all! Furthermore I don't haven't heard or read of any country in the world that has "competing organisations" measure air quality to ensure quality. There are however stringent quality assurance programs mandated by e.g. WHO, the US EPA and the European Union. Whether these are followed in Thailand, I don't know...

/ Priceless

PS Maybe I should add that I agree with your last sentence. So what should we do if the PCD figures are all we have?

Edited March 23, 2008 by Priceless

[mcgriffith]

I would be interested to read opinions and data from Thai government agronomists.

I think a very large percentage of the smoke issue is agriculture related.

What are the costs, on a very large scale, of alternate methods of clearing paddy fields, and returning nitrogen to the soil?

I have a feeling there are serious budgetary constraints that prevent addressing the burning issue.

Thailand is the largest exporter of rice in the world. Vietnam is #2.

But tourism is by far the largest contributor to the Thai economy, as a percentage of GDP.

Hope the issue gets sorted out....sooner rather than later.

[Mapguy]

I would be interested to read opinions and data from Thai government agronomists.

I think a very large percentage of the smoke issue is agriculture related.

What are the costs, on a very large scale, of alternate methods of clearing paddy fields, and returning nitrogen to the soil?

I have a feeling there are serious budgetary constraints that prevent addressing the burning issue.

Thailand is the largest exporter of rice in the world. Vietnam is #2.

But tourism is by far the largest contributor to the Thai economy, as a percentage of GDP.

Hope the issue gets sorted out....sooner rather than later.

McG, you have certainly raised a good point. I wish I could give you some direct references for information. I can't right now. I simply haven't got an agronomist's contact information handy, but I can report something second-hand from the the environmental office of the province, and I can direct you to two people who might be able to guide you to further sources of information:

Asst. Professor Wasoam Jompakdee, PhD.

Faculty of Engineering

CMU

Email: [email protected]

[Professor Wasoam is active as "co-chair" of the Internatrional Concerned Citizens of Chiang Mai]

Associate Professor Phongtape Wiwatanadate, PhD.

Department of Community Medicine

Faculty of Medicine

CMU

Email: [email protected]

As well, I suggest you contact the schools of agriculture of both Chiang Mai and Mae Jo universities.

Anyway, yes, there are budgetary as well as other problems to tackle.

According to the environmental department of the province, there is indeed a need for both education and economic alternatives for farmers, the most important audience in their view. The department believes that agricultural burning is indeed the most pervasive contributor to air pollution in Chiang Mai. There are different reasons for it, according to the department. Among them:

* Clearance of new land for planting by poor farmers, sometimes leading to uncontrolled burns;

* Lack of appropriate (and expensive) plows and appropriate plow blades to turn the rice straw under;

* Some incentive for selling the rice straw, for example, as cheap fuel used in the manufacture of bricks or, apparently, even as animal fodder. Ruminants will apparently eat just about anything, just like those who love muesli for breakfast;

* Forest burning (that gets out of control) for stimulating mushroom growth;

* Traditional practices.

The above list does not include forest fires due to other sources nor other problems contributing to air pollution.

Many of these problems, if not all, are countrywide in agricultural areas.

There is a special problem with topography and weather for much of Chiang Mai province, including the city. The smoke that arises from agricultural burning (as well as other airborne particulate producers downwind, such as the Lampang power plant, travel north into Chiang Mai's "pollution bowl" on prevailing S/SW winds. And other provinces further north are affected as well.

Another budgetary constraint --- although things might be getting better --- has to do with simply identifying problems, proposing viable solutions, and so forth on normal budget calendars. Rapid comprehensive reaction, for example, to the March 2007 crisis --- a real "wake-up call" --- wasn't really feasible. And there is always a struggle for available baht in any case. The general political situation might not have been helpful.

The environmental office of the province is relatively new, perhaps 4 - 5 years old, and it is staffed by three officers. The city, I believe, has one officer.

All this is not to raise one's hands in despair. This year, the department apparently feels that so far agricultural burning is down "20%." There has also been some sensible planning regarding campaigns to improve the situation very significantly. This is a real challenge for a number of reasons, as you can imagine.

There are all sorts of players to consider in coming up with a solution. The farmers, obviously. The, village headmen and local officials in small communities. Going up the ladder, you have to consider at least four areas of expertise and interest" environment, public health, natural resources, and disaster control agencies/departments/ministries at different levels of government. In addition, the tourist industry has been encouraging authorities to keep their mouths shut about this problem!

There are other peripheral albeit real concerns that are associated with burning, as you know: local neighborhood leaf disposal, garbage burning, and so forth. Some progress is being made there in fits and starts, apparently. Example, there is no longer black smoke billowing out of the incinerator adjacent to Hotel Lotus Pang Suan Kaew (part of the Kad Suan Kaew complex) like last year.

It seems that some knowledgeable as well as realistic officials are really doing quite a lot, especially considering complexity and restraints. I don't buy "TIT" thinking. Please at least consider how long comparatively it has been taking economically well-developed countries to deal with pollution issues.

Want to help? There is individual action, of course. Good examples have appeared on this site. As action proceeds, there should be meaningul activities for volunteers to help. The mayor has asked for volunteers from the farang community, and the province isn't ignoring farang either.

[Larry]

This will not solve the problem, but it can ameliorate it for those who can afford it. Nowadays, there are excellent air purifiers for 6K baht, as well as ACs that contain advance filtration techniques for about 10K baht more than the very cheap models. These are effective and will at least ensure that you can work and sleep in clean air. Yes, it's a shame that it must come to this, but frankly, 6-10 k baht is a cheap way to preserve your health. BTW, for the first time since last year's horrible air pollution crisis, I cannot see Doi Suthep from my front lawn, and that old Donovan song "first there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is" is starting to play in my head again!

[ThaiPauly]

Thanks for putting that song in my head Larry LOL

Last year was very bad, now, for he first time since I have been living in CM I am questioning if I should stay. The weather just sucks so badly.

I have freinds on Koh Chang right now who are reporting cool breezes and clear blue skies. I cannot recall the last time I saw a blue sky here.

I love CM but I don't have to stay here and submit to this crap, another "Grey Day" in prospect.

[Bananaman]

Today does seem particularly bad.

Definitely the worst I have seen since moving here 6 months ago.

Whether it is the worst probably varies with your exact location, but yesterday and today are definitely among the worst so far this year. At the PCD's "Chiang Mai" site the PM-10 level was (in the 24-hour period ending at 9:00 AM today) 119.7 ug/m3, whereas at Uparaj College it was a whopping 145.7 ug/m3

Let's hope for some wind and no inversion Rain would probably be too much to ask for

/ Priceless

I have seen the figures and follow these threads, but I would be very interested in seeing independent figures ragarding the air pollution here.

We all know the negative effect on tourism pollution causes so I would be curious to see if the actual numbers provided by the goverment were accurate.

China is a perfect example of biased figures. Stations in Beijing were moved from polluted areas to less polluted ones and I believe the actual number of stations were also reduced. This is because they need to meet certain requirments for the upcoming Olympics.

Well I gotta say that I'm not inclined to believe today's figures and think they could well be being doctored. According to the graph for CM, the 7th of March saw a PM10 count of 141 and the 23rd saw a figure of 119 and yet the last few days both my eyes and the symptoms I am experiencing tell me that the air quality right now is the worst it's been this year so how can yesterday have a better PM1O count than two weeks ago?. Last March it hit over the 300 mark (Priceless might be able to give me the exact figure) and right now visibly we're really not a long way from what it looked like at that time and yet we're supposed to believe it's well under half as bad as it was last year? I don't swallow it. Maybe someone who understands figures better than me can explain.

[bggg]

Thanks for putting that song in my head Larry LOL

Last year was very bad, now, for he first time since I have been living in CM I am questioning if I should stay. The weather just sucks so badly.

I have freinds on Koh Chang right now who are reporting cool breezes and clear blue skies. I cannot recall the last time I saw a blue sky here.

I love CM but I don't have to stay here and submit to this crap, another "Grey Day" in prospect.

I too am for the 1st time questioning if our family should remain here. I love Chiang Mai, but I am sitting in my closed up house with air filters and air con running. Eyes burning chest hurting, thinking of my children at school. I have to question if it is fair to them to remain here as we have the choice. I am realistic enough to know we are years away from the burning issue being resolved. I applaud every effort being made towards that end, but its a long way off!

We drove back from Bangkok yesterday. Wow fires the whole way, it was horrific!! We kept praying it would be better when we arrived here. This is not meant to be whining, but it does make me so sad to think I may have to make the decision to move for my health and my childrens health.

[Priceless]

Well I gotta say that I'm not inclined to believe today's figures and think they could well be being doctored. According to the graph for CM, the 7th of March saw a PM10 count of 141 and the 23rd saw a figure of 119 and yet the last few days both my eyes and the symptoms I am experiencing tell me that the air quality right now is the worst it's been this year so how can yesterday have a better PM1O count than two weeks ago?. Last March it hit over the 300 mark (Priceless might be able to give me the exact figure) and right now visibly we're really not a long way from what it looked like at that time and yet we're supposed to believe it's well under half as bad as it was last year? I don't swallow it. Maybe someone who understands figures better than me can explain.

Well, since you ask me: I am at the moment not inclined to believe that the figures are doctored. Such doctoring is feasible in China with its tightly controlled press, NGOs and lack of other "checks and balances", but I think it would be much harder here. The incentives would also be weaker than in a city which will, in a few months time, arrange the Olympic Games.

On the other hand, I think I can provide you with a plausible explanation to the seeming discrepancies between what you experience and what the figures show. The figure provided for e.g. 14 March 2007 (which BTW was the record-setting one at 303.9) is actually the 24-hour average from 9:00 AM on 13 March to 9:00 AM on 14 March. This means that when we experience a sudden surge in pollution level like the last few days', the numbers will basically appear with a one-day delay. The first really bad day this time, as I recall it, was 22 March (Saturday), yet the figure for that day was only 69.1. Definitely suspect, until you realise that the figure actually mostly describes Friday 21 March. The figures for the following two dates (23 & 24 March) are 119.7 and 171.3, respectively, so they confirm that yesterday actually was (by a considerable margin) the worst day so far this year. (At Uparaj College the figure for 24 March, i.e. mostly describing yesterday, is 206.2 which is really atrocious.)

BTW today the visibility here in the vicinity of the Night Safari seems considerably better than yesterday. I'm keeping my fingers crossed that things are actually improving.

/ Priceless

[scotbeve]

T Dog,

It's an admirable effort you put in there. It's unfortunate that after many generations of said burning that it may well take several more generations to follow what us farangs have been "trying" to do for quite a few years.

Have you thought about purchasing several stand alone air filters for your place of residence? They work well to a good extent but you'll have to get outside sooner or later... Masks, breathing apparatuses, and respirators? For 3-4 months a year?

[Loom]

On my last trip I left a supply of N95 respirators for my Thai relatives in case of pollution spikes. They're not recommended to be used for more than a few hours at a time though. Carbon dioxide rebreathing is a problem.

According to my stats, there has been some progress with the proportion of bad days (PM10s over 100) falling from 13% of available PDC daily readings to 8% since the 1999-2001 period.

I haven't checked the figures, but we also drove north to CM from Khamphaeng Phet in Feb and the air was much worse in Lampang. So some of the actions taken in CM appear to have helped a little this year.

I wonder if the government could encourage burning at times when the weather is more of a help to blow out the bad air...April thru June? Or maybe it's too wet then.

Edited March 24, 2008 by Loom

[Priceless]

On my last trip I left a supply of N95 respirators for my Thai relatives in case of pollution spikes. They're not recommended to be used for more than a few hours at a time though. Carbon dioxide rebreathing is a problem.

According to my stats, there has been some progress with the proportion of bad days (PM10s over 100) falling from 13% of available PDC daily readings to 8% since the 1999-2001 period.

I haven't checked the figures, but we also drove north to CM from Khamphaeng Phet in Feb and the air was much worse in Lampang. So some of the actions taken in CM appear to have helped a little this year.

I wonder if the government could encourage burning at times when the weather is more of a help to blow out the bad air...April thru June? Or maybe it's too wet then.

I think you're right. My stats put the "bad day limit" where the Thai government puts it, i.e. at 120 ug/m3. With that definition the frequency of "bad days" has gone down from 10.1% in 1998-1999 to 5.1% in 2000-2008 (according to the Pollution Control Department data and my calculations). Let's hope this is a real improvement trend and not just fluke or statistical error

/ Priceless

[Sao Jiang Mai]

Flew to Mandalay then onto Rangoon, BKK and back ten days ago and there was a brown soup of clouds covering the entire region. Very depressing stuff indeed. It is a regional problem which must be tackled by all governments. BGGG told me last night about her drive from BKK and it sounded eerie...having to turn on head lights in mid-day because the pollution was too bad to drive in! Yikes.

[mobs00]

I smell rain....... Will that help!?

[ThaiPauly]

Weight of opinion seems to be that Chiang mai is terribly polluted. Very quiet from the one poster for whom polllution holds no fear.

He means YOU UG

[Ulysses G.]

Weight of opinion seems to be that Chiang mai is terribly polluted. Very quiet from the one poster for whom polllution holds no fear.

He means YOU UG

Actually, I think that he means the weight of opinion during the height of the smoky season.

I've never said that there was never any pollution in Chiang Mai; It looks like today is one of the few really bad days that we have per year. I am only reacting to visual signs of pollution because I feel no discomfort breathing at all. I do see lots of dirty looking clouds, but am quite comfortable otherwise.

When I visited Luang Prabang during the smoky season, it was literaly like standing in a big grey cloud, I could smell the smoke, my lungs hurt and my eyes watered for 3 days. I had a simular experience in Manilla when I visited there over a few weeks and coughed up black phlem for a few weeks after leaving. I have never felt anything remotely like this in Chiang Mai.

Edited March 24, 2008 by Ulysses G.

[john b good]

The opening post said "can anything be done"

Forget it, nothing can be done because no one gives a shyt about it. It's all in the too hard basket and someone might have to get off their fat ar_se and go out from their nice air-conditioned office.

Do something about it "forget it"

Edited March 24, 2008 by john b good

[mobs00]

Weight of opinion seems to be that Chiang mai is terribly polluted. Very quiet from the one poster for whom polllution holds no fear.

He means YOU UG

Actually, I think that he means the weight of opinion during the height of the smoky season.

I've never said that there was never any pollution in Chiang Mai; It looks like today is one of the few really bad days that we have per year. I am only reacting to visual signs of pollution because I feel no discomfort breathing at all. I do see lots of dirty looking clouds, but am quite comfortable otherwise.

When I visited Luang Prabang during the smoky season, it was literaly like standing in a big grey cloud, I could smell the smoke, my lungs hurt and my eyes watered for 3 days. I had a simular experience in Manilla when I visited there over a few weeks and coughed up black phlem for a few weeks after leaving. I have never felt anything remotely like this in Chiang Mai.

I bet if you come to the Hash run tomorrow you will feel some discomfort and not just from the air! But seriously, we hashers really do notice it when we run this time of year, lungs are tight and breathing is difficult.

And yes we know we shouldn't run in this weather, but we are hashers we don't listen!