Burning Continues And Air Quality Issues

[chiang mai]

To all you concerned folks,

It's come to my attention as of late that this thread has turned into a huff & puff match. All of your arguements are valid, some data MAY be incorrect / misquoted, and in general, has given quite a few readers more info to the pollution problems of CM. This is all well and good and everyone is entitled to free speech. But, don't you all think it would be more constructive to take on a more proactive position and actually DO something about the problem instead of quibbling. For example, each one of us could get together (not for a piss up!) and say, collect signatures on a petition or how about actually helping the fire fighters in some way or donations or fire watches or (anybody have any more ideas???)

Following the previous Mayor's suggestion I think we should start Sonkran in February and let it run 'till May.

[tijnebijn]

Well its raining right here now

Hope the air will clear up a bit , how is it in CM , allready raining ,

feels so nice at the moment , happy I came home this weekend .

[Priceless]

[...] The problem of course is of course the quantification of the problem. I see fragmented and partial stats showing that one year and one location was such and such and another year was something different hence trying to put the problem into perspective is difficult. Because of this I have to fall back on my own personal experiences and say, yes, the pollution in CM is bad, for me it's very bad and the risk is unacceptable. Others that I meet, tourists and would be new residents are most often unaware of the scale of the problem which I think you will agree is not insignificant. Ajarn in his post suggests the problem is something new to him, this despite twenty years residency and I fail to understand that. So whilst I am not an eco radical I am all in favor of balance in this issue and in everyone seeing the facts, whatever they may be and deciding accordingly.

The reason why only "fragmented and partial stats" are posted on this forum is very simple: All the available stats (which in the case of Chiang Mai means nearly daily observations since 1 June 1998) are published on the Pollution Control Department website. This has been pointed out numerous times on the Chiang Mai forum, but since you have obviously not been following these discussions, I will repeat it one more time: http://www.pcd.go.th/AirQuality/Regional/Q...fm?task=default. If you select Chiang Mai under "Query by particular site" and then click "Query" you will (as of today) get a list of 2,927 records. The reason that I and other forum members don't post this particular data set is of course:

- It is readily available on an easily accessible and well known website

- A raw data set like this is of very little informational value to the casual reader

- It is extremely boring

If there is "popular demand", I am of course willing to post any number of graphs, tables etc, but my impression is that there is probably more popular demand that I don't

Quite honestly, my personal impression is that you are not so much interested in information as in an opportunity to complain about a city that you have already left. Are you looking for confirmation that you made the right decision or have you got some other kind of agenda?

/ Priceless

[Ulysses G.]

Quite honestly, my personal impression is that you are not so much interested in information as in an opportunity to complain about a city that you have already left. Are you looking for confirmation that you made the right decision or have you got some other kind of agenda?

/ Priceless

[mcgriffith]

Quite honestly, my personal impression is that you are not so much interested in information as in an opportunity to complain about a city that you have already left. Are you looking for confirmation that you made the right decision or have you got some other kind of agenda?

/ Priceless

[mcgriffith]

By the way, it rained this afternoon, no doubt due to HM's cloud seeding directive. And we had high winds. Air seems much clearer, and the temperature is positively cool and refreshing. Life is good in Chiang Mai.....

[Mapguy]

Priceless, I think you are going overboard. I agree heartily with your adhorrence for hyperbole and spurious statistics. Your assidulously researched contributions of "facts" are both well-meant and well-presented, but let me try to respond with an incomplete metaphor.

Guns kill. A small caliber bullet will leave a smaller hole than a larger caliber bullet, but both will kill you. Worrying too much about the size of the bullet, or whether the guy down the street has a larger gun or not, isn't very useful.

I must admit that I have a problem with your somewhat less than intelligible metaphor, but I guess that you mean something like "pollution kills, the level is just a question of degrees"?

If my interpretation of your metaphor is correct, I am sorry but you are wrong. According to the World Health Organisation (http://www.euro.who.int/Document/E90038.pdf) no effects on "total, cardiopulmonary and lung cancer mortality" have been shown with PM-10 pollution levels below an annual mean of 20 ug/m3, which is also the lowest of the four levels discussed in the WHO report. (Incidentally, the mean for Chiang Mai during the years 2000-2008 has been 48.6 ug/m3, which is within the "WHO interim target 2" (at 50 ug/m3) but outside the "WHO interim target 3" (at 30 ug/m3).)

Apart from that, what message are you trying to get across to our fellow residents of Chiang Mai: "Hold your breath, because you'll die if you breathe"?

/ Priceless

Well, I did mention the metaphor is incomplete! How about "reasonableness" of argument rather than arguing with extreme examples to support a point, such as picking the lowest level (20 ug/m3)? Let's call that a "spitball" to fit my metaphor. A spitball certainly won't kill you. But I don't find such an illustration any more useful than pointing at the record high (304 ug/m3, was it?) of last year in Chiang Mai Province. To fit the metaphor, let's call that extreme a 50mm machine gun. (Even using arithmetical means in statistical analysis can be tricky, as you know, but that's a whole unnecesary discussion here.) So, certainly I am not saying "hold your breath, because you'll die if you breathe!" That's an extreme conclusion mean to make fun, certainly. Absurd argument, a type of hyperbole, might be good theater, but it is by definition logically "over the top" or, better said, a rhetorical blow "below the belt."

In the end, the point is that air pollution in this area (as well as in others) is a problem of significant enough proportion given the best science we have and the weight of unfortunate collective personal experience. As you have said time and time again on the forum, there is a problem that needs to be dealt with constructively. Yes, there are some Chicken Littles running around yelling the sky is falling. At the same time, there are other people in "denial;" still others telling people who have health problems just to buzz off! These approaches get us nowhere.

Understanding how hazardous it is, I'll still try another metaphor! This is simplistic, but I am trying to illustrate a simple point. If I see a fire, I try to put in out before worrying too much about the temperature at which combustion occurs and checking the research in the applied science of fire fighting. I don't want to be so busy in the library, on the internet and with my calculator that the house burms down in the meantime.

Now, obviously, good basic and applied science help me to decide how serious a fire is and what the best method of putting it out might be with the resources at hand. In fact, we have already learned from that: for example, most people know that you don't toss water on an electrical fire or that smothering a fire is often more effective than dousing it with water even if they are not familiar with the science and research that backs that up.

In the end, let's hope that we can help improve the situation rather than running away from it. I simply think it is sad that people have to leave Chiang Mai for a month or so or permanently. As I say this, I listen to my family cough. I am not an alarmist, but I can not help but be concerned, as you are.

In the meantime, I will try to improve upon my metaphors! And I don't want to get lost in an argumentative fog.

[chiang mai]

[...] The problem of course is of course the quantification of the problem. I see fragmented and partial stats showing that one year and one location was such and such and another year was something different hence trying to put the problem into perspective is difficult. Because of this I have to fall back on my own personal experiences and say, yes, the pollution in CM is bad, for me it's very bad and the risk is unacceptable. Others that I meet, tourists and would be new residents are most often unaware of the scale of the problem which I think you will agree is not insignificant. Ajarn in his post suggests the problem is something new to him, this despite twenty years residency and I fail to understand that. So whilst I am not an eco radical I am all in favor of balance in this issue and in everyone seeing the facts, whatever they may be and deciding accordingly.

The reason why only "fragmented and partial stats" are posted on this forum is very simple: All the available stats (which in the case of Chiang Mai means nearly daily observations since 1 June 1998) are published on the Pollution Control Department website. This has been pointed out numerous times on the Chiang Mai forum, but since you have obviously not been following these discussions, I will repeat it one more time: http://www.pcd.go.th/AirQuality/Regional/Q...fm?task=default. If you select Chiang Mai under "Query by particular site" and then click "Query" you will (as of today) get a list of 2,927 records. The reason that I and other forum members don't post this particular data set is of course:

- It is readily available on an easily accessible and well known website

- A raw data set like this is of very little informational value to the casual reader

- It is extremely boring

If there is "popular demand", I am of course willing to post any number of graphs, tables etc, but my impression is that there is probably more popular demand that I don't

Quite honestly, my personal impression is that you are not so much interested in information as in an opportunity to complain about a city that you have already left. Are you looking for confirmation that you made the right decision or have you got some other kind of agenda?

/ Priceless

I'm sorry Priceless that you have not been able to comprehend what I wrote. I personally don't give a toss about your stats database for CM and I'm certainly not going to waste my time trawling through it to make case for or against anything - I made my decision to leave CM for the reasons I have stated and I'm very comfortable with that. But I would have thought that you or others who are proponents of the "it's really not that bad" brigade might have risen to the challenge and set out a facts based arguments, using real data, to show that perhaps CM and the problem under discussion is not as bad as some think and used comparisons. After all, you live in the middle of this problem, I do not - sensible folks will always agree with facts and truth when they can see it and I for one am prepared to be convinced that my opinion is incorrect. But taking the debate down to the level of incorrectly perceived personal motives for enjoining the debate in the first place smacks of distraction and much hot air rather than anything else.

Reason for edit: removed personal opinion regarding habits of sheep

Edited March 30, 2008 by chiang mai

[chiang mai]

Quite honestly, my personal impression is that you are not so much interested in information as in an opportunity to complain about a city that you have already left. Are you looking for confirmation that you made the right decision or have you got some other kind of agenda?

/ Priceless

Granted life here in Phuket is not easy. I mean I sit here on my perch overlooking the blue waters of the Andaman, watching the weather change and the clouds roll in from the horizon (the horizon by the way is the furthest point on the planet one can see naturally without obstruction, including airborne obstruction) changing the lush greens of the mountains behind. I breath the sea air and ponder endlessly whether I was right to move from the mountains of CM and wonder what pain I can still inflict on family, residents and friends who still live there. When I tire of those thoughts I revert to wondering how I can get my own back on my primary school teacher of some fifty years ago for not giving me a gold star for my art homework and Dr. Beeching for destroying the railways in England during the 60’s. So I will apologize here and now if I do not give this thread my full attention but as you can see I need to spread my attentions across a very wide range of very important issues.

But seriously, how about a decision matrix to help identify where each of us is on this issue:

Is there a problem

Is it a big problem or a small one

Does the problem effect me and my family

Will the effect on me jeopardize my well being and my lifespan

Can I reduce the risk of the effects to an acceptable level

Will risk reduction take place within acceptable timescales

For me, I'm still on points 1 & 2 although others seem to have answered the first point with a NO and yet others are on point 6!

Edited March 31, 2008 by chiang mai

[chiang mai]

Apologies, the last line should read points 2 & 3.

[Ulysses G.]

I'm sorry Priceless that you have not been able to comprehend what I wrote. I personally don't give a toss about your stats database for CM and I'm certainly not going to waste my time trawling through it to make case for or against anything - I made my decision to leave CM for the reasons I have stated and I'm very comfortable with that. But I would have thought that you or others who are proponents of the "it's really not that bad" brigade might have risen to the challenge and set out a facts based arguments, using real data, to show that perhaps CM and the problem under discussion is not as bad as some think and used comparisons.

Priceless has made a very good case using facts, figures, charts and common sense that while Chiang Mai does have a pollution problem during certain times of the year, it is far less dangerous than some posters have led us to believe.

He has also raised the level of the discussion to where posters are looking for solutions to the problem, instead of just running around screaming that the sky is falling.

Priceless is a priceless asset to the Chiang Mai forum!

[chiang mai]

it is far less dangerous than some posters have led us to believe.

Quantification please! And not just PM10 levels from a single government web site. Less dangerous than where, Bangkok, Udon? - more dangerous than where, anywhere? Related deaths and hospitalization cases by comparison?

[Ulysses G.]

Go back and read the threads. These things have been gone over numerous times.

[chiang mai]

Go back and read the threads. These things have been gone over numerous times.

Actually I have, several times - this one from 2004 is one of the most enlightening as to facts and figures at that time but even more interesting is what forum members had to say at that time. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=7962

I'm going to exit this debate here since I don't believe it's likely to conclude in a such a way as to quantify the pollution problem in such a way as to allow most sensible people to make an informed judgment - rather the topic is too emotive for some current residents. You guys will no doubt continue to believe your baby is beautiful but you'll forgive me if I continue to remain unconvinced.

[Bananaman]

Go back and read the threads. These things have been gone over numerous times.

Actually I have, several times - this one from 2004 is one of the most enlightening as to facts and figures at that time but even more interesting is what forum members had to say at that time. http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=7962

I'm going to exit this debate here since I don't believe it's likely to conclude in a such a way as to quantify the pollution problem in such a way as to allow most sensible people to make an informed judgment - rather the topic is too emotive for some current residents. You guys will no doubt continue to believe your baby is beautiful but you'll forgive me if I continue to remain unconvinced.

Wow, it's frightening that it's been four years since this thread and aside from a lot of hot air being blown around, very little has changed or improved. Okay so there are now people forming groups to tackle the problem and the mayor is trying to do her bit, but at a local level the attitudes of those who responsible for burning have obviously not changed in the slightest. People posting on here really aren't joking when they say it's going to be long time before the mindset of the locals' changes, by which time for many the effects on their health will be irreversible. Scary stuff and definitely enough to make you question whether Chiang Mai is a viable destination for long-term living if you want to make it to old age without respiratory complications.

[jomama]

One can understand that business owners don't like negative publicity -- but its hard to build a smokescreen big enough to hide the real smokescreen outside. Even government officials admit the seriousness of the problem. It's one of the reasons I finally moved away from Chiang Mai after more than a decade.

The facts are: its really is that bad and it's not going to change. The system has always been to burn off everything beginning in January and unless the government/society can provide refuse collection, jobs for slash-and-burn farmers and a generations-long educational effort, it ain't going to change. Just hold your breath and wait for rain -- a bit usually comes at Songkran ...

[nokia]

Smog in northern air is Thai problem alone

"An additional problem is that national borders get in the way, with man-made burn-offs also occurring in Burma's Shan State and in Laos," says your editorial, "Burning issue plagues North" on March 29.

Having recently returned from a 1,500km motorcycle trip in northern Laos, half of it off road on dirt tracks in the mountains, I can assure you the toxic soup that passes for air in Chiang Mai is an entirely Thai-made problem.

I did not see so much as a wisp of smoke in northern Laos or along the Burmese border. The air is clear and there is no haze until one is south of Chiang Rai.

As someone who lived and worked in Chiang Mai for six years before moving to Bangkok for the vastly improved air quality (oh yes), I assure you there is nothing even remotely encouraging in the health and forestry authorities' promised campaign to urge villagers not to burn off forests, rubbish or grass. We hear the same hot air from them every year.

Villagers continue their nightly burning of leaves and plastic, as local government officials and racketeers continue to pocket the cash from refuse contracts, ensuring that the rubbish is dumped in fields and burnt instead of going into landfill sites.

Meanwhile, thousands of heavily polluting empty songtaews continue to drive around all day, and the dust from the current frenzy of construction fills the air.

The result is that Chiang Mai has the highest rates of lung disease in the country. No amount of spineless local councillors commissioning yet another report into the cause of air pollution, analysing another air sample, waffling on about traditional lifestyles, handing out masks or pointing a barely visible finger through the smog toward Laos or Burma is going to solve the problem.

The solutions are clear, easily identified and easily solved. Start by getting rid of the incompetent buffoons who have mismanaged Chiang Mai for the past decade.

I do not know how anyone can reside in Chiang Mai today. The putrid air makes it one of the most unliveable cities in Thailand. I hung on until bronchitis brought on by nightly burning of waste in our village forced my reluctant retreat.

With its rich culture, beautiful scenery and easy-going people, Chiang Mai had so much going for it.

Unfortunately, self-interest, apathy and ignorance have taken a heavy toll on the city. That's a shame, because I miss it desperately and would love to move back, but not until I can do so without wheezing.

MICK SHIPPEN

Bangkok

http://www.bangkokpost.com/310308_News/31Mar2008_news22.php

[Ajarn]

Bullshit article, written by a non-expert on a tour of Laos. From Laos he says there is no smoke from Burma... great eyesight

[Ulysses G.]

This guy is full of __it.

I visited Luang Prabang at this time of year a few years ago and the whole town was a big, grey cloud of smoke 24 hours a day. My eyes watered all of the time and I was coughing constantly.

If Chiang Mai was anything like that, I would understand all the whinging.

[solent01]

Full of it or not, he has a very good point, I and my family, let alone the rest of our town has a major problem with the smog this year, how you guys can just dismiss it (taken from the other posts within this sub forum) is beyond me. One of my diggers is working in "Hot", on the drive down from Fang to Hot, when checking the job, my wife and I notice the air becoming thicker and thicker with sh*t, the closer we get to the city (or should I say, THE LOWER OUR ALTITUDE GETS, because that is the reality of it), I don't believe its just a Thai problem, but it is a problem nun the less. Despite the local head men, warning not to burn, everyone seems to be taking no notice what so ever, I feel very angry about the fact that I have to breath in everyones polution, so much so I am planning to travel down to the coastel areas with my family so we can breath some fresh air.

As a Pilot (Flying instructor + Examiner) I would say our local Vis is 2Nm, 2.5 at best, that is not good when we are talking SMOG.

Edited April 1, 2008 by solent01

[Rasseru]

A piece written by a moron who cannot even write English properly.

The solutions are clear, easily identified and easily solved.

Solutions do not get solved, easily or otherwise; problems do.

[siam-i-am]

This guy is full of __it.

I visited Luang Prabang at this time of year a few years ago and the whole town was a big, grey cloud of smoke 24 hours a day. My eyes watered all of the time and I was coughing constantly.

If Chiang Mai was anything like that, I would understand all the whinging.

Why defend the undefendable, I can't speak for other countries bordering LOS, but a blind man on a galloping horse couldn't fail to see the fires all over CM. A while back a guy called Hans Christian Aderson wrote a story called 'The Emporer's new clothes' maybe you should read it.

[nokia]

It seems there are two major problems that are causing the SMOG. The annual slash & burn, and the burning of rubbish.

For the first problem, non-permanent residents can avoid CM during the months Feb-March or even January & April.

But for the second problem, it is unavoidable, as the burning of rubbish occurs every month/day, even during the rainy season.

If we cant change the environment, can we change ourselves/schedules/etc since we still want to stay in CM?

Do share your thoughts/solutions.

------------

However, the complexity of the air pollution issue is as integral to its proposed solutions as to its causes. 'Placing a sudden national or trans-country ban on burning is a tricky issue, considering the number of ethnic minorities that depend on slash and burn agriculture for their livelihood', says Po Garden. 'It would really impact most harshly on the poorest of the poor.'

http://www.chiangmainews.com/ecmn/viewfa.php?id=1796

7Kris:I have been complaining everyday in Chiang Mai for 14 years since my move from Chiang Rai.

I live in a residential project near the ariport. Neighbors burn refuse EVERYDAY. I try to exercise but when I get a whiff of burnt plastic and organic waste, my head aches.

Even my mother is burning rubbish. And I agree is that it is the tradition of folks around here to burn.

Now the weather is catastrophically health threatening. I cough on and off and my skin iches whereas my brother has throat infection.

http://www.chiangmainews.com/ecmn/viewfa.php?id=1796

[Priceless]

Just a few points:

- According to the Thai Meteorological Department (http://www.tmd.go.th/en/province.php?id=2) the visibility at present is 8 km. As a former Commercial Pilot and Swedish Air Force squadron leader, my subjective assessment agrees with their measurement.

- The visibility the last two days, especially in the mornings, has been considerably less. Yesterday morning the humidity where I live (near the Night Safari) was 88% at 9:00 AM. Since the visibilty improved a lot slightly later in the day, I venture to guess that morning mist was the cause of the poor visibility.

- The Pollution Control Department only started measuring pollution levels in Chiang Rai about three months ago, but so far the indications are that the levels in Chiang Rai are slightly higher than in Chiang Mai (though the period of observation is of course far to short to draw any definite conclusions).

- "[...] a major problem with the smog this year [...]". The pollution levels during January-March this year are actually the lowest for at least 7 years. They have been 11.7, 19.7 and 21.5 ug/m3 lower , respectively, than the averages for the corresponding months for the period 2000-2008 (according to raw data from the Pollution Control Department http://www.pcd.go.th/AirQuality/Regional/Q...fm?task=default, put into MS/Excel and analysed by me).

- A blind man on a galloping horse, somebody riding a motorcycle in Laos or somebody taking a walk (or drive) around his moo baan are of course much more reliable witnesses, but just to add an opinion here is a map of the fires in the Greater Northern Thailand area during the last 24 hours (from http://maps.geog.umd.edu/website/Activefir...dMap=Thailand):

Now I am going out for a walk in the lovely fresh air, doesn't a bit of rain do wonders?

/ Priceless

Edited April 1, 2008 by Priceless

[Ulysses G.]

I visited Luang Prabang at this time of year a few years ago and the whole town was a big, grey cloud of smoke 24 hours a day. My eyes watered all of the time and I was coughing constantly.

Why defend the undefendable, I can't speak for other countries bordering LOS, but a blind man on a galloping horse couldn't fail to see the fires all over CM.

Did you bother to read the name of the thread and nokia's post?

nokia Posted Today, 2008-04-01 08:09:10

Smog in Northern Air is Thai Problem Alone

Edited April 1, 2008 by Ulysses G.

[solent01]

After posting here earlier today, it started raining, and has been heavy most of the day Vis is good again, and the air much cleaner

[Mapguy]

After posting here earlier today, it started raining, and has been heavy most of the day Vis is good again, and the air much cleaner

WOW! It was absolutely GORGEOUS this morning!!

The Chiang Mai city area enjoyed a very nice rain last night and this morning. Let us pray for more good showers as the dry season goes on! This year's advance forecasts actually look somewhat promising for occasional rain. ["Occasional" in April means some rain about once a week. Check the climographs on Chiang Mai to see the annual pattern over time. This is, after all, the dry season. Even after rain today, my humidistat reads 49%, and it is not broken!

For weeks we have forgotten what a blue sky looks like! For weeks, we have not been able to tell what color the trees are on Doi Suthep! In the afternoon, the usual pollution haze started to set in, but it was still remarkably clear compared to what we usually suffer. At sunset, you could see the reflection of the setting sun (Never mind that it was pink (not a great color in sunsets re pollution) on the clouds above the mountain. Even just after sunset, after the normal pollution haze started to set in, you could still see the lights twinkling at the wat near the top of the mountain. Tonight, late, I can still see a couple of stars. Which one is the really bright one in the SW; a star or a planet? It is quite bright.

Perhaps we can not enjoy a morning as lovely as the one was this morning every morning, but we can certainly enjoy a lot more like it without breaking into rain dances in the dry season!! It will take work, but it is doable.

Early this morning. my neighbor's daughter was coughing, but she sent her to school anyway. The child does not have a cold or infection. She has a mild reaction to the air pollution in Chiang Mai. I hope her cough is better tomorrow. But too many polluted tomorrows will accumulate in her lungs just as accumulated yesterdays.

[Greenside]

Firstly, I have to own up that I've not kept up with this important thread so forgive me if my post is not very original but I'll be up all night if I have to start at page 2 again.

Whatever the actual figures, it seems to me that we've had a better season than last year. I have a sneaking feeling that I felt more claustrophobic about the pollution back then because the view (or lack of it) of Doi Suthep from my apartment was a constant and irrefutable reminder of what we were breathing. Now I've moved to the other side of town and can only dream about the mountains even on a clear day, it doesn't seem as bad and I'm not moved to check the filth in the aircon filters every six hours...

That's a bit of a digression. What I intended to write about was this:

Despite the scepticism when it was launched, I'd say that the anti burning legislation is really working. I hardly see any fires locally these days and the notices telling people not to indulge in their favourite end-of-the-afternoon recreational bonfire and many and large. How much this is contributing to the easing of the general pollution issue is one thing but living without the constant smell of burning plastic is a big improvement.

Actually, what worries me is that the car park of my local shop (a big well stocked shack, not a 7/11) is almost impossible to get into due to a big pile of rubbish that's growing daily. When asked why we had to park on a dangerous road rather than drive round the back, the owner said he was waiting until he could light a fire and then he'd get rid of the lot. I'm still figuring out how to diplomatically tell him how anti social this would be (all suggestions considered) but it occurs to me that he may only be one of many and if most of the stuff that we've avoided adding to the smog is all going to be lit on the first day the law allows, then it'll really get unpleasant around here.

This should be drawn to the attention of the authorities that have enforced the ban so well so far. I bet there are a lot of Thai villagers who think it''s more pleasant without the burning and it would be a shame if, having broken that habit for many (excluding my shopkeeper friend) things just returned to the old ways.

[Ulysses G.]

Everyone seems to be convinced that the fog in front of Doi Suthep is all air pollution, but I remember it being much thicker when I first visited in 1989 when Chiang Mai didn't have a big pollution problem.

It seems to me, that if it were all pollution, most people would be coughing and uncomfortable all the time, but most people aren't. I think that quite a bit of it must be natural fog from some source.

[scotbeve]

UG,

Yes, there is a BIT of mist on the entire mountain range from down your way all the way up to Mae Sa valley during quite a few months a year, early (ish) in the mornings. This appears to "burn off" (definitely no pun intended) once the sun is high enough. But rest assured, there's pollution in that as well. 17 years in Mae Ai & Fang, 4.5 years in Mae Rim is kind of a while to be up here and have seen it / done it. Last year seemed to be the worst ever and covered the most land area...