Burning Continues And Air Quality Issues

[Mapguy]

From the Chiang Mai Mail:

“Waste to Value” village product display at Northern Village

Reducing burning by recycling into commercial products

The results of a project launched last year by Prof. Doungchan Charoenmuang and sponsored by Chiang Mai University’s Social Research Institute, its Faculty of marketing and its Fine Arts Faculty, were on display recently at Northern Village, Airport Plaza, pending an official opening in August.

Entitled “From Waste to Value avoiding Burning,” the sales exhibition featured many items, including bags, flowerpots, handicrafts and works of art, all transformed from garbage and waste material by workers in three Chiang Mai villages, who had been trained for almost a year in this unique method of reducing burning and its environmental and health hazards.

Professor Doungchan can be reached at [email protected]

The website for the institute is www.sri.cmu.ac.th

[Ulysses G.]

Well, basically I think we are all on the same side and feeling frustrated a lot of the time.

The internet will of course bring you a variety of claims and observations, some well-founded (like one blog above that talks briefly about WHO standards) and some simply alarmist. I am as thoroughly annoyed by the alarmists as UG is. I don't think it is very smart to plan a trip to Chiang Mai in late February - early April, but otherwise what a delightful place!

This is the main area where Mapguy and I do not agree.

I understand that his daughter has had a number of respiratory attacks and I would also be alarmed in his position, but I still maintain that very few people in normal health are bothered by the air during the average "smoky season".

That doesn't mean that eventually there will be no long term health problems for those of us who live here all the time if this isn't taken care of, but for the short term, healthy folks don't have much to worry about.

[chiang mai]

When I lived in Chiang Mai my home was some sixteen floors above the ground and the views on clear days of the city and Doi Suthep were simply wonderful. On less than clear days my views were hazy at best and on bad days my views were often obscured completely - my measure therefore of air quality in Chiang Mai was often measured by what I could (or could not) see from my lofty perch. On bad days I would often meet with friends who lived more normally at ground level and invariably the discussion at some point would turn to air quality. Whilst I would often moan and complain at the high level of pollution my friends would frequently reply, "what pollution". Earlier in this thread one poster responded that he could not see Doi Suthep from his balcony - I wonder therefore how many residents of Chiang Mai judge the pollution levels based on what they see, the smell in the air or how often they are sick from respiratory ailments. For me personally, I am willing to admit that my perception of the pollution issue in CM is more acute than most because of the constant visual reminder and I wonder if a part of this problem is, "out of sight, out of mind"?

[Mapguy]

In the spirit of the OP to do something to help ameliorate the situation, here's another path to becoming more familiar with what's going on re environmental issues and other municipal matters. It is nothing more than a public meeting (and a chance to vent, if you will), but in and of itself, it should be a very interesting and instructive experience and an opportunity to discuss environmental issues broadly ... or you can stay home and watch BBC and CNN:

From the Chiang Mai Mail

“The environmental issues of Chiang Mai”

Residents gather at monthly meeting[/b]

Once a month, a group of foreign and Thai residents of Chiang Mai gather at the Art Museum to discuss their environmental and other concerns with the Mayor of Chiang Mai and members of her administrative staff.

At this month’s meeting, held on July 1 and attended by 65 people, (55 Thais and 10 expats), discussions focused on the environment. Present at the meeting were Dr. Somchote Ong-Sakul , (CMU), representatives from the Chiang Mai Cycling Club, Dr. Jermpol, (CMU), Dr.Wasan, (CMU) ,members of Chiang Mai Friends Group and Chiang Mai Expats Club and Pakee,(Kon Rak Chiang Mai).

Topics for the meeting were cycling lanes in the city, stressing cooperation from local police in forbidding cars to park in cycling lanes; improving the city’s pavements; controlling the use of billboards and tidying electricity cables; increasing “green areas” in the city by planting more trees, flowers, etc; improving the public transport system by providing more buses and routes, and making available comprehensive maps of the city.

The meeting was told that the Mayor and her team will be speaking with local police commanders about finding a solution to Chiang Mai’s worsening traffic problems. On general topics, an information centre will be set up to enable citizens to inform the Mayor and municipality officials about any problems or complaints, and to suggest solutions. It is important that all work together to solve environmental problems. The email address for the centre is forchiangmai @gmail.com; residents are invited to use this new service, as now is the time to do, not talk!

The next meeting will be held on August 5; all meetings are held in the Thai language. However, for those who do not speak Thai and who wish to attend, please apply to join Chiang Mai Friends. Your complaints and suggestions can be sent to the Mayor through the group, and a Thai speaker will translate for you during the meeting.

[Mapguy]

Well, basically I think we are all on the same side and feeling frustrated a lot of the time.

The internet will of course bring you a variety of claims and observations, some well-founded (like one blog above that talks briefly about WHO standards) and some simply alarmist. I am as thoroughly annoyed by the alarmists as UG is. I don't think it is very smart to plan a trip to Chiang Mai in late February - early April, but otherwise what a delightful place!

This is the main area where Mapguy and I do not agree.

I understand that his daughter has had a number of respiratory attacks and I would also be alarmed in his position, but I still maintain that very few people in normal health are bothered by the air during the average "smoky season".

That doesn't mean that eventually there will be no long term health problems for those of us who live here all the time if this isn't taken care of, but for the short term, healthy folks don't have much to worry about.

Thank you, UG, I appreciate your thoughtfulness about my daughter.. My apologies if I sounded alarmist. My daughter's problems are fortunately really not huge, but she is a living "litmus test," so to speak, of what happens during the "smoky season." I do know a couple --- not lots --- of people, who are very seriously affected. I do hurt for them. It is just a plain fact, however, that the statistics on respiratory illness during late February - early April do zoom up every year

I agree with UG about a minor short-term health risk for the great majority of tourists, but it isn't just a short-term issue for them or for residents. Let's just look at short-term tourism as vulnerable.

If your idea of a vacation is to load up on Viagra and hang out with bar girls all night and sleep all day, then I don't suppose it makes much difference that you come here at all during the "smoky" season. What I mean by "not too smart" to plan a trip to Chiang Mai then is that there really are entirely too many truly rotten days and other just plain yukky days when the air and the view are really spoiled. Have you taken an ATV "nature ride" around the mountain on one of those days? [The whole notion of ATV ecotourism is a little absurd, but never mind that!] There are odds that the ride may indeed be memorable! Enough to remember to call the tour agent to get you out of town when you get back and not come back again; maybe even post something nasty on the internet (as reflected in earlier posts above). So, I believe it is not only a long-range health problem but also a problem when it comes to "short term" tourism.

If I were a tour agent (who wanted return business), I'd definitively push visiting Chiang Mai during the rest of the year, but warn people not to seriously chance marring a vacation by going to Northern Thailand during the "smoky season." My season to visit would be to start with Song Kran, a close enough seasonal call. Otherwise, there's just too much of a chance of it being awful outside. Hey! Vacation days are valuable in time and money! Why shoot craps with the season? Who needs the hassle!

Then again, there are people who do go to the Caribbean during the tropical storm/hurricane season! Oy!

Edited July 20, 2008 by Mapguy

[Priceless]

In post #213 above, Mapguy refers to a blog entry with the following words: "The internet will of course bring you a variety of claims and observations, some well-founded (like one blog above that talks briefly about WHO standards) and some simply alarmist." I have taken the time to take a closer look at that piece of writing, i.e. the blog. I will discuss a few quotes from the (not very long) piece. I'd like to apologize in advance to anybody who might find this boring

First the title: "Air pollution levels in Chiang Mai rising". In a restricted sense this was true, since the text was published on 27 February, i.e. going into March which is the worst month of almost every year. In a wider sense, however, it is not true since it seems that the trend is towards a steady improvement of CM's air quality. Of the last 36 months, i.e. since 1 July 2005, six months have had a higher pollution level than the average for the corresponding months during 2000-2008, but 29 months have had a lower level than the average (one month is missing since I don't calculate an average if more than 25% of data is missing).

Another quote: "In London, the United States and the European Union as a whole it is considered a serious pollution ‘episode’ if the PM-10 level exceeds 50 - see the London Air Quality Network website." (BTW, London is the capital of UK, which is a member of the European Union ) A level of 50 may be a "serious episode" (I haven't found the actual quote) but the standard actually says that this should not be exceeded more than 35 times per year, with no limit as to how much it may be exceeded. It is also worth noting that no less than 17 measuring stations in London exceeded the limit more than 35 times during 2007.

A third quote: "For some reason, the Thai Pollution Control Department has set the ’safe level’ to be anything less than a PM-10 of 120." The phrase "For some reason" certainly implies shady motives, even though the author is careful not to expressly say this. My Thai reading skills do not allow me to read the Pollution Control Department website to see if they explain the reasoning behind the standard. However, I can guess that the reasoning may be similar to that of the US Environmental Protection Agency ( http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html#3 ) when it set the US standard to 150, i.e. 25% higher than the Thai standard. Incidentally, this shows the author was wrong when he claimed that the US standard is 50.

To summarize: The quoted text gives a (in my opinion) false impression with his choice of headline. He also mixes an absolute standard (i.e. 120 in Thailand) that should never be exceeded (though in CM it has been exceeded three times so far this year) with a recommended level that should not be exceeded more than 35 times per year (the EU standard). He continues with a blatant lie about the US standard, which is not 50 but rather 150, i.e. higher than the Thai standard.

In my opinion this is not only an example of "simply alarmist" text, but also a particularly obnoxious piece of tendentious and misleading (and partly false) writing. I can not help but wonder what kind of vested interest lies behind it, since it does not give the impression of being written out of stupidity

So as not to be misunderstood: I definitely belong to the group that is concerned about the air quality in Chiang Mai, particularly that of March every year. I think that a lot more can and needs to be done, not just about "agricultural" burning but also about vehicle emissions. I just don't think that writing like the blog I've discussed here can help, but rather that it hurts the credibility of those that try to actually do something (besides of course hurting everybody involved in the tourism and related industries).

/ Priceless

Edited July 20, 2008 by Priceless

[mcgriffith]

Arghhh...

Where is the Mildew thread I was hoping for, in this season?

I'm right in the middle on this one.

I feel people could do much more, maybe be a bit more proactive, in convincing their friends to take positive steps to reduce pollution of all kinds, not just smoke in March/April, but much more- how about giving up the Fortuner? Or at least seriously limiting your trips in said megalosaurus to once a week? Recycle? Quit buying bottled water, and tossing the PET plastic bottle? Quit eating only food that is imported from the other side of the planet, just 'cause you can afford it? The list goes on and on.....

That said, can we not also see that we here in Muang do not really control, or have much say about what happens over the mountain ridges? Much less in the adjoining countries....we can talk ourselves blue in the face about Chiang Mai, make it the greenest city in Asia in a few years of concerted effort with all citizens involved.....

But how about the 100's of thousands of rice farmers who will continue to burn their fields every year in the surrounding provinces after 1st harvest, and the forest burning that is done partly for economic reasons (land clearing), partly for commercial reasons (mushroom cultivation), and partly for whatever reason on military controlled land? None of this is going to stop, short term, meaning the next decade or so.

I try to do my part. I think my personal "carbon footprint" (god I hate these topical buzzwords) is minimal, compared to many if not most of the posters on this forum.

Look deep in yourself, and look at your life and home and family closely.

What can you do personally?

This is all that matters, people.

Do what you can, personally to make things better.

That's all we can ask for.

Isn't the rain wonderful?

Aren't the trees green?

[Ulysses G.]

Quit eating food that is imported from the other side of the planet

There better be an exception for Aussies. Vegemite is more important to them than vitimin C!

[sabaijai]

In post #213 above, Mapguy refers to a blog entry with the following words: "The internet will of course bring you a variety of claims and observations, some well-founded (like one blog above that talks briefly about WHO standards) and some simply alarmist." I have taken the time to take a closer look at that piece of writing, i.e. the blog. I will discuss a few quotes from the (not very long) piece. I'd like to apologize in advance to anybody who might find this boring

First the title: "Air pollution levels in Chiang Mai rising". In a restricted sense this was true, since the text was published on 27 February, i.e. going into March which is the worst month of almost every year. In a wider sense, however, it is not true since it seems that the trend is towards a steady improvement of CM's air quality. Of the last 36 months, i.e. since 1 July 2005, six months have had a higher pollution level than the average for the corresponding months during 2000-2008, but 29 months have had a lower level than the average (one month is missing since I don't calculate an average if more than 25% of data is missing).

Another quote: "In London, the United States and the European Union as a whole it is considered a serious pollution ‘episode’ if the PM-10 level exceeds 50 - see the London Air Quality Network website." (BTW, London is the capital of UK, which is a member of the European Union ) A level of 50 may be a "serious episode" (I haven't found the actual quote) but the standard actually says that this should not be exceeded more than 35 times per year, with no limit as to how much it may be exceeded. It is also worth noting that no less than 17 measuring stations in London exceeded the limit more than 35 times during 2007.

A third quote: "For some reason, the Thai Pollution Control Department has set the ’safe level’ to be anything less than a PM-10 of 120." The phrase "For some reason" certainly implies shady motives, even though the author is careful not to expressly say this. My Thai reading skills do not allow me to read the Pollution Control Department website to see if they explain the reasoning behind the standard. However, I can guess that the reasoning may be similar to that of the US Environmental Protection Agency ( http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html#3 ) when it set the US standard to 150, i.e. 25% higher than the Thai standard. Incidentally, this shows the author was wrong when he claimed that the US standard is 50.

To summarize: The quoted text gives a (in my opinion) false impression with his choice of headline. He also mixes an absolute standard (i.e. 120 in Thailand) that should never be exceeded (though in CM it has been exceeded three times so far this year) with a recommended level that should not be exceeded more than 35 times per year (the EU standard). He continues with a blatant lie about the US standard, which is not 50 but rather 150, i.e. higher than the Thai standard.

In my opinion this is not only an example of "simply alarmist" text, but also a particularly obnoxious piece of tendentious and misleading (and partly false) writing. I can not help but wonder what kind of vested interest lies behind it, since it does not give the impression of being written out of stupidity

So as not to be misunderstood: I definitely belong to the group that is concerned about the air quality in Chiang Mai, particularly that of March every year. I think that a lot more can and needs to be done, not just about "agricultural" burning but also about vehicle emissions. I just don't think that writing like the blog I've discussed here can help, but rather that it hurts the credibility of those that try to actually do something (besides of course hurting everybody involved in the tourism and related industries).

/ Priceless

Well done

[Mapguy]

In post #213 above, Mapguy refers to a blog entry with the following words: "The internet will of course bring you a variety of claims and observations, some well-founded (like one blog above that talks briefly about WHO standards) and some simply alarmist." I have taken the time to take a closer look at that piece of writing, i.e. the blog. I will discuss a few quotes from the (not very long) piece. I'd like to apologize in advance to anybody who might find this boring

First the title: "Air pollution levels in Chiang Mai rising". In a restricted sense this was true, since the text was published on 27 February, i.e. going into March which is the worst month of almost every year. In a wider sense, however, it is not true since it seems that the trend is towards a steady improvement of CM's air quality. Of the last 36 months, i.e. since 1 July 2005, six months have had a higher pollution level than the average for the corresponding months during 2000-2008, but 29 months have had a lower level than the average (one month is missing since I don't calculate an average if more than 25% of data is missing).

Another quote: "In London, the United States and the European Union as a whole it is considered a serious pollution 'episode' if the PM-10 level exceeds 50 - see the London Air Quality Network website." (BTW, London is the capital of UK, which is a member of the European Union ) A level of 50 may be a "serious episode" (I haven't found the actual quote) but the standard actually says that this should not be exceeded more than 35 times per year, with no limit as to how much it may be exceeded. It is also worth noting that no less than 17 measuring stations in London exceeded the limit more than 35 times during 2007.

A third quote: "For some reason, the Thai Pollution Control Department has set the 'safe level' to be anything less than a PM-10 of 120." The phrase "For some reason" certainly implies shady motives, even though the author is careful not to expressly say this. My Thai reading skills do not allow me to read the Pollution Control Department website to see if they explain the reasoning behind the standard. However, I can guess that the reasoning may be similar to that of the US Environmental Protection Agency ( http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html#3 ) when it set the US standard to 150, i.e. 25% higher than the Thai standard. Incidentally, this shows the author was wrong when he claimed that the US standard is 50.

To summarize: The quoted text gives a (in my opinion) false impression with his choice of headline. He also mixes an absolute standard (i.e. 120 in Thailand) that should never be exceeded (though in CM it has been exceeded three times so far this year) with a recommended level that should not be exceeded more than 35 times per year (the EU standard). He continues with a blatant lie about the US standard, which is not 50 but rather 150, i.e. higher than the Thai standard.

In my opinion this is not only an example of "simply alarmist" text, but also a particularly obnoxious piece of tendentious and misleading (and partly false) writing. I can not help but wonder what kind of vested interest lies behind it, since it does not give the impression of being written out of stupidity

So as not to be misunderstood: I definitely belong to the group that is concerned about the air quality in Chiang Mai, particularly that of March every year. I think that a lot more can and needs to be done, not just about "agricultural" burning but also about vehicle emissions. I just don't think that writing like the blog I've discussed here can help, but rather that it hurts the credibility of those that try to actually do something (besides of course hurting everybody involved in the tourism and related industries).

/ Priceless

My apologies, Priceless, for inadvertently getting you off on a toot with a quick parenthetical reference. I meant to say that the blog in question was "relatively well-founded;" that is, the guy actually did go searching among some decent sources as opposed to the total rant of the other tourist.

We seem to get bits and pieces of information on TV. Here are some very good references that give an overview, focus on standards, and introduce an organization that is active in Thailand and Asia.

Overall Introduction to the Topic:

An informal but well-sourced article:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulate

Particulate Matter (PM) Standards:

We only talk about particulate matter, so:

There are two general classes of particulate matter of wide concern: PM<10 and PM<2.5. PM<10 pollution is commonly reported. PM<2.5 are smaller particles and apparently much more dangerous to health but are not (as in Thailand) measured and reported in all countries. Find a very readable short description and data here:

www.euro.who.int/document/mediacentre/fs0405e.pdf

There are two common statistical standards used to measure the extent of PM pollution: "24-hour average" and "annual average." These statistics are both valid ways of analyzing data. The 24-hour "running average" is what you first see when you look at readings on the Pollution Control Department (PCD) web site:

http://www.pcd.go.th/AirQuality/Regional/Default.cfm

It is easy to graph several days' data for comparison on the PCD web site. If you graph the 24-hour data over a year, you can really see the seasonal peaks and valleys of pollution we have in Chiang Mai. The annual average masks these variations, but it is a useful standard for other purposes, such as comparing one place with another.

The most useful "one-time shot" graph on standards that I have found is attached. It is a slide from a PowerPoint presentation that is very revealing of the situation in Asia. In fact, statistics from Chiang Mai are shown from time to time in the full presentation (quite easy to follow). PowerPoint file attached.

Significant Organization Active in Asia

I have attached the annual report of Clean Air Initiative for Asian Cities Center (CAI Asia). Based in Manila, CAI-Asia gives a useful regional focus. They are located at www.cleanairnet.org/caiasia.

Interestingly, the next international workshop to be held by CAI-Asia will be 12 – 14 November in Bangkok. Details at www.baq2008.org

Air_Quality_Standards___1995_Thailand.pdf

2006_AQI_Standards_in_Asia.ppt

Annual_Report_2007_CAI_Asia.pdf

[realthaideal]

UG, Mapguy, nice conversation. Priceless, great stats as usual, always appreciated. I notice many many signs around town and in the various amphoe's saying to not burn; that's a good thing.

But now, as for me, this topic is like last year's Xmas tree - let's pack it up, mothball it, and not look again till next year.

[lannarebirth]

UG, Mapguy, nice conversation. Priceless, great stats as usual, always appreciated. I notice many many signs around town and in the various amphoe's saying to not burn; that's a good thing.

But now, as for me, this topic is like last year's Xmas tree - let's pack it up, mothball it, and not look again till next year.

Seconded. Show of hands everyone? Ok, the motion is carried.

So, you think it will flood this year?

[el jefe]

UG, Mapguy, nice conversation. Priceless, great stats as usual, always appreciated. I notice many many signs around town and in the various amphoe's saying to not burn; that's a good thing.

But now, as for me, this topic is like last year's Xmas tree - let's pack it up, mothball it, and not look again till next year.

Seconded. Show of hands everyone? Ok, the motion is carried.

So, you think it will flood this year?

From now on, no more posts about burgers and pizza either.

This is a serious discussion about an ongoing problem. There have been many useful suggestions made. Isn't it better to come up with a solution now rather than just comment "the pollution was so bad today that I couldn't see the mountain" in March?

realthaideal and lannarebirth, if you're bored with the subject no one is forcing you to click on this thread.

[lannarebirth]

UG, Mapguy, nice conversation. Priceless, great stats as usual, always appreciated. I notice many many signs around town and in the various amphoe's saying to not burn; that's a good thing.

But now, as for me, this topic is like last year's Xmas tree - let's pack it up, mothball it, and not look again till next year.

Seconded. Show of hands everyone? Ok, the motion is carried.

So, you think it will flood this year?

From now on, no more posts about burgers and pizza either.

This is a serious discussion about an ongoing problem. There have been many useful suggestions made. Isn't it better to come up with a solution now rather than just comment "the pollution was so bad today that I couldn't see the mountain" in March?

realthaideal and lannarebirth, if you're bored with the subject no one is forcing you to click on this thread.

I think many of those suggestions you're talking about were made by me. There probably aren't that many more to be made, but if there are I'd love to read them.

[Priceless]

My apologies, Priceless, for inadvertently getting you off on a toot with a quick parenthetical reference. I meant to say that the blog in question was "relatively well-founded;" that is, the guy actually did go searching among some decent sources as opposed to the total rant of the other tourist.

I'm sorry, Mapguy, but what you said was this: "The internet will of course bring you a variety of claims and observations, some well-founded (like one blog above that talks briefly about WHO standards) and some simply alarmist." I cannot avoid reading this as an endorsements of something that was, in reality, a mixture of half-truths and outright lies, obviously meant to deceive and mislead those who don't take the time to check on what the author says.

For those who may be interested enough to form their own opinions, please read the blog here: http://www.earthoria.com/air-pollution-lev...mai-rising.html

Then ask yourselves whether the blog gives the impression that:

A/ The Thai standard for air pollution (PM-10) is stricter than that of the USA.

B/ The air quality in Chiang Mai has significantly improved over the last few years (even though there is still a lot of room for improvement, particularly during March of each year).

C/ Chiang Mai does, measured by yearly average pollution, have among the best air qualities in Thailand.

Then consider whether the blog was "well-founded", as Mapguy has claimed.

/ Priceless

PS My apologies for posting again on this subject, I am getting almost as bored with it as lannarebirth and realthaideal are. I do however think that any real actions to eventually solve, or at least improve, the real situation have to be a continuous process rather than something that pops up in March of each year.

Edited July 21, 2008 by Priceless

[Mapguy]

Sorry, I made a mistake and did not append the graph on standards (as of 2006) that I meant to share. It is useful in avoiding misunderstandings.

The WHO "IT" standards are interim standards, which provide some slack, sometimes considerable slack.

The last time Thailand revised standards was, I believe, in 1995.

It is interesting that US EPA standards are still used as "benchmarks," even after an eight-year onslaught by the Bush administration to weaken the organization.

Edited July 22, 2008 by Mapguy

[Mapguy]

So, maybe Chiang Mai should bid for the Olympics!! Well, maybe not the Olympics, but think about the SE Asia Games or Asian Games. They didn't build the 700 Year Stadium for expats to play badminton or give driving lessons to girl friends. And wouldn't the couch potato jocks and tourist biz folks on TV love it!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7498198.stm

Now, before anyone gets hot and bothered about BBC's techniques for measuring PM<10 pollution in Beijing with a hand meter (which is laughable), they should remember that the Chinese have been truly disingenuous in how the official measurements have been taken. The source for that observation can be found in the article below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/world/as...china.html?pa...

[Mapguy]

So, maybe Chiang Mai should bid for the Olympics!! Well, maybe not the Olympics, but think about the SE Asia Games or Asian Games. They didn't build the 700 Year Stadium for expats to play badminton or give driving lessons to girl friends. And wouldn't the couch potato jocks and tourist biz folks on TV love it!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7498198.stm

Now, before anyone gets hot and bothered about BBC's techniques for measuring PM<10 pollution in Beijing with a hand meter (which is laughable), they should remember that the Chinese have been truly disingenuous in how the official measurements have been taken. The source for that observation can be found in the article below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/world/as...china.html?pa...

Carrying on with the Beijing story as it is relevant to Chiang Mai, I invite you to view the picture series on this page:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7506925.stm

Again, I am not enthusiastic about BBC's approach to air quality monitoring, but relevant to Chiang Mai, would anyone be willing to set up a tripod where a camera can take a datetime series of photos of Doi Suthep? The series then can be captioned with the PM<10 readings that are available. Indeed, I wonder if PCD might not provide their hourly spreadsheet rathering than captioning with a running 24-hour average. Each picture might not be worth a thousand words, but collectively over time they are revealing.

Today, in the late afternoon, you would have seen some truly blue skies over Chiang Mai, common for this time of year.

Edited July 30, 2008 by Mapguy

[mcgriffith]

[Mapguy]

Say what ??!! You mean your view is to the East?!

[Greenside]

Do we have a north east wind tonight? I swear I can smell fireworks...

[Mapguy]

So, maybe Chiang Mai should bid for the Olympics!! Well, maybe not the Olympics, but think about the SE Asia Games or Asian Games. They didn't build the 700 Year Stadium for expats to play badminton or give driving lessons to girl friends. And wouldn't the couch potato jocks and tourist biz folks on TV love it!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7498198.stm

Now, before anyone gets hot and bothered about BBC's techniques for measuring PM<10 pollution in Beijing with a hand meter (which is laughable), they should remember that the Chinese have been truly disingenuous in how the official measurements have been taken. The source for that observation can be found in the article below:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/world/as...china.html?pa...

Carrying on with the Beijing story as it is relevant to Chiang Mai, I invite you to view the picture series on this page:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_pictures/7506925.stm

Again, I am not enthusiastic about BBC's approach to air quality monitoring, but relevant to Chiang Mai, would anyone be willing to set up a tripod where a camera can take a datetime series of photos of Doi Suthep? The series then can be captioned with the PM<10 readings that are available. Indeed, I wonder if PCD might not provide their hourly spreadsheet rathering than captioning with a running 24-hour average. Each picture might not be worth a thousand words, but collectively over time they are revealing.

Today, in the late afternoon, you would have seen some truly blue skies over Chiang Mai, common for this time of year.

More blue skies today in Chiang Mai!

A brief, very readable and well-sourced report on urban air pollution was written by the World Resources Institute (www.wri.org) because of the intense interest in air quality at the Olympics. It does happen to feature Bangkok, interestingly enough. It is relevant to Chiang Mai because of the seasonal problems in particular that we suffer.

The air was clear for the Olympics due to the weather conditions and the astonishing draconian steps taken by Chinese authorities both locally in Beijing and regionally, something only an extraordinarily authoritarian country could even dream of doing. Too bad they'll have to let the automobiles loose, the factories back up and humming, and those coal-fired power plants back on line!

Unfortunately, I can not upload the report (distributed on 20-21 August) for technical reasons, but if interested, please ask the authors for a copy by writing to [email protected].

Edited August 25, 2008 by Mapguy

[cloudhopper]

Interesting article on pollution from coal burning in China affecting the US. Although these particulates can be washed into the ocean and attenuated on their way to the US, during the NE monsoon season here there is little rain and a much shorter distance to LOS. I often notice the faint but unmistakeable smell of burning coal when sitting in my hot tub evenings in the cold season.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/mcclatchy/20080831...clatchy/3031567

[richard10365]

Seeing as how we are not in the burning season, can the Mods close this thread until the burning in Thailand starts again. I hate long drawn out threads that move on and off a topic for months or even years at a time. I'm not saying this thread is not important and the opinions are not important, it's just I wouldn't want to miss some new and important information just because I don't want to read a 10 to 15 page thread. At present, with all the rain, air quality is not that bad.

[Mapguy]

Seeing as how we are not in the burning season, can the Mods close this thread until the burning in Thailand starts again. I hate long drawn out threads that move on and off a topic for months or even years at a time. I'm not saying this thread is not important and the opinions are not important, it's just I wouldn't want to miss some new and important information just because I don't want to read a 10 to 15 page thread. At present, with all the rain, air quality is not that bad.

I understand your point of view if indeed you are rereading all of the thread each time there is a new post. I think, however, it is when things are quite pleasant, as now, that people tend to forget about the seriousness of this public health and economic problem. As well, from time to time some very useful background information or news does in fact come to the fore. That's the sort of thing I try to draw people's attention to because, disappointingly, during the bad weeks, many TV posts are just grousing and speculation.

And it isn't just the seasonal burning of rice straw that is the problem. There are pollution concerns throughout the year that are increasing, not decreasing, in East, South and Southeast Asia in particular. It is most dramatic in urban areas. Chiang Mai is a small urban area, but it is growing with increasing air pollution of many kinds, not just particulate matter in the air (which is an unfortunate seasonal problem in Chiang Mai, Northern and Central Thailand). And the city has the bad geographical luck of being in a valley that traps the air.

So, I vote for ongoing, not seasonal, intelligent awareness with the hope that that will lead to individual and collective action to ameliorate if not solve the problem. If I come across appropriate information (e.g., some continuing public health research is underway), I'll share it. And I hope others will do the same.

Edited August 31, 2008 by Mapguy

[richard10365]

Seeing as how we are not in the burning season, can the Mods close this thread until the burning in Thailand starts again. I hate long drawn out threads that move on and off a topic for months or even years at a time. I'm not saying this thread is not important and the opinions are not important, it's just I wouldn't want to miss some new and important information just because I don't want to read a 10 to 15 page thread. At present, with all the rain, air quality is not that bad.

I understand your point of view if indeed you are rereading all of the thread each time there is a new post. I think, however, it is when things are quite pleasant, as now, that people tend to forget about the seriousness of this public health and economic problem. As well, from time to time some very useful background information or news does in fact come to the fore. That's the sort of thing I try to draw people's attention to because, disappointingly, during the bad weeks, many TV posts are just grousing and speculation.

And it isn't just the seasonal burning of rice straw that is the problem. There are pollution concerns throughout the year that are increasing, not decreasing, in East, South and Southeast Asia in particular. It is most dramatic in urban areas. Chiang Mai is a small urban area, but it is growing with increasing air pollution of many kinds, not just particulate matter in the air (which is an unfortunate seasonal problem in Chiang Mai, Northern and Central Thailand). And the city has the bad geographical luck of being in a valley that traps the air.

So, I vote for ongoing, not seasonal, intelligent awareness with the hope that that will lead to individual and collective action to ameliorate if not solve the problem. If I come across appropriate information (e.g., some continuing public health research is underway), I'll share it. And I hope others will do the same.

I appreciate your concern for the environment. I too think it's an important issue. However, like most threads on this website, there comes a time when they should be closed to make way for new information. Additional data could be found by searches if needs be.

What if there was only one thread on marriage visas? How much information would be lost by people deciding not to read long drawn out threads.

Since pollution and the environment is important, wouldnt it be better to post new information with the appropriate title to keep readers informed properly? I would prefer that than to spend so much time reading long threads.