Haze Spreading In Chiang Mai

[tyznd]

No reason to think that, but every reason to think that it was caused by, 1. my Diabetes 2. My irregular heartbeat 3. my heavy weight (now 50 kgs lighter) 4. My sedentary lifestyle

Ajarn,

Sorry to hear you have diabetes along with an irregular heartbeat, but it's good to see you've lost all that weight. But after reading you have these conditions I would think moving to a healthier climate, especially in your case, might be worth thinking about. There is a possibility the air pollution could have contributed to your stroke. This was on the American Heart Associations website:

"Until May of 2004, the American Heart Association had not issued any expert reviewed statement about the short-term and long-term effects of chronic exposure to different pollutants. This was due to flaws in research design and methodology of many pollution studies. During the last decade, however, epidemiological studies conducted worldwide have shown a consistent, increased risk for cardiovascular events, including heart and stroke deaths, in relation to short- and long-term exposure to present-day concentrations of pollution, especially particulate matter."

In any case, good luck.

[jdinasia]

I'll end by saying some of you may not have the wherewithal or common sense to do it, but my suggestion to move out of this area as soon as possible, is the best advice you will likely get.

has he moved yet?

[...Ken]

[

No reason to think that, but every reason to think that it was caused by, 1. my Diabetes 2. My irregular heartbeat 3. my heavy weight (now 50 kgs lighter) 4. My sedentary lifestyle

Not only am I a new member of this group, but also a new member of the Type 2 club.

By not eating 'anything from a cow' (fat) and eating to my meter (blood sugar) I dropped 3 lbs per week for 12 weeks to 185 lbs. I actually ate more food than usual and worked (excercised) no more/no less. From my experience, I am led to believe that the type of food you eat is more important than excercise for strictly weight loss goals. We (family) are returning for the 5th time to

attempt 'sustainability' in Thailand. I am concerned about long term health concerns, not only for myself, but my wife and young daughter. I have known too many 'expats' in the Chiengmai area who died off well before their mid/late 60's. As I am fairly familiar with Thai rural lifestyle I am quite aware of the quality of vegetables that leave the farms. Most farmers I know have separate crops one to eat and one to sell. Those vegetables that the Chiengmai wholesale buyers want get the extra dose(s) of pesticide, they are the ones the farmers won't eat. Anyone eating strawberries or watermelon in Thailand is a complete fool....but those two are the easiest to avoid. Garlic is nearly as bad.

In my opinion....wood smoke should be the least of your concerns.....much of the 'Thai food' commonly available is, albeit tasty, quite detrimental to already compromised health.

....Ken

[Ajarn]

No reason to think that, but every reason to think that it was caused by, 1. my Diabetes 2. My irregular heartbeat 3. my heavy weight (now 50 kgs lighter) 4. My sedentary lifestyle

Ajarn,

Sorry to hear you have diabetes along with an irregular heartbeat, but it's good to see you've lost all that weight. But after reading you have these conditions I would think moving to a healthier climate, especially in your case, might be worth thinking about. There is a possibility the air pollution could have contributed to your stroke. This was on the American Heart Associations website:

"Until May of 2004, the American Heart Association had not issued any expert reviewed statement about the short-term and long-term effects of chronic exposure to different pollutants. This was due to flaws in research design and methodology of many pollution studies. During the last decade, however, epidemiological studies conducted worldwide have shown a consistent, increased risk for cardiovascular events, including heart and stroke deaths, in relation to short- and long-term exposure to present-day concentrations of pollution, especially particulate matter."

In any case, good luck.

Thanks for your concern about my health... But, we live a life in a world of 'increased risks' for one thing, or another. Caution is good, but that's as far as it goes for me.

[Ajarn]

I am led to believe that the type of food you eat is more important than excercise for strictly weight loss goals.

Gotta disagree with you on that point....

I lost my 50+ kilos based mostly on a Mcdonalds/Pizza Hut/KFC/Dukes diet, interspersed with some fruits and vegetables.

I've come to realize that, for me anyway, it's not what I eat, but how I balance that with time, amount, and excericse. I can eat whatever I want as long as I balance it out And, being a non-perfect human being, I can mess things up occasionaly and still get away with it

[...Ken]

I am led to believe that the type of food you eat is more important than excercise for strictly weight loss goals.

Gotta disagree with you on that point....

I lost my 50+ kilos based mostly on a Mcdonalds/Pizza Hut/KFC/Dukes diet, interspersed with some fruits and vegetables.

I've come to realize that, for me anyway, it's not what I eat, but how I balance that with time, amount, and excericse. I can eat whatever I want as long as I balance it out And, being a non-perfect human being, I can mess things up occasionaly and still get away with it

Well......proofs in the puddin' ;-)

Anyone who drops 100 lbs. is doing something right.

Congratulations....Ken

[george]

Haze spreading

CHIANG MAI: -- The haze that has blanketed Chiang Mai over the past few days has spread to nearby provinces and is making it difficult for aircraft to fly safely in Mae Hong Son, an environmental official said yesterday.

"Air pollution [in Chiang Mai] is much worse this year than last year," said Apiwat Kunarak, director of Environment Office Region One.

"It has spread to Chiang Rai and Mae Hong Son and made Mae Hong Son's air crisis so severe that aircraft cannot operate effectively and safely."

The amount of dust in the air was almost twice the acceptable level yesterday morning, Apiwat said. Dust particles had risen to 210-215 micrograms per cubic metre, he said, adding that the acceptable level was 120 micrograms per cubic metre.

The combination of haze and a rising temperature is making living in the northern city quite uncomfortable, Apiwat said. Last year, an intensive campaign to prevent forest fires and outdoor burning succeeded in preventing the kind of air pollution seen this year, he said.

Apiwat said the failure to tackle outdoor burning of rubbish, brush and fields was a major cause of the haze.

The Environment Office has opened a 24-hour hotline at (053) 890 000 for people to report forest fires and outdoor burning.

--The Nation 2006-03-22

[KhunMarco]

Nothing to worry about.... ask Ajarn , just kidding Ajarn

At least now I 'm sure I'm not a lunatic paranoid. Last year it was not so bad.

[Ajarn]

The combination of haze and a rising temperature is making living in the northern city quite uncomfortable, Apiwat said. Last year, an intensive campaign to prevent forest fires and outdoor burning succeeded in preventing the kind of air pollution seen this year, he said.

What's this about, I wonder... First they say that the pollution is worse this year, then they tell us how successful their campaign to prevent forest fires and outdoor burning was "in preventing the kind of air pollution seen this year'

Nothing to worry about.... ask Ajarn , just kidding Ajarn

Please don't try to misrepresent me. It's simply that I don't get hysterical about the air pollution.

[mobile69]

The combination of haze and a rising temperature is making living in the northern city quite uncomfortable, Apiwat said. Last year, an intensive campaign to prevent forest fires and outdoor burning succeeded in preventing the kind of air pollution seen this year, he said.

What's this about, I wonder... First they say that the pollution is worse this year, then they tell us how successful their campaign to prevent forest fires and outdoor burning was "in preventing the kind of air pollution seen this year'

You don't expect a govt official to admit he'd failed? Burning continues as usual on the valley floor. Don't know about the hills, I can't see them.

[Ajarn]

The combination of haze and a rising temperature is making living in the northern city quite uncomfortable, Apiwat said. Last year, an intensive campaign to prevent forest fires and outdoor burning succeeded in preventing the kind of air pollution seen this year, he said.

What's this about, I wonder... First they say that the pollution is worse this year, then they tell us how successful their campaign to prevent forest fires and outdoor burning was "in preventing the kind of air pollution seen this year'

You don't expect a govt official to admit he'd failed? Burning continues as usual on the valley floor. Don't know about the hills, I can't see them.

That's the point. First they say they failed, then they say they didn't.

[jomama]

We may be making the mistake of taking an assertion at face value. The man said they prevented fires last year, and I don't think that's the case at all.

The smoke was as bad, or worse, last year. The Mae Hon Song airport was also closed for a time last year and we had these "burning" discussions last year. Remember the TV poster Tornado?

I was hoping this year might be better after the governmental and public discussions last year, but that is not the case. To say that they had any impact last year is complete BS.

And call a hotline? Are they really going to send someone racing over to the rice field and write somebody up? If I see another one, I'll call, and let ya'll know what happened.

[chanchao]

I also don't buy the suggestion that it's 'spreading' from Chiang Mai, i.e. Chiang mai being the source. It's an issue anywhere in the dry North and North East, particularly in valleys. All centers in the North are in valleys, including Pai, Mae Hong Son and to a slightly lesser extent Chiang Rai.

Cheers,

Chanchao

[sabaijai]

To add some perspective on the burning around Chiang Mai, there are other places in the north where the smoke is worse. I just returned from Pai and that valley is ringed by visible flames every night, all night. The smoke in the valley is so much thicker there than here this time of year, that it's always a relief to get back to Chiang Mai. My eyes never sting in CM, for example, but in these mountain valleys during March and April my eyes water constantly. Many other valleys have similar conditions this time of year, eg, it goes equally for Mae Chaen, for Muang Mae Song Hon itself, Chiang Kham and no doubt many other moutain valleys that are primarily agricultural. After staying in such valleys a few days, your eyes will sting and all your clothes will smell as if you slept next to a campfire for days.

I realise there are other things in the air in CM that may be detrimental to health, but my subjective impression is that CM is better off than some valleys of the north from the perspective of smoke density.

[sabaijai]

I also don't buy the suggestion that it's 'spreading' from Chiang Mai, i.e. Chiang mai being the source. It's an issue anywhere in the dry North and North East, particularly in valleys. All centers in the North are in valleys, including Pai, Mae Hong Son and to a slightly lesser extent Chiang Rai.

Cheers,

Chanchao

Exactly. They don't call Mae Hong Son the 'Land of Three Fogs' (saam mawk) for nothing, one of the fogs referred to is the smoke from burning, and that name goes back at least 40-50 years. Mae Chaem also bad, Khun Yuam, ditto, as there are zero limits on burning in those areas and the number of fires set on the outskirts of these mountain towns each night number in the hundreds.

Spreading from Chiang Mai? Not likely. If Chiang Rai isn't as bad (haven't been this season) it must because it's a flatter area, no?

That's not to say it might not be worse this year. As the population grows throughout the north, the number of fires will no doubt increase until the region becomes so urbanised that there aren't any farmers left and there are no fields or woodlands left to burn ... or until the gov't gets serious about enforcing regulations.

My neighbour, an elderly northern Thai woman, burns a big pile to leaves and rubbish outside her home almost every morning this time of year. When the wind hits a certain angle, the smoke blows directly into my office windows. My wife has called the police several times, and they've come and told her to stop burning each time. As soon as they leave she starts burning again. She's too poor to be paying bribes, and I've watched them talking to her, so can only assume they're letting her off with just a warning each time either because they feel sorry for her or because they don't care very much about the issue. Mutiply that one example by hundreds of thousands of people in the north who burn rubbish out of tradition and you can see it's a problem that's not going away anytime soon.

[sabaijai]

Before to complain about fires and fumes here, please remember that:

The USA is the world's biggest polluter

http://www.vexen.co.uk/USA/pollution.html#Pollution

Dixit GWB:

"We will not do anything that harms our economy, because first things first are the people who live in America"

And without to forget all the pollution generated by the wars USA is involved in.

I'll maybe be considered as a troll, but I don't care.

Just about any fully industrialised country produces more pollutants and greenhouse emissions, per capita, than Thailand and other developing countries. This production usually correlates with consumption, i.e., the higher-consuming countries are usually the greatest polluters, so the UK, Europe, Japan and Australia fall into the same category.

[jomama]

Just about any fully industrialised country produces more pollutants and greenhouse emissions, per capita, than Thailand and other developing countries. This production usually correlates with consumption, i.e., the higher-consuming countries are usually the greatest polluters, so the UK, Europe, Japan and Australia fall into the same category.

Actually, I've been wondering about this: do they calculate these emissions by the amount of gasoline consumed, the amount of coal used, the number of cars on the road? How do they arrive at these figures?

Anywhere in their widely-quoted stats is there a measurement for the number of rice fields burned or trash piles set alight? I guarantee you Chiang Mai is doing more than it's fair share of pumping gases into the air right now.

[sabaijai]

Just about any fully industrialised country produces more pollutants and greenhouse emissions, per capita, than Thailand and other developing countries. This production usually correlates with consumption, i.e., the higher-consuming countries are usually the greatest polluters, so the UK, Europe, Japan and Australia fall into the same category.

Actually, I've been wondering about this: do they calculate these emissions by the amount of gasoline consumed, the amount of coal used, the number of cars on the road? How do they arrive at these figures?

Anywhere in their widely-quoted stats is there a measurement for the number of rice fields burned or trash piles set alight?

Point taken. I've seen tables that rank countries by pollutants and greenhouse gas production but haven't read the small print to see what the data is based on. I assume you're right, that the numbersmost likely relate to measureable data on fossil fuel consumption, number of vehicles per capita, etc. If no one is measuring the burning here and in other places in the developing world than the figures may not be so meaningful, in which case no one can really demonstrate which countries are the worst polluters.

I guarantee you Chiang Mai is doing more than it's fair share of pumping gases into the air right now.

Yep and other valleys in the north even more so, if you talk about burning alone.

[sabaijai]

At the link below you can download an Excel sheet with per-capita energy-related carbon emissions around the world.

Thailand ranks relatively low with only 3.11 metric tons per capita as of 2003. By comparison China produces 2.72 tons per capita, Germany 10.21, Netherlands 16.07, Canada 19.05, Australia 19.10 and the USA 19.95.

The wealthier countries in the Middle East all rank higher than the US, Europe or Australia: Kuwait 23.17, Qatar 45.73, UAE 44.11.

The highest emissions by far, according to the table, are all islands: the Netherlands Antilles 49.97; Trinidad & Tobago 24.92, US Virgin Islands 121.46, and number one in the world, Gibralter 146.64! Curious.

The data measures only for petroleum, natural gas and coal ...

International emissions data

[jomama]

At the link below you can download an Excel sheet with per-capita energy-related carbon emissions around the world.

Thailand ranks relatively low with only 3.11 metric tons per capita as of 2003. By comparison China produces 2.72 tons per capita, Germany 10.21, Netherlands 16.07, Canada 19.05, Australia 19.10 and the USA 19.95.

The wealthier countries in the Middle East all rank higher than the US, Europe or Australia: Kuwait 23.17, Qatar 45.73, UAE 44.11.

The highest emissions by far, according to the table, are all islands: the Netherlands Antilles 49.97; Trinidad & Tobago 24.92, US Virgin Islands 121.46, and number one in the world, Gibralter 146.64! Curious.

The data measures only for petroleum, natural gas and coal ...

International emissions data

For example, China PER CAPITA may rank fairly low, China in ACTUAL POLLUTION would be extremely high indeed. While the millions of poor, non-car owning, non-air-con Chinese would dilute the country's per capita figures, the net pollution is enormous -- so much that high-altitude pollutants are travelling across the Pacific Ocean to California in easily measurable amounts. China also burns highly polluting high-suphur coal, as does Thailand.

The small countries you listed would probably have the opposite bias: low population, high per-capita car ownership and overall lifestyle. But I'll bet you could put all those countries together and equal about the true pollution Bangkok puts out every day.

A few years back forest fires burning in Indonesia turned day to night all the way to in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia -- you could see it from outer space. So how does that rank on the scale?

Another thing to note is that these "highly polluting" countries in the West are at least making an effort to mitigate the impact through smokestack scrubbers, emmison control on cars, etc. Where I come from in Colorado you can no longer burn wood in a fireplace because woodsmoke is so polluting, especially in winter with air inversions. And if you do it, you WILL be fined.

I also think dragging out the "West Pollutes More" boogieman everytime we try to discuss this annual problem in Chiang Mai really deflects the issue, and serves the -- perhaps intended -- result of letting the local polluters off the hook.

[tyznd]

I read through this whole topic and did some more research on my own. The conclusion I came to is this is a problem much worse than most think. Bad enough that I am making plans to move out.

The reasons are as follows:

1) This is not a new problem. It has been going on for years.

2) The problem is getting worse, not better.

3) It is unlikely anything will be done about it.

4) The longer you stay, the greater your risk.

Unfortunately, we cannot change history. If we could there would have been a warning system before the tsunami, everyone would have evacuated New Orleans before Katrina and Custer wouldn't have rode into the Little Bighorn.

At least this time, the warning signs are already up - we just have to heed them.

[jomama]

After of my woofing today I have to say that the air is much cleaner this Wednesday. Driving home on the eastern ring road I could make out Doi Suthep. I can see blue sky and clouds. Definitely better. Perhaps it is improving...

[meadish_sweetball]

At the link below you can download an Excel sheet with per-capita energy-related carbon emissions around the world.

Thailand ranks relatively low with only 3.11 metric tons per capita as of 2003. By comparison China produces 2.72 tons per capita, Germany 10.21, Netherlands 16.07, Canada 19.05, Australia 19.10 and the USA 19.95.

The wealthier countries in the Middle East all rank higher than the US, Europe or Australia: Kuwait 23.17, Qatar 45.73, UAE 44.11.

The highest emissions by far, according to the table, are all islands: the Netherlands Antilles 49.97; Trinidad & Tobago 24.92, US Virgin Islands 121.46, and number one in the world, Gibralter 146.64! Curious.

The data measures only for petroleum, natural gas and coal ...

International emissions data

For example, China PER CAPITA may rank fairly low, China in ACTUAL POLLUTION would be extremely high indeed. While the millions of poor, non-car owning, non-air-con Chinese would dilute the country's per capita figures, the net pollution is enormous -- so much that high-altitude pollutants are travelling across the Pacific Ocean to California in easily measurable amounts. China also burns highly polluting high-suphur coal, as does Thailand.

The small countries you listed would probably have the opposite bias: low population, high per-capita car ownership and overall lifestyle. But I'll bet you could put all those countries together and equal about the true pollution Bangkok puts out every day.

A few years back forest fires burning in Indonesia turned day to night all the way to in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia -- you could see it from outer space. So how does that rank on the scale?

Another thing to note is that these "highly polluting" countries in the West are at least making an effort to mitigate the impact through smokestack scrubbers, emmison control on cars, etc. Where I come from in Colorado you can no longer burn wood in a fireplace because woodsmoke is so polluting, especially in winter with air inversions. And if you do it, you WILL be fined.

I also think dragging out the "West Pollutes More" boogieman everytime we try to discuss this annual problem in Chiang Mai really deflects the issue, and serves the -- perhaps intended -- result of letting the local polluters off the hook.

There are several angles from which you can view the issue, and it does not hurt to do so, no matter where your starting point is.

It is easy for wealthy countries to pat each other on their back and tell developing nations how they should be running things, in the process conveniently choosing to forget or only mention passingly, the historical impact now-industrialized countries have had pollution-wise, during the long development towards industrialization.

Environmentalist thought did not make the agenda of most countries before the 1960s, and did not make a true impact anywhere until the 1980s. By that time, today's industrialized nations already had functioning (superior) economies, while other countries were striving to get ahead and not get run over or left behind... and a lot of the pollution in the third world is, in a fair few cases, due to companies with head offices in richer parts of the world taking advantage of the more lax control or enforcement of regulations.

In other words, I strongly believe we are all in this together - sweeping statements against locals without acknowledging the above will only make you look arrogant in the eyes of the people you critizise. Only when you do not try to make yourself look better than you actually are can you start discussing change with any authority.

The small countries you listed would probably have the opposite bias: low population, high per-capita car ownership and overall lifestyle. But I'll bet you could put all those countries together and equal about the true pollution Bangkok puts out every day.

Perhaps, although it is hard to say without actually studying the figures, but if we try ask ourselves why? Partly because of placing production in low-cost (developing) countries who take the bulk of the environmental burden. But who is REALLY to blame for the pollution?

The consumer who buys the product without asking questions - the factory owner who does not bother to install proper waste and effluent systems - the local politicians who turn a blind eye for a buck and choose to put jobs before environment and health - international organs for not enforcing effective world wide regulations - etc. ?

Gibraltar: http://www.chronicle.gi/Features/bucket%20...t%20brigade.htm

[Maejo Man]

After of my woofing today I have to say that the air is much cleaner this Wednesday. Driving home on the eastern ring road I could make out Doi Suthep. I can see blue sky and clouds. Definitely better. Perhaps it is improving...

You're right on there Jomama, for some inexplicable reason today was much clearer. I've just watched the sun set on the doi, and it's the clearest it's been in a long time. Almost a pleasure to watch again.

[Diablo Bob]

OK.....

Let me throw another issue into the fray!

I was in Iowa when the EPA banned burning of the corn fields. At the time, approximately 30% of the farms were already tilling the fields without burning. The reason the other 70% were resisting was the cost in equipment required to accomplish the work!

Consider this, these farmers had a certain amount of time from the melting of the snows to when they could actually enter the property with equipment. Using the standard disc of 18" required approximately a day/acre to till burned land and 3 days to till unburned land. Now some of these farms equated to a thousand acres or more, and would be using many tractors.

The growing season is actually quite short in Iowa, around 6 months. Every day wasted in the tilling of the soil equated to a reduction in the yield of the farm.

Now, the only solution was to upgrade to larger tractors which would be able to move through the unburned soil at the same rate as before. The cost? Well a John Deere tractor in 1995 was running a million +.

So you ask why are the farmers indifferent? Maybe they aren't, maybe they are cost conscience. The family farmer in the USA esentially died with the burning mandate by the EPA since the family farms didn't have the deep pockets of the corporate farms and just sold their assets away.

[Donnyboy]

I am led to believe that the type of food you eat is more important than excercise for strictly weight loss goals.

Gotta disagree with you on that point....

I lost my 50+ kilos based mostly on a Mcdonalds/Pizza Hut/KFC/Dukes diet, interspersed with some fruits and vegetables.

I've come to realize that, for me anyway, it's not what I eat, but how I balance that with time, amount, and excericse. I can eat whatever I want as long as I balance it out And, being a non-perfect human being, I can mess things up occasionaly and still get away with it

Well......proofs in the puddin' ;-)

Anyone who drops 100 lbs. is doing something right.

Congratulations....Ken

hope the burnt fat didnt add to the smog!

[ThaiPauly]

I was on my balcony yesterday and I just saw that my aircon unit was covered in dust. The dust was not there 3 or 4 days ago!

So I am assuming that any of us who have been outside for long periods of time during the last few days would have been subjected to all this dust as well!

It s a horrible thought!

[groo]

After of my woofing today I have to say that the air is much cleaner this Wednesday. Driving home on the eastern ring road I could make out Doi Suthep. I can see blue sky and clouds. Definitely better. Perhaps it is improving...

You're right on there Jomama, for some inexplicable reason today was much clearer. I've just watched the sun set on the doi, and it's the clearest it's been in a long time. Almost a pleasure to watch again.

Its back today though. Yesterday was nice with some nice breeze for the past two days.

thanks everyone for the wealth of information on pollution, numbers, ratios etc. maybe some rain would help.

[el jefe]

FYI -

I was at the top of Rte 1096, the Mae Sa Road today. There's a viewpoint 11 km before Samoeng. There's obviously no view at all this time of year, but I did stop and was able to count 23 separate fires burning.

[tyznd]

From my house off Hang Dong road near Tesco, I cannot even make out the mountains a short distance away today. I have gone from being very concerned to just being downright angry.

What should be a beautiful place to visit and live has been turned into one of the most polluted and unhealthy areas in the world. Even the fact that this is Thaksin's home town and officials have known about this serious problem a long time, nothing has been done about it. This is both insane and criminal.

Do some research on the internet and you will see just how much damage this filthy air is doing to your lungs and other vital organs. Remember, unlike other polluted cities in the world, all this crap in the air gets trapped and recirculated making it extremely dangerous. No one breathing it in is going to be immune to the health problems it can cause. It's just when and how the damage shows up and how life threatening it might be when it does.

And yes, like some others I am now making plans to move. I can buy another house, another car and a number of other things. The one and most important thing I can't buy is my health. Lose your health and you lose everything. Time to move on.