Smoke, Smog, Dust 2015 Chiang Mai

[T_Dog]

The last satellite map I saw of the fires were almost none in Burma - they were all to the East of Thailand.

I like to use NASA's Firms for its real time view:

https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/firemap/

The picture does look pretty good at present, both Myanmar and Thailand seem fairly subdued, I wonder why.

EDIT: Cambodia looks busy, I suspect that's affecting Pattaya?

It always seems to get bad after they start burning the forests for mushroom growth. Have seen very little burning in the hills on mountain bike rides, and that is probably as there is still a lot of moisture up there from the late season rains. Some of the creeks are still running quite high. A few more days or weeks of hot sun and the conditions should be prime for local burning and smoke which will drift downhill at night into the CM basin.

[masuk]

Chiang Mai Feb 10.

vis approx 2km from Kad Suan Keow to Ping River.

[Tywais]

Snapshot firemap for future comparative reference. Feb 10, 2015

[chiang mai]

This date:

https://firms.modaps.eosdis.nasa.gov/firemap/

[ememkay]

is this a good sign or is this the same as every year? http://www.chiangmai-mail.com/current/news.shtml "Air pollution levels remain stable in Chiang Mai as the government begins implementation of burning bans for the province starting February 15, 2015 and increased surveillance of pollution and hot spots for 60 days."

i was originally planning on going to Chiang Mai with a baby in mid march but am thinking if its to dangerous

[SundayAfternoon]

Can't see Doi Sutteph today. I'm guessing it's really the start of it for this year.

Ememkay, if you have other options I'd consider them. (Or get yourself an air filter and filter fabric over your a/c for baby). If second hand cigarette smoke is bad for kids... imagine what this is doing! You're fine again once the rains start... The air is so much better then.

[chiangmaiexpat]

is this a good sign or is this the same as every year? http://www.chiangmai-mail.com/current/news.shtml "Air pollution levels remain stable in Chiang Mai as the government begins implementation of burning bans for the province starting February 15, 2015 and increased surveillance of pollution and hot spots for 60 days."

i was originally planning on going to Chiang Mai with a baby in mid march but am thinking if its to dangerous

The headline is misleading as air quality is anything but stable. As of mid-February we are approaching daily averages of 100 µg/m3 PM10 in Chiang Mai. The haze is visible and you can smell it. How well the implementation of the burning ban is going to work this year remains to be seen. Personally, I don't have high expectations after having observed complete failure for almost a decade.

Don't come to Chiang Mai in mid March if you don't have to, because air pollution usually peaks around that time.

Cheers, CM-Expat

Edited February 16, 2015 by chiangmaiexpat

[ememkay]

is this a good sign or is this the same as every year? http://www.chiangmai-mail.com/current/news.shtml "Air pollution levels remain stable in Chiang Mai as the government begins implementation of burning bans for the province starting February 15, 2015 and increased surveillance of pollution and hot spots for 60 days."

i was originally planning on going to Chiang Mai with a baby in mid march but am thinking if its to dangerous

The headline is misleading as air quality is anything but stable. As of mid-February we are approaching daily averages of 100 µg/m3 PM10 in Chiang Mai. The haze is visible and you can smell it. How well the implementation of the burning ban is going to work this year remains to be seen. Personally, I don't have high expectations after having observed complete failure for almost a decade.

Don't come to Chiang Mai in mid March if you don't have to, because air pollution usually peaks around that time.

Cheers, CM-Expat

im landing in BKK and taking another flight to CNX, now i have to decide if i should take the loss and go somewhere else even though it doesnt seem like any place compares to chiang mai in things to do and see

[ememkay]

http://aqicn.org/city/chiang-mai/

for some reason this doesn't seem worse than the rest of the world except for the states (world map http://aqicn.org/nearest// )

which of the numbers really make a difference?

im currently visiting here http://aqicn.org/city/jerusalem/ and while the number is not to far off, its definitely clear and crisp air

Edited February 16, 2015 by ememkay

[SundayAfternoon]

We're telling you what we think, based on our experiences living here. That's not the same as trying to evaluate numbers (that are manipulated) on a screen... (I've heard that they hose the data equipment with water to reduce the number - true or not, who knows - but it wouldn't surprise me in the least!)

You won't know how bad it is until you experience it for yourself... So if you've booked the flight already, come, guage it, and be prepared to leave if you don't like what you find. The loss then will be outweighed by the 'knowing'...

Alternatively just Google it. There will be, I'm sure, loads of posts describing it in throat scorching, lung-searing, eye smarting detail. It really is unpleasant, and if I had the opportunity to be somewhere else at this time of year, I'd be there. I'd have been in the plane yesterday when I could no longer see Doi Setteph mountain!

[T_Dog]

http://aqicn.org/city/chiang-mai/

for some reason this doesn't seem worse than the rest of the world except for the states (world map http://aqicn.org/nearest// )

which of the numbers really make a difference?

im currently visiting here http://aqicn.org/city/jerusalem/ and while the number is not to far off, its definitely clear and crisp air

It is not very bad yet in Chiang Mai as the visibility is still over 8 kilometers. Most years, it gets so bad that visibility is reduced to 300-500 meters for several days. I went through old photos and the visibility is usually fairly good until the third week in February when it seems they start burning the forests in earnest. By the time March hits, visibilities are much less than what we have today. There seems to be pretty fair correlation between visibility and the PM-10 particulates which are unhealthy. I normally stop cycling when the PM-10 levels get around a 100 uG/cubic meter but we have not hit that yet this year. You can almost always count on the first two weeks of March being quite bad.

[Tywais]

Here is a very good research publication that goes in to great detail of the contributing factors for the smoke season and the primary locations. For those who doubt the contributions from neighboring countries, the details are pretty clear in the document. It is a 67 page paper but you can scan key indicators easily in it. It has pictures too.

Problems and Obstacles in Solving Smog Haze Problem in Chiang Mai Province,Thailand (pdf) - session2.pdf

Also, here is a link for plugins for Chrome/FF and for iOS/Android/Windows apps for Air Quality Index monitoring Chiang Mai - http://aqicn.org/city/thailand/chiangmai/city-hall/

And a link to several Modis Firemaps data including .kml (Google earth), Web Fire Mapper, and Global Fire Maps. https://earthdata.nasa.gov/data/near-real-time-data/firms

Edited February 21, 2015 by Tywais
Reduced pdf for only the pertinent part of the paper

[connda]

This year has been a whole lot better than the same time last year. Went up to Mae Ngam dam today and had lunch with some friends. Slightly hazy but not too bad; could see one fire to the Southeast but that was it. Last year at this time you'd be lucky to have 5km visibility.

[T_Dog]

Here is good research paper another TV poster provided last year that should be on the reading list as well. The effects of burning start on about page 299.

Mountain biking on the forest trails around Chiang Mai, there is an obvious lack of humus mass on the forest floor as everything gets burned off year after year. You have to get to rather remote areas before you start to see the natural soil conditions of a tropical forest.

Chiang Mai Forest Health.pdf

[Awk]

Here is a very good research publication that goes in to great detail of the contributing factors for the smoke season and the primary locations. For those who doubt the contributions from neighboring countries, the details are pretty clear in the document. It is a 67 page paper but you can scan key indicators easily in it. It has pictures too.

Problems and Obstacles in Solving Smog Haze Problem in Chiang Mai Province,Thailand (pdf)

Tywais, with all due respect, exactly what details are clear regarding the contribution from neighbouring countries?

The PDF consists of several papers, of which only the first seems to be related to the smog, so please correct me if I am wrong.

At 11 pages, it is a quick read, but I do not see anything quotable in those pages regarding the contribution from neighbouring countries. There is nothing that quantifies what part of the problem experienced in Chiang Mai is caused by neighbouring countries, except some useless references to firemaps showing that there are fires not only in Chiang Mai, but also far away. So what? How much of the pollution from those far away fires reaches Chiang Mai?

If, before you read that paper, you had no idea whether one percent or 90 percent of the smog we will now experience in Chiang Mai is pollution blown in from neighbouring countries, you will, as far as I can understand, after having read that paper still have no idea. I still have no idea.

I would not say it is a very poor paper, but it is obviously some sort of student paper, perhaps an assignment part of an early or mid-level university course related to agriculture. Unlike some of the posters here, who in a retarded way blame the farmers for only caring about themselves, the paper does however show an understanding for that it is not simply up to the farmers to stop burning. The government must first provide them with an adequate alternative to burning.

[chiangmaiexpat]

Here is a very good research publication that goes in to great detail of the contributing factors for the smoke season and the primary locations. For those who doubt the contributions from neighboring countries, the details are pretty clear in the document. It is a 67 page paper but you can scan key indicators easily in it. It has pictures too.

I don't know, Tywais... why anyone would call this a "very good research publication"?

Only the first 10 pages pertain to the smog issue and this is a student's homework paper at best. It contains some (poorly visualised) numbers about historical particulate matter measurements, occurrences of lung cancer and other respiratory diseases, some numbers about national park acreage, forest cover, and farming. All of this information can be googled and compiled in less than a day and much of it has been presented here. On page 6, the author states ignorantly that "there is no other measure to get rid of corn cobs that is easier and cheaper than burning." Well, burn my ass. There is a whole array of uses for corn cobs, starting from corn meal production, cattle feed, to composting it or simply ploughing it under. One only has to look to what other countries are doing with their corn cobs. Alas, I forgot that this is something that Thai people don't do. In the conclusion of this very good research publication, it is mentioned verbatim that "even though the smog crisis was awared in both local and national level, this problem seem to be uncontrollable and unavoidable due to many internal and external factors."

There we have it! Nothing can be done.

How more apologetic can it get? Basically, this paper is best used for toilet applications.

Cheers, CM-Expat

[blueyeshk]

Don't use the air4thai app or trust any government readings it seems due to the happy Thailand promotion this years air quality readings are a bit inaccurate or how else could one explain the total mismatch while mountains disappear

[chiang mai]

Don't use the air4thai app or trust any government readings it seems due to the happy Thailand promotion this years air quality readings are a bit inaccurate or how else could one explain the total mismatch while mountains disappear ImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect1424580472.167297.jpgImageUploadedByThaivisa Connect1424580513.804259.jpg

The fact that Doi Suthep can't be seen clearly is not necessarily conclusive evidence of heavy pollution, the refractory effect of the inversion layer is another possible cause - given that the pollution readings are what they are suggests that the inversion layer is also a more probable cause. If in doubt on this point, what do your senses tell you, is there a heavy smell of smoke in the air and are your eyes burning/watering, mine certainly are not. And finally, look at the firemaps, the number of fires seen from the NASA satellites are very few by comparison to previous years although I'm unsure why this is.

[naboo]

Driving into Chiang Mai from the south yesterday evening, there was a clear change from blue to brown in the colour of the sky around Saraphi. I've always thought it was the forest burning, but the smog created by the heavy Chiang Mai traffix may have more of an impact this time of year than I thought.

[connda]

I'm still going with, (based on my eyes and lungs) that it is a a lot better than last year. I heard that the government put a bounty on chatching the type of firestarters the driver down the road and set anything flammable of fire, so that mushrooms will be great the next year. Truthfully I have not seen alot of side-of-the-road fires going on. BUT...it isn't March yet either. One can only hope and pray.

[blueyeshk]

The doctor recommends pay a visit to the next eye department -you must be blind

[blueyeshk]

It's about time to get the measure instruments out of the aircon offices to get a reliable reading.

Edited February 22, 2015 by blueyeshk

[chiang mai]

It's about time to get educated on the subject!

[blueyeshk]

Ola la @ Chiang Mai - sounds like you are involved into the readings.

[Awk]

I looked at the http://aqmthai.com/public_report.php site now, and noticed it now includes a pm2.5 option also for station 36. Have not seen that before and think this is is nice, as everyone seems to agree pm2.5 is more important and harmful than pm10. Looking at the pm2.5 availability, it looks like pm2.5 was added about a month ago to this station, while station 35 does not have it (yet?).

[Awk]

I btw also input the pm10 number for today (average) from http://aqmthai.com/public_report.php into http://www.airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=resources.conc_aqi_calc, for converting to the AQI number the mobilephone app uses, which naturally matches the phone app and results in a "moderate" verdict for the air quality.

Using the pm2.5 number instead, which the phone app does not seem to have yet (I will see if I can find out where to send an email, so hopefully they will update the app), the verdict from www.airnow.gov changes to a very bad "unhealthy" unfortunately, with an AQI number of 158.

Edited February 22, 2015 by Awk

[chiang mai]

Unless PM 2.5 is actually measured its value is assumed, the technology to measure PM 2.5 is not cheap - perhaps they are in the process of upgrading their equipment.

[Awk]

Unless PM 2.5 is actually measured its value is assumed, the technology to measure PM 2.5 is not cheap - perhaps they are in the process of upgrading their equipment.

I can only guess, but I doubt the value is extrapolated (from e.g. the PM10 value). If it was, it would not make sense to do it only for monitoring station 36, and not station 35, and all other stations.

No, I don't think it makes any sense to think the pm2.5 value is "assumed", while the other values are measured.

[chiang mai]

Unless PM 2.5 is actually measured its value is assumed, the technology to measure PM 2.5 is not cheap - perhaps they are in the process of upgrading their equipment.

I can only guess, but I doubt the value is extrapolated (from e.g. the PM10 value). If it was, it would not make sense to do it only for monitoring station 36, and not station 35, and all other stations.

No, I don't think it makes any sense to think the pm2.5 value is "assumed", while the other values are measured.

As I recall from debates on this subject over many years, it was always said that Thailand did not have technology in place to measure PM 2.5, in fact, up until about three years ago not many countries did, even Canada had only installed this capability in very recent years. Accepted practice for PM 2.5 measurement, prior to the introduction of the newer technology, was to derive a reading from the PM10 element although I have no idea exactly how this was accomplished and whether it was extrapolated or assumed - either way, the reading is not/was not actual.

[Awk]

Unless PM 2.5 is actually measured its value is assumed, the technology to measure PM 2.5 is not cheap - perhaps they are in the process of upgrading their equipment.

I can only guess, but I doubt the value is extrapolated (from e.g. the PM10 value). If it was, it would not make sense to do it only for monitoring station 36, and not station 35, and all other stations.

No, I don't think it makes any sense to think the pm2.5 value is "assumed", while the other values are measured.

As I recall from debates on this subject over many years, it was always said that Thailand did not have technology in place to measure PM 2.5, in fact, up until about three years ago not many countries did, even Canada had only installed this capability in very recent years. Accepted practice for PM 2.5 measurement, prior to the introduction of the newer technology, was to derive a reading from the PM10 element although I have no idea exactly how this was accomplished and whether it was extrapolated or assumed - either way, the reading is not/was not actual.

According to a wikileaks article, Chiang Mai has had the ability to measure pm2.5 for many years: https://www.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09CHIANGMAI38_a.html