No burning for 2 months

[KC 71]

[villagefarang]

Thought I might add a little local color.

[Manassas]

Last night there was a large area of fire on a mountain nearby easily visible. Authorities were aware but nobody knows what they will do about it. They considered sending the fire truck but concluded it couldn't get up the steep road.

I'm sympathetic to small farmers, but hope the government can reclaim and reforest the mountain lands some day. Maybe even get some wildlife back. Just my personal preference...

[wolfmuc]

Drove yesterdayfrom Phrae to ChiangMai and back today. No fires anywhere. OK, daytime. Grey skies as already mentioned, a little bit better between Lampang and Phrae. But real!y I think it,s thesmog com coming from china. I have absolutly no problems with chinese, but I think it is too short-thought making it ti to a problem of the IndiChines farmers..

sorry. mistakes. problem with tablet...

[KC 71]

[KC 71]

Todays air quality

[KC 71]

[KC 71]

[sup3r1or]

This app colours really get me. Looking at green colour I would think it is healthy but it shows it as moderate. Over a 100 here in Phayao today.

Sent from my SM-N920C using Tapatalk

[canuckamuck]

Two weeks, and no burning here so far. But also I have noticed that the strong presence of forestry officers has vanished for now. It will be interesting to see how the ban holds now.

Actually I am actually concerned that if they don't burn over the next 6 weeks, they are going to burn it all at the same time. What would that be like? We may not survive.

That's what I had to say on March 1st.

Now today is the first day after the burning ban and the air is the worst I have seen it in the last 5 years

So I was right that there would be a penalty to pay if they stopped the farmers burning. Because they are going to burn, but now they are going to do it all at once. Just when we had hopes of the burning season becoming a memory.

The irony is, that the farmers who behaved and did not burn, are the ones who are getting the worst smoke now, as the local burning is highly concentrated.

Man we could use some rain.

[chiang mai]

Look on the bright side, the "no burn" period was a success to a greater degree, that's a vast improvement over previous years - all we need to do is build on that, it's a start and a good one.

[pastafarian]

Look on the bright side, the "no burn" period was a success to a greater degree, that's a vast improvement over previous years - all we need to do is build on that, it's a start and a good one.

OK, so I'm no Sherlock Holmes but are you from Chiang Mai by any chance? If so then you may not realise that the 'ban' on burning made no difference at all to the smoke pollution here in Chiang Rai, it's been one of the worst years yet and with a subservient population and no deterrents whatsoever it will continue every year.

[chiang mai]

Look on the bright side, the "no burn" period was a success to a greater degree, that's a vast improvement over previous years - all we need to do is build on that, it's a start and a good one.

OK, so I'm no Sherlock Holmes but are you from Chiang Mai by any chance? If so then you may not realise that the 'ban' on burning made no difference at all to the smoke pollution here in Chiang Rai, it's been one of the worst years yet and with a subservient population and no deterrents whatsoever it will continue every year.

The fact that so many people started burning again as soon as the "no burn" period expired suggests that people did pay attention to the ban, in that respect it can be considered successful, albeit to a lesser degree. I know for a fact that in the are where I live North of Chiang Mai, people did pay attention to the ban. What is perhaps not clear to you is that the process of reducing burning is a series of small steps here and that will take much time, in that respect I'm pleased to see that people are paying attention to the ban.

[pastafarian]

Look on the bright side, the "no burn" period was a success to a greater degree, that's a vast improvement over previous years - all we need to do is build on that, it's a start and a good one.

OK, so I'm no Sherlock Holmes but are you from Chiang Mai by any chance? If so then you may not realise that the 'ban' on burning made no difference at all to the smoke pollution here in Chiang Rai, it's been one of the worst years yet and with a subservient population and no deterrents whatsoever it will continue every year.

The fact that so many people started burning again as soon as the "no burn" period expired suggests that people did pay attention to the ban, in that respect it can be considered successful, albeit to a lesser degree. I know for a fact that in the are where I live North of Chiang Mai, people did pay attention to the ban. What is perhaps not clear to you is that the process of reducing burning is a series of small steps here and that will take much time, in that respect I'm pleased to see that people are paying attention to the ban.

Over the last few weeks I've been in Mae Sai, Fang, Thaton, Phayao, Phrae and Mae Salong...I witnessed first hand burning in all of those places and have seen pics of lots of other fires both day and night. There was no 'ban' enforced and if anyone paid attention to it then they were in a tiny minority. The air has been horrendous here for weeks on a daily basis, there is no need to it to be done in small steps or for it to take much time as you suggest.

[chiang mai]

Look on the bright side, the "no burn" period was a success to a greater degree, that's a vast improvement over previous years - all we need to do is build on that, it's a start and a good one.

OK, so I'm no Sherlock Holmes but are you from Chiang Mai by any chance? If so then you may not realise that the 'ban' on burning made no difference at all to the smoke pollution here in Chiang Rai, it's been one of the worst years yet and with a subservient population and no deterrents whatsoever it will continue every year.

The fact that so many people started burning again as soon as the "no burn" period expired suggests that people did pay attention to the ban, in that respect it can be considered successful, albeit to a lesser degree. I know for a fact that in the are where I live North of Chiang Mai, people did pay attention to the ban. What is perhaps not clear to you is that the process of reducing burning is a series of small steps here and that will take much time, in that respect I'm pleased to see that people are paying attention to the ban.

Over the last few weeks I've been in Mae Sai, Fang, Thaton, Phayao, Phrae and Mae Salong...I witnessed first hand burning in all of those places and have seen pics of lots of other fires both day and night. There was no 'ban' enforced and if anyone paid attention to it then they were in a tiny minority. The air has been horrendous here for weeks on a daily basis, there is no need to it to be done in small steps or for it to take much time as you suggest.

So tell us all how you would, if it was your shot to call, quickly change the cultural practise of rural burning, without taking small steps.

[pastafarian]

Firstly, this has been a serious problem for years and keeps getting worse, not better, if 'small steps' were being taken that would not be the case. Nothing is being done at all to prevent or reduce the burning, nothing at all. This year's great idea, for show only of course, was a ban which supposedly started on Feb 17th but it wasn't enforced and therefore generally ignored. There are options to widespread burning, don't be so naive. Yes, it may be more labour intensive and expensive, especially in the steeper areas, but that is not a reason not to do it, the government and big companies like CP who are directly responsible need to subsidise it. I was in Chiang Mai 10 days ago, there was hardly any noticeable smoke but on the drive back it soon came, if you'd been subject to it daily like those in Chiang Rai and surrounding areas have been daily for weeks and weeks I doubt you'd have the same attitude.

Edited April 17, 2016 by pastafarian

[chiang mai]

Firstly, this has been a serious problem for years and keeps getting worse, not better, if 'small steps' were being taken that would not be the case. Nothing is being done at all to prevent or reduce the burning, nothing at all. This year's great idea, for show only of course, was a ban which supposedly started on Feb 17th but it wasn't enforced and therefore generally ignored. There are options to widespread burning, don't be so naive. Yes, it may be more labour intensive and expensive, especially in the steeper areas, but that is not a reason not to do it, the government and big companies like CP who are directly responsible need to subsidise it. I was in Chiang Mai 10 days ago, there was hardly any noticeable smoke but on the drive back it soon came, if you'd been subject to it daily like those in Chiang Rai and surrounding areas have been daily for weeks and weeks I doubt you'd have the same attitude.

I've been living with the pollution for twelve years and I've seen it change in terms of intensity some years, I also have fairly extensive experience of the pollution in Chiang Rai where I am a regular visitor.

But I asked you for your quick solution to the problem and you didn't give me one, all you did was to repeat the same line of it not needing to be small steps, that makes me think you don't understand the problem and/or don't have a viable solution - and believe me when I say that I have heard all the wannabe solutions theories after twelve years of listening to people day dream on this subject each year!

[pastafarian]

Firstly, this has been a serious problem for years and keeps getting worse, not better, if 'small steps' were being taken that would not be the case. Nothing is being done at all to prevent or reduce the burning, nothing at all. This year's great idea, for show only of course, was a ban which supposedly started on Feb 17th but it wasn't enforced and therefore generally ignored. There are options to widespread burning, don't be so naive. Yes, it may be more labour intensive and expensive, especially in the steeper areas, but that is not a reason not to do it, the government and big companies like CP who are directly responsible need to subsidise it. I was in Chiang Mai 10 days ago, there was hardly any noticeable smoke but on the drive back it soon came, if you'd been subject to it daily like those in Chiang Rai and surrounding areas have been daily for weeks and weeks I doubt you'd have the same attitude.

I've been living with the pollution for twelve years and I've seen it change in terms of intensity some years, I also have fairly extensive experience of the pollution in Chiang Rai where I am a regular visitor.

But I asked you for your quick solution to the problem and you didn't give me one, all you did was to repeat the same line of it not needing to be small steps, that makes me think you don't understand the problem and/or don't have a viable solution - and believe me when I say that I have heard all the wannabe solutions theories after twelve years of listening to people day dream on this subject each year!

Well as I'm not a farmer nor an agricultural expert I don't have a quick solution and there are others whose jobs it is to do so, hopefully they'll put their collective brains together and come up with something but in the last 10-15 yrs, since it has got considerably worse here, nobody has implemented anything other than burn. However, I'll do my best. One alternative is to plough the stubble back into the ground instead of burning it, this then acts as fertiliser. They do this in Issan where they have very little smoke pollution. You'd think slash-and-burn would be avoided as it accelerates the soil nutrient depletion but as it's so easy and cheap...

There are many more sustainable and efficient methods, many countries used to mainly slash-and-burn but don't any more, like I said they are likely to be more expensive, time consuming and labour intensive but that is where the government and multi-billion dollar companies like CP come in...they help to pay for it.

Go to any hospital in/around Chiang Rai and see how many asthma and bronchhitus cases there are and for one reason only. And then there are the long-term affects of breathing PM10 and, worse still, PM2.5 such as lung cancer. Thousands of sq kms covered in carcinogenic smoke every hour for days and weeks and there is nothing that can be done to reduce/prevent it, don't be ridiculous.

[chiang mai]

Firstly, this has been a serious problem for years and keeps getting worse, not better, if 'small steps' were being taken that would not be the case. Nothing is being done at all to prevent or reduce the burning, nothing at all. This year's great idea, for show only of course, was a ban which supposedly started on Feb 17th but it wasn't enforced and therefore generally ignored. There are options to widespread burning, don't be so naive. Yes, it may be more labour intensive and expensive, especially in the steeper areas, but that is not a reason not to do it, the government and big companies like CP who are directly responsible need to subsidise it. I was in Chiang Mai 10 days ago, there was hardly any noticeable smoke but on the drive back it soon came, if you'd been subject to it daily like those in Chiang Rai and surrounding areas have been daily for weeks and weeks I doubt you'd have the same attitude.

I've been living with the pollution for twelve years and I've seen it change in terms of intensity some years, I also have fairly extensive experience of the pollution in Chiang Rai where I am a regular visitor.

But I asked you for your quick solution to the problem and you didn't give me one, all you did was to repeat the same line of it not needing to be small steps, that makes me think you don't understand the problem and/or don't have a viable solution - and believe me when I say that I have heard all the wannabe solutions theories after twelve years of listening to people day dream on this subject each year!

Well as I'm not a farmer nor an agricultural expert I don't have a quick solution and there are others whose jobs it is to do so, hopefully they'll put their collective brains together and come up with something but in the last 10-15 yrs, since it has got considerably worse here, nobody has implemented anything other than burn. However, I'll do my best. One alternative is to plough the stubble back into the ground instead of burning it, this then acts as fertiliser. They do this in Issan where they have very little smoke pollution. You'd think slash-and-burn would be avoided as it accelerates the soil nutrient depletion but as it's so easy and cheap...

There are many more sustainable and efficient methods, many countries used to mainly slash-and-burn but don't any more, like I said they are likely to be more expensive, time consuming and labour intensive but that is where the government and multi-billion dollar companies like CP come in...they help to pay for it.

Go to any hospital in/around Chiang Rai and see how many asthma and bronchhitus cases there are and for one reason only. And then there are the long-term affects of breathing PM10 and, worse still, PM2.5 such as lung cancer. Thousands of sq kms covered in carcinogenic smoke every hour for days and weeks and there is nothing that can be done to reduce/prevent it, don't be ridiculous.

Ploughing under requires a plough and that costs money, many of the small freeholders don't make enough profit to be able to afford technology, even outdated crude technology. And many of the locations that need to be ploughed are in mountainous terrain, the sort of land that would be very hard indeed to access let alone use a plough. So tell me, what incentive does the small freeholder have to go out and spend a relatively large sum on technology that replaces something that is free, one that requires a fair amount of effort to use, and why should they replace a method that has been used successfully for generations.

I'm playing devils advocate with you on this because I don't think you've really though it through properly or understood the magnitude of the problem and any solution. Small steps, over time remains the only viable answer, unless you want to have another shot at it!.

[pastafarian]

Firstly, this has been a serious problem for years and keeps getting worse, not better, if 'small steps' were being taken that would not be the case. Nothing is being done at all to prevent or reduce the burning, nothing at all. This year's great idea, for show only of course, was a ban which supposedly started on Feb 17th but it wasn't enforced and therefore generally ignored. There are options to widespread burning, don't be so naive. Yes, it may be more labour intensive and expensive, especially in the steeper areas, but that is not a reason not to do it, the government and big companies like CP who are directly responsible need to subsidise it. I was in Chiang Mai 10 days ago, there was hardly any noticeable smoke but on the drive back it soon came, if you'd been subject to it daily like those in Chiang Rai and surrounding areas have been daily for weeks and weeks I doubt you'd have the same attitude.

I've been living with the pollution for twelve years and I've seen it change in terms of intensity some years, I also have fairly extensive experience of the pollution in Chiang Rai where I am a regular visitor.

But I asked you for your quick solution to the problem and you didn't give me one, all you did was to repeat the same line of it not needing to be small steps, that makes me think you don't understand the problem and/or don't have a viable solution - and believe me when I say that I have heard all the wannabe solutions theories after twelve years of listening to people day dream on this subject each year!

Well as I'm not a farmer nor an agricultural expert I don't have a quick solution and there are others whose jobs it is to do so, hopefully they'll put their collective brains together and come up with something but in the last 10-15 yrs, since it has got considerably worse here, nobody has implemented anything other than burn. However, I'll do my best. One alternative is to plough the stubble back into the ground instead of burning it, this then acts as fertiliser. They do this in Issan where they have very little smoke pollution. You'd think slash-and-burn would be avoided as it accelerates the soil nutrient depletion but as it's so easy and cheap...

There are many more sustainable and efficient methods, many countries used to mainly slash-and-burn but don't any more, like I said they are likely to be more expensive, time consuming and labour intensive but that is where the government and multi-billion dollar companies like CP come in...they help to pay for it.

Go to any hospital in/around Chiang Rai and see how many asthma and bronchhitus cases there are and for one reason only. And then there are the long-term affects of breathing PM10 and, worse still, PM2.5 such as lung cancer. Thousands of sq kms covered in carcinogenic smoke every hour for days and weeks and there is nothing that can be done to reduce/prevent it, don't be ridiculous.

Ploughing under requires a plough and that costs money, many of the small freeholders don't make enough profit to be able to afford technology, even outdated crude technology. And many of the locations that need to be ploughed are in mountainous terrain, the sort of land that would be very hard indeed to access let alone use a plough. So tell me, what incentive does the small freeholder have to go out and spend a relatively large sum on technology that replaces something that is free, one that requires a fair amount of effort to use, and why should they replace a method that has been used successfully for generations.

I'm playing devils advocate with you on this because I don't think you've really though it through properly or understood the magnitude of the problem and any solution. Small steps, over time remains the only viable answer, unless you want to have another shot at it!.

If you read my posts properly you'd have seen that I mentioned the increased cost and the fact that some burning is done on steep mountainsides, you'd have also seen my suggestion that both the government and the large agri-business folk like CP that are responsible for a lot of the increased burning contribute towards or pay for it. I knew sooner or later the old argument that they've been doing it for generations would come up. So what? Slash/Burn and burning off used to be done all over the world yet has now been replaced, surely being progressive is a good thing, shall we bring back bear-baiting and witch-burning while we're at it too?

More and more of the burning isn't done by the small freeholders you mention,it is the likes of CP etc that now grow corn on thousands of rai for both human and pet food, this smoke problem has really only got much worse over the past 10 years or so, if it were just a few farmers then it wouldn't be anywhere near as bad as it is now and pretty much every year. And let me play devil's advocate now, why should a few hundred (thousand?) farmers be able to have such a negative affect on millions of people's lives? Literally millions of people breathing carcinogenic smoke every hour of every day for months? Why is it ok for there to be thousands of people in hospital and taking medicine for asthma, bronchhitus and other respiratory illnesses, hundreds of hotel bookings cancelled and thousands of tourist's holidays ruined? Why can the flat land that is farmed not have a proper burning ban imposed and other methods used? There has been nothing done, not even one small step, to reduce/prevent the burning. There are no deterrents and nobody is ever held accountable or properly punished. That comes from speaking to Thai people in the know, not from my armchair, and apologists like yourself don't help when you just say 'let them get on with it'.

[chiang mai]

I've been living with the pollution for twelve years and I've seen it change in terms of intensity some years, I also have fairly extensive experience of the pollution in Chiang Rai where I am a regular visitor.

But I asked you for your quick solution to the problem and you didn't give me one, all you did was to repeat the same line of it not needing to be small steps, that makes me think you don't understand the problem and/or don't have a viable solution - and believe me when I say that I have heard all the wannabe solutions theories after twelve years of listening to people day dream on this subject each year!

Well as I'm not a farmer nor an agricultural expert I don't have a quick solution and there are others whose jobs it is to do so, hopefully they'll put their collective brains together and come up with something but in the last 10-15 yrs, since it has got considerably worse here, nobody has implemented anything other than burn. However, I'll do my best. One alternative is to plough the stubble back into the ground instead of burning it, this then acts as fertiliser. They do this in Issan where they have very little smoke pollution. You'd think slash-and-burn would be avoided as it accelerates the soil nutrient depletion but as it's so easy and cheap...

There are many more sustainable and efficient methods, many countries used to mainly slash-and-burn but don't any more, like I said they are likely to be more expensive, time consuming and labour intensive but that is where the government and multi-billion dollar companies like CP come in...they help to pay for it.

Go to any hospital in/around Chiang Rai and see how many asthma and bronchhitus cases there are and for one reason only. And then there are the long-term affects of breathing PM10 and, worse still, PM2.5 such as lung cancer. Thousands of sq kms covered in carcinogenic smoke every hour for days and weeks and there is nothing that can be done to reduce/prevent it, don't be ridiculous.

Ploughing under requires a plough and that costs money, many of the small freeholders don't make enough profit to be able to afford technology, even outdated crude technology. And many of the locations that need to be ploughed are in mountainous terrain, the sort of land that would be very hard indeed to access let alone use a plough. So tell me, what incentive does the small freeholder have to go out and spend a relatively large sum on technology that replaces something that is free, one that requires a fair amount of effort to use, and why should they replace a method that has been used successfully for generations.

I'm playing devils advocate with you on this because I don't think you've really though it through properly or understood the magnitude of the problem and any solution. Small steps, over time remains the only viable answer, unless you want to have another shot at it!.

If you read my posts properly you'd have seen that I mentioned the increased cost and the fact that some burning is done on steep mountainsides, you'd have also seen my suggestion that both the government and the large agri-business folk like CP that are responsible for a lot of the increased burning contribute towards or pay for it. I knew sooner or later the old argument that they've been doing it for generations would come up. So what? Slash/Burn and burning off used to be done all over the world yet has now been replaced, surely being progressive is a good thing, shall we bring back bear-baiting and witch-burning while we're at it too?

More and more of the burning isn't done by the small freeholders you mention,it is the likes of CP etc that now grow corn on thousands of rai for both human and pet food, this smoke problem has really only got much worse over the past 10 years or so, if it were just a few farmers then it wouldn't be anywhere near as bad as it is now and pretty much every year. And let me play devil's advocate now, why should a few hundred (thousand?) farmers be able to have such a negative affect on millions of people's lives? Literally millions of people breathing carcinogenic smoke every hour of every day for months? Why is it ok for there to be thousands of people in hospital and taking medicine for asthma, bronchhitus and other respiratory illnesses, hundreds of hotel bookings cancelled and thousands of tourist's holidays ruined? Why can the flat land that is farmed not have a proper burning ban imposed and other methods used? There has been nothing done, not even one small step, to reduce/prevent the burning. There are no deterrents and nobody is ever held accountable or properly punished. That comes from speaking to Thai people in the know, not from my armchair, and apologists like yourself don't help when you just say 'let them get on with it'.

I never suggested they should just get on with it and go stuff your apologist comment! What I did was challenge you to come up with a solution that was quick and didn't involve small steps towards cultural change, you didn't and presumably couldn't hence now perhaps you have a better appreciation for the problem. Out!

[luke000]

Now today is the first day after the burning ban and the air is the worst I have seen it in the last 5 years

So I was right that there would be a penalty to pay if they stopped the farmers burning. Because they are going to burn, but now they are going to do it all at once. J

Although that was quite obvious .

When the burn ban stops , whats going to happen ?

EErrmmmmm . Lots of fires and smoke

[canuckamuck]

Now today is the first day after the burning ban and the air is the worst I have seen it in the last 5 years

So I was right that there would be a penalty to pay if they stopped the farmers burning. Because they are going to burn, but now they are going to do it all at once. J

Although that was quite obvious .

When the burn ban stops , whats going to happen ?

EErrmmmmm . Lots of fires and smoke

It's not about whether or not it was obvious. The more important part of that is that the burning ban only lengthened the burning season, and for the areas that observed the ban, they get even worse smoke than ever before.

There should be no ban, if the government is not presenting an alternative. The farmers aren't just going to quit farming, and they obviously feel burning is necessary.

[canuckamuck]

Last night we had fires at all points of the compass and an orange sky from the fires diffusing through the haze.

Even worse was the location of those fires. High points of true jungle, places which before had been to far away or too high to farm. These are locations I would look at and say to myself, At least I can see real jungle from my house. I guess now I can just remember it.

The haze is substantial this morning. Visible between points as close as 4 meters.

This and the fact that we have no water because the aquifers are empty, also partially a result of slash and burn, has really made me question life in the hills. It was OK when we had abundant water and the air never got this bad.

How bad will it be next year?

[vivid]

Last night we had fires at all points of the compass and an orange sky from the fires diffusing through the haze.

Even worse was the location of those fires. High points of true jungle, places which before had been to far away or too high to farm. These are locations I would look at and say to myself, At least I can see real jungle from my house. I guess now I can just remember it.

The haze is substantial this morning. Visible between points as close as 4 meters.

This and the fact that we have no water because the aquifers are empty, also partially a result of slash and burn, has really made me question life in the hills. It was OK when we had abundant water and the air never got this bad.

How bad will it be next year?

Single digit visiblity is very very extreme. I don't think Chiang Rai is very humid even in the morning (water in the air makes the PM2.5 particles expand quite a bit, bringing the visibility down....you can have the same visibility of 1km on different days and the PM2.5 and PM10 readings could be very different). But heck, even with high humidity, 4 metres is extreme.

Edit - ok, Chiang Mai is not humid in the morning. But Chiang Rai is quite humid in the morning.

24-hr PM10 for 57t CR = 315 ug/m3.

57t hit a high point of PM10 416 ug/m3 last night.

Edited April 19, 2016 by vivid

[Randell]

After viewing that makes one grateful for visibility of 3/4 to 1 Kms which we have here in the waterford valley area.