Chiang Mai Air Quality

[typ123]

How can the AQI reports from the government show 79 when I cannot even see the sun outside? Am I missing something? 79 for today seems very low. I know someone who works at a school in Samoeng and said the school tests the AQI there. They reported it to be at 813 PM10 last week. However, there is some intense burning happening in the Samoeng area. It just has me wondering though. How are these results reported and how accurate are they? 79 AQI seems like it would be quite normal.

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

Edited March 30, 2016 by typ123

[MadMac]

PM2.5 AQI is 155 today. That's what David wrote in FB earlier today (Farang Community Chiang Mai).

[canthai55]

Cloudy today - not just haze/smoke

And 78 as of noon

Edited March 30, 2016 by canthai55

[WinnieTheKhwai]

PM2.5 AQI is 155 today. That's what David wrote in FB earlier today (Farang Community Chiang Mai).

Yes.

The Aqicn site doesn't use the PM2.5 data, only PM10. There are not too many measuring stations in Thailand that include PM2.5 data, but the one in the old town does.

If Aqicn would use it then Chiang Mai would suddenly look much worse than everywhere else in the North, and that would confuse all the ladies who blog about such things.

Current levels are 'unhealthy', but compared to the average over the years it's better than usual this year.

BTW there is a pinned topic running on this.

Edited March 30, 2016 by WinnieTheKhwai

[Lizard2010]

So can someone explain the difference between the The Aqicn PM2.5 data, And PM10.

Is a multiplication factor of 4 to get the 2.5

Or is it something different??

[jobin]

Fine particles (PM_2.5) are 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller, and can only be seen with an electron microscope. Fine particles are produced from all types of combustion, including motor vehicles, power plants, residential wood burning, forest fires, agricultural burning, and some industrial processes.Oct 22, 2015 from Wikipedia.

Coarse dust particles (PM10) are 2.5 to 10 micrometers in diameter. Sources include crushing or grinding operations and dust stirred up by ...

So, pm 2.5 are not just smaller but far more deadly coz are much more likely to penetrate lung tissues.

[FolkGuitar]

I've been tracking PPM10 for the past three years. If the site is accurate, then this year HAS been better than the last two.

I remember that several days last year I couldn't even see Kad Suan Kaew from my window a few blocks away. There has only been one day this year so far that I couldn't make out Doi Suthep. While it's been well smogged in, I could make out its outline every day. Last year there were entire weeks that I couldn't see it at all.

I won't speculate as to the reason 'why' it's better this year, but I'm a lot happier for it!

The actual numbers were higher last week than a year ago, but that was because we had several days of rainy weather last year at the same time which cleared up the pollution. I've only felt the need to wear an N95 mask one day this year.

[Mapguy]

Ok, Dante, which ring of hell do we occupy ?!

Edited March 30, 2016 by Mapguy

[Dante99]

Not all of us are in hell with you Mapguy.

[Mapguy]

Fine particles (PM_2.5) are 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller, and can only be seen with an electron microscope. Fine particles are produced from all types of combustion, including motor vehicles, power plants, residential wood burning, forest fires, agricultural burning, and some industrial processes.Oct 22, 2015 from Wikipedia.

Coarse dust particles (PM10) are 2.5 to 10 micrometers in diameter. Sources include crushing or grinding operations and dust stirred up by ...

So, pm 2.5 are not just smaller but far more deadly coz are much more likely to penetrate lung tissues.

Not just more likely: DO penetrate lung tissue. Not just penetrate lung issue; enter the blood stream!

From there on out is gets technical. There are issues regarding short and long-term exposure and risk, so on and so on. There is a lot of information, including research available, on the Internet.

The decisions regarding risk to health as reflected in the "danger charts" indicating what's "healthy" and various degrees of "unhealthy" are also dictated not just be heath factors and degree of risk but by other factors, such as the capacity of a country to deal realistically with mitigation. "Rich" countries have more stringent standards than less-developed economies and have greater national economic capacities to deal with pollution. In some instances, particularly huge China and India, the quest for economic growth out of poverty and the reliance on heavily-polluting generation of energy (coal!) is a huge challenge. Indonesia, with its massive pollution, is another example. (Sometimes people don't realize that Indonesia is so populous)

Ironically, of course, looking at the general social and physical environmental capacity situation, it is the richer consumerist countries (e.g., Western economies) that are extraordinarily more wasteful.

Well, there's a huge amount of stuff on line about all this. Read on!

[Chicog]

Fine particles (PM_2.5) are 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller, and can only be seen with an electron microscope. Fine particles are produced from all types of combustion, including motor vehicles, power plants, residential wood burning, forest fires, agricultural burning, and some industrial processes.Oct 22, 2015 from Wikipedia.

Coarse dust particles (PM10) are 2.5 to 10 micrometers in diameter. Sources include crushing or grinding operations and dust stirred up by ...

So, pm 2.5 are not just smaller but far more deadly coz are much more likely to penetrate lung tissues.

Which probably explains why Chiang Mai has one of the highest lung cancer rates per capita in the world.

I still love this editorial that should be explained to every dumb arsonist in Thailand while they are being beaten with a baseball bat.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Risk-of-a-calamity-if-North-haze-not-tackled-urgen-30258695.html

[Mapguy]

Not all of us are in hell with you Mapguy.

Damned, indeed! Missed out on extreme unction!!

[CNXBKKMAN]

I've been tracking PPM10 for the past three years. If the site is accurate, then this year HAS been better than the last two.

I remember that several days last year I couldn't even see Kad Suan Kaew from my window a few blocks away. There has only been one day this year so far that I couldn't make out Doi Suthep. While it's been well smogged in, I could make out its outline every day. Last year there were entire weeks that I couldn't see it at all.

I won't speculate as to the reason 'why' it's better this year, but I'm a lot happier for it!

The actual numbers were higher last week than a year ago, but that was because we had several days of rainy weather last year at the same time which cleared up the pollution. I've only felt the need to wear an N95 mask one day this year.

I would agree with you and Winnie this year hasn't been as bad as the last couple of years. What is weird imo is there are normally a couple of thunderstorm/heavy rains for 20 to 30 mins occurring between mid march and the end of the month. So far this hasn't happened although Lamphun got one last week. I can't remember any March that i have been here that didn't have these heavy rains.

[Trujillo]

Why split the thread?

http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/879040-smoke-smog-dust-2016-chiang-mai/page-14

[Mapguy]

Fine particles (PM_2.5) are 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller, and can only be seen with an electron microscope. Fine particles are produced from all types of combustion, including motor vehicles, power plants, residential wood burning, forest fires, agricultural burning, and some industrial processes.Oct 22, 2015 from Wikipedia.

Coarse dust particles (PM10) are 2.5 to 10 micrometers in diameter. Sources include crushing or grinding operations and dust stirred up by ...

So, pm 2.5 are not just smaller but far more deadly coz are much more likely to penetrate lung tissues.

Which probably explains why Chiang Mai has one of the highest lung cancer rates per capita in the world.

I still love this editorial that should be explained to every dumb arsonist in Thailand while they are being beaten with a baseball bat.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Risk-of-a-calamity-if-North-haze-not-tackled-urgen-30258695.html

Wow! That's a real ball-buster of an editorial! Occasionally somewhat of a rant, but some obvious effort. There is another calculus, however, when dealing with policy on this issue, that is really not touched upon. I am NOT talking about neglecting the problem There's a kind of cost-benefit analysis that legitimately must be done, and that involves balancing socio-economic with health issues. One has to consider the broader situation. Economically and socially viable alternatives to burning have to be considered. Both have life-or-death consequences of various kinds--- and obvious political consequences. And I --- no fan of CP --- am not talking about some sort of political or economic corruption.

[FolkGuitar]

I find it interesting that just when the PPM10 numbers start to go down, and folks have less to complain about,

that suddenly people start quoting the PPM2.5 figures, and it gives them the shot in the arm needed to continue to bitch.

I wonder if anyone has the figures for PPM2.5 from two years ago to compare with this year's data.

Just guessing here but I'd think that if the PPM10 numbers have been going down, that the PPM2.5 figures would be going down as well. But with nothing to compare them with, it's easy to get up in arms about high numbers. This is NOT to say that the high PPM2.5 is anything to ignore. Just that 'perhaps' this is making significant improvement too.

[Mapguy]

Folk Guitar, that's an interesting interpretation!

PM<2.5 pollution is, as you know, simply a measure of part of PM<10 pollution. Many moons ago, in the continuing discussion of air pollution, it was posted (including general international research and a study here in Northern Thailand) that PM<2.5 is generally 40 - 60% of the larger particle density. The Northern Thai study (of burning rice straw) indictated a higher proportion. With apologies for being vague, I recall that I have run across some reports that burning corn waste is worse. I haven't followed up on that. One reasonable surmise to test might be that although PM<10 figures might be going down (debatable in the short run), the proportion of PM<2.5 particles has increased --- and might even be increasing!

PM<2.5 is the really nasty stuff! So, maybe there is something valid to gripe about --- especially since people have become more and more aware that the smaller particles are the really deadly ones. On the other hand, of course, a huge number of people who post here gripe as a hobby!

[WinnieTheKhwai]

I find it interesting that just when the PPM10 numbers start to go down, and folks have less to complain about,

that suddenly people start quoting the PPM2.5 figures, and it gives them the shot in the arm needed to continue to bitch.

I wonder if anyone has the figures for PPM2.5 from two years ago to compare with this year's data.

Just guessing here but I'd think that if the PPM10 numbers have been going down, that the PPM2.5 figures would be going down as well.

Yes I do have the PM2.5 numbers for a couple years back for downtown Chiang Mai.

PM2.5 numbers follow the PM10 trend very closely.

The PM2.5 level is about two-thirds of the PM10 level. Looking only at PM10 paints too rosy a picture.

However, that also means that PM10 works just fine for tracking if a year has been better or worse than average, and developments over time.

[FolkGuitar]

That's what I thought. Makes sense when you think about it. PPM2.5 has ALWAYS been present. It just wasn't discussed.

So we're not getting dosed with something new and different, we're just 'looking' at different sized stuff that has always been present.

And... as Winnie has told us, the PPM2.5 is going down as well. That's good to hear.

Now the question remains, 'why' are the numbers going down? Does it have anything to do with Thailand's efforts to reduce the pollution? Is it that the farmers don't 'need' to burn so much this year? Or is it just a happy coincidence?

I guess it's going to take a few years of tracking to really see what is going on. I wonder if it continues to get better and better each year, will people no longer leave for southern beaches for the month? Is it possible that the better air will actually have a negative impact on tourism?

[WinnieTheKhwai]

And... as Winnie has told us, the PPM2.5 is going down as well. That's good to hear.

Now the question remains, 'why' are the numbers going down? Does it have anything to do with Thailand's efforts to reduce the pollution? Is it that the farmers don't 'need' to burn so much this year? Or is it just a happy coincidence?

Yes that's the million dollar question. It varies enough year on year that you can't really draw any conclusions based on just one year.

That said, the weather this year doesn't' seem to have been especially favorable though (no major storm periods), yet numbers are down. So it'd be interesting to see if the policy of moving burning forward and allowing burning in different areas at different times has a positive effect.

The one thing that remains a total crap shoot though is the illegal burning of forest undergrowth. I don't think that's been any less this year. That just requires a law enforcement approach.

[Dante99]

In a village North of Mae Joe the word is that burning can result in a 5,000 Baht fine. That seems to have been an effective deterrent around there and the rule was thought to be for most/all of CM.

Edited March 30, 2016 by Dante99

[Lizard2010]

I find it interesting that just when the PPM10 numbers start to go down, and folks have less to complain about,

that suddenly people start quoting the PPM2.5 figures, and it gives them the shot in the arm needed to continue to bitch.

I wonder if anyone has the figures for PPM2.5 from two years ago to compare with this year's data.

Just guessing here but I'd think that if the PPM10 numbers have been going down, that the PPM2.5 figures would be going down as well.

Yes I do have the PM2.5 numbers for a couple years back for downtown Chiang Mai.

PM2.5 numbers follow the PM10 trend very closely.

The PM2.5 level is about two-thirds of the PM10 level. Looking only at PM10 paints too rosy a picture.

However, that also means that PM10 works just fine for tracking if a year has been better or worse than average, and developments over time.

Seeing that no onew has replied to my previous Post

Do you have a web site that actually shows the 2.5

Thanks

[TheAppletons]

I find it interesting that just when the PPM10 numbers start to go down, and folks have less to complain about,

that suddenly people start quoting the PPM2.5 figures, and it gives them the shot in the arm needed to continue to bitch.

I wonder if anyone has the figures for PPM2.5 from two years ago to compare with this year's data.

Just guessing here but I'd think that if the PPM10 numbers have been going down, that the PPM2.5 figures would be going down as well.

Yes I do have the PM2.5 numbers for a couple years back for downtown Chiang Mai.

PM2.5 numbers follow the PM10 trend very closely.

The PM2.5 level is about two-thirds of the PM10 level. Looking only at PM10 paints too rosy a picture.

However, that also means that PM10 works just fine for tracking if a year has been better or worse than average, and developments over time.

Seeing that no onew has replied to my previous Post

Do you have a web site that actually shows the 2.5

Thanks

The first link provided in the original thread ("stickied" at the top of the page) can be queried for PM 2.5 data for station 36t in Chiang Mai. Here it is again:

http://aqmthai.com/index.php?lang=en

[WinnieTheKhwai]

Yes, and for PM2.5 levels from past years, they're available at http://aqnis.pcd.go.th/

(36t Station only)

Bad day coming up today, by the way.

Edited March 31, 2016 by WinnieTheKhwai

[Rancid]

Fine particles (PM_2.5) are 2.5 micrometers in diameter or smaller, and can only be seen with an electron microscope. Fine particles are produced from all types of combustion, including motor vehicles, power plants, residential wood burning, forest fires, agricultural burning, and some industrial processes.Oct 22, 2015 from Wikipedia.

Coarse dust particles (PM10) are 2.5 to 10 micrometers in diameter. Sources include crushing or grinding operations and dust stirred up by ...

So, pm 2.5 are not just smaller but far more deadly coz are much more likely to penetrate lung tissues.

Which probably explains why Chiang Mai has one of the highest lung cancer rates per capita in the world.

I still love this editorial that should be explained to every dumb arsonist in Thailand while they are being beaten with a baseball bat.

http://www.nationmultimedia.com/opinion/Risk-of-a-calamity-if-North-haze-not-tackled-urgen-30258695.html

Good article, a plea falling on deaf ears of course as they pursue ecological suicide. One wonders if the large company benefiting from corn is why nothing is done.

[FolkGuitar]

Kudos to the Chiang Mai Air Quality Control Office! Adding a whole new dimension to the definition of "hypocrisy."

We took a ride around the Samoeng Loop road today, and the entire upper roads had been freshly burned. Mile after mile of blackened slash, sometimes going back 25 meters up the hillsides, other times just one meter from the edge of the road if there were rocks behind. I guess it's just much easier to burn than to cut it all back, while at the same time, giving farmers fines for burning their fields....

Edited April 3, 2016 by FolkGuitar

[CNXBKKMAN]

The locals near Huay Tung Tau had a big burn last week. They have had five or six that i am aware of already. This used to be a trail through the jungle. Whole trees burnt down in this fire. This is screenshot don't bother clicking on "play".

[WinnieTheKhwai]

In a village North of Mae Joe the word is that burning can result in a 5,000 Baht fine. That seems to have been an effective deterrent around there and the rule was thought to be for most/all of CM.

Yes.. I have family South of town and it's been the same there. We had a bit of land cleared and normally that would just go up in smoke, but the rules and enforcement is finally getting stricter.

That's for village areas though of course, way up on the hills it's more difficult I guess.

Still, it's a good sign.

[mesquite]

In a village North of Mae Joe the word is that burning can result in a 5,000 Baht fine. That seems to have been an effective deterrent around there and the rule was thought to be for most/all of CM.

Yes.. I have family South of town and it's been the same there. We had a bit of land cleared and normally that would just go up in smoke, but the rules and enforcement is finally getting stricter.

That's for village areas though of course, way up on the hills it's more difficult I guess.

Still, it's a good sign.

No, it's not a good sign. It's the same nonsense every year. At first there's a discussion on TV on how it's not that bad or it is that bad, then it goes on and many people leave. The ones left come to the conclusion that it is that bad and the authorities should do something about it. Then the rains come and the smoke goes away until the next year when we repeat the cycle.

[canthai55]

In a village North of Mae Joe the word is that burning can result in a 5,000 Baht fine. That seems to have been an effective deterrent around there and the rule was thought to be for most/all of CM.

Came around our village and said 10,000 if they catch you. Maybe 6 weeks ago ?