Pollution in China

[stoney]

I lived in Hangzhou for one year, and found the pollution to be rather shocking. I am from a smaller city in Canada where there is no noticeable air pollution. When I visited Beijing it was even worse. I was in Dalian for a few days, and the air was much better there.

I'm wondering how the air pollution in a place like Hangzhou, compares with similar cities ( same size, population, etc. ) in Europe and North America.

Also, does anyone know of any reliable sources for information on air pollution levels in China? Have researchers from other countries ever gone over there and done air quality testing? Does the Chinese government do this sort of testing and make the results public?

I loved living in Hangzhou and will go back regardless of the pollution. But it does concern me; not just my own health, but for the Chinese. It seems like they are oblivious to it, feel they can't do anything about it, and just go on poisoning themselves.

Anyways, just wondering how other people feel??

[imron]

does anyone know of any reliable sources for information on air pollution levels in China?

The State Environmental Protection Administration (SEPA) releases daily air quality figures for major cities in China (the English link to this page seems to be broken, so the above is only for the Chinese version). How reliable the data is I'm not sure, however there have been reports recently that the figures in Beijing were being fudged by taking readings from less polluted areas, and not including readings from more polluted areas, to make it look better for the Olympics (they have clean air targets they need to meet). The data is also archived, and you can search pollution levels for previous days.

It seems like they are oblivious to it

Yes, because when that's all you've ever known, it seems normal.

[muyongshi]

One factor that makes the pollution a lot more noticeable is the type of coal that is used here. They don't burn "clean" coal like in the states, so it cause more of the visible pollution. But that is only one factor.

[huisheng]

This is so not the Hangzhou from my memory. But I haven't been there in 13 years. It must've changed heaps. Rapid industrialisation in China's most developed areas including Hangzhou, has contributed to seriously high rates of air and water pollution. My dad recently went to Shanghai, located in the Changjiang River Delta as Hangzhou, and said the water there tasted horrible that the pollution was evident.

[roddy]

So which kind of pollution from those tables is better, 可吸入颗粒物, or 二氧化硫?

I was going to express doubt about the ratings, as virtually everywhere gets an excellent or good rating, with the current worst being a '轻度污染 ', which seems a bit odd considering this is meant to cover all major Chinese cities. But then I figured maybe the holidays were making a difference.

[gato]

可吸入颗粒物, or 二氧化硫

http://www.epa.gov/air/particlepollution/index.html

"Particulate matter," also known as particle pollution or PM, is a complex mixture of extremely small particles and liquid droplets. Particle pollution is made up of a number of components, including acids (such as nitrates and sulfates), organic chemicals, metals, and soil or dust particles.

The size of particles is directly linked to their potential for causing health problems. EPA is concerned about particles that are 10 micrometers in diameter or smaller because those are the particles that generally pass through the throat and nose and enter the lungs. Once inhaled, these particles can affect the heart and lungs and cause serious health effects.

SO2 contributes to respiratory illness, particularly in children and the elderly, and aggravates existing heart and lung diseases.

SO2contributes to the formation of acid rain, which:

* damages trees, crops, historic buildings, and monuments; and

* makes soils, lakes, and streams acidic.

I was going to express doubt about the ratings, as virtually everywhere gets an excellent or good rating, with the current worst being a '轻度污染 ', which seems a bit odd considering this is meant to cover all major Chinese cities

That's because the mainland's definition of "good" is lower than international standards. Anything below a 100 on the overall index is good (or considered to be "blue sky" in Beijing terminology), whereas in the US (and probably in Europe, too), it generally would need to be lower than 50 to be "good".

Here's the scale for the US:

http://airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airnow.showlocal&CityID=228

California Air Quality Summary

See this chart from the Economist of Beijing's pollution level:

http://www.chinese-forums.com/showthread.php?p=51258#post51258

High PM10 Levels

See also this Caijing article on preparation for the Olympics for a very good analysis of the issue:

http://www.tegao.net/?viewnews-4574.htm

备战“奥运空气”直面潜在危机

2007-11-18 19:39　来源: 《财经》杂志

[Long Zhiren]

I'm wondering how the air pollution in a place like Hangzhou, compares with similar cities ( same size, population, etc. ) in Europe and North America.

This comparison information seems enormously difficult to find.

From my experience, from worst to least worst goes in this order, for air pollution:

(1) Beijing (Jan 2008 ) I believe the huge amount of construction going on has something to do with it. I would wake up in the mornings with my throat feeling really dry and cruddy.

(2) London (Jun 1986) The UK was finally starting to cut back on coal emissions. The buildings were all covered in black soot. After just one afternoon, you'd start blowing your nose and hucking loogies of black soot. Note: The place is far cleaner now and nice. Many of the buildings have been cleaned quite well so the black soot coverings are mostly gone. (ie There's hope for China!)

(3) Paris (Jun 1986) France had already cut back on coal emissions and had just become almost totally nuclear. The buildings were all covered in black soot. Similar to London but not as bad. Note: The place is far cleaner now and nice. Many of the buildings have been cleaned quite well so the black soot coverings are mostly gone. (ie There's hope for China!)

(4) Los Angeles (1975) This place was so smoggy by the late 1970's that you'd have to look straight up for any hope to see a very small circle of clear blue if there was any.

Beijing (May 1994) wasn't so bad at all, a bit hazy, but no problems. Los Angeles (Apr 2003) wasn't bad at all (more hope for China!)

[stoney]

Thanks for the input. And imron, gato, thanks for the links.

As Long Zhiren says, there is still hope for China, like in other big cities around the world.

I'm not an environmentalist or tree hugger ( sorry tree huggers) , but if they had anything to do with keeping the air clean in my part of the world, then thank you. But when I am in China, the situation is rather depressing. I wonder if the government will have the will to change things, and can NGO's / environmentalists really have an impact on Chinese policy??

[Long Zhiren]

I wonder if the government will have the will to change things, and can NGO's / environmentalists really have an impact on Chinese policy??

We could hope so.

When I was in Chongqing in May 1994, I bumped into a bunch of European water pollution experts who were trying to help get the Yangzi cleaned-up.

Fourteen years later now, water pollution everywhere in China sounds very bad. The Yangzi dolphin went extinct during the same time period. That's kind of sad.

On the same trip, I was inspired with an idea to hire Chinese soldiers to guard American convicts to pick up trash everywhere in China. The environment would get some clean-up. China would get rural jobs. The U.S. could save a lot of money on prison expenses. However, the American Left declares anything less than five star hotel treatment as cruel and unusual punishment for prisoners. Maybe the Left is the wrong direction to seek environmental, social, international and economic advances.

[roddy]

Bits of government have the will to change things. Unfortunately there are other bits of government which have the will to keep building factories. The top-level government body in charge of the environment, SEPA, doesn't have ministerial status so has a weaker voice in decision making. Local level branches of SEPA are subordinate to the local government, not the higher level of SEPA. And SEPA itself is not flawless, there was a fairly large corruption case in Hangzhou recently.

Chinadialogue.net is worth a look if you are interested in this kind of thing - lots of bilingual articles on China and its environment.

[bhchao]

Fourteen years later now, water pollution everywhere in China sounds very bad. The Yangzi dolphin went extinct during the same time period.

They're thinking of building a dam on the Nu River in Yunnan. Dams also cause water pollution by trapping sediment and restricting the natural flow into the sea.

Many old dams in the US are being permanently torn down. When the Edwards Dam on the Kennebec River in Maine was removed in 1999, massive numbers of fish began to reappear upstream.

[cui ruide]

But when I am in China, the situation is rather depressing. I wonder if the government will have the will to change things, and can NGO's / environmentalists really have an impact on Chinese policy??

This is a big problem for the Chinese government. The upper levels know they need to address the issue because it's having a devastating effect on the Chinese people health-wise as well as their reputation abroad--polluted products (food, aquaculture), air-quality (Olympics), desire to open business there (quality of life). It's likely to be one of the larger reasons for any domestic...unruliness..on the part of the common people. On the other hand, the government is afraid to hinder the mostly responsible economic growth (and ensuing energy demand) because of the perceived and real gain to the lives of the common people. It's a precarious situation.

[native chinese]

well, chinese official standard on environment pollution is much lower than the internation standard. judging by our standard, a heavily polluted air in Canada is very likely to be OK, or even good in china. so in china, do not concern environment seriously, otherwise, you'll be frightened.