China Asks Other Nations Not to Release Its Air Data

By Keith Bradsher

June 5^th, 2012

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/06/world/asia/china-asks-embassies-to-stop-measuring-air-pollution.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

http://trendsupdates.com/the-worlds-most-polluted-city-linfen-china/

This is a picture of the smoggy and polluted air of one of China’s cities. The man in the picture is putting a face mask to not inhale the dangerous air.

Summary:

                An air censor at the American Embassy in Beijing, China tweets the air quality results hourly but on Tuesday the Chinese government took a strong position on the issue. Wu Xiaoqing, the vice minister for environmental protection, demanded all foreign countries to stop releasing data on China’s air quality. At the news conference Mr. Wu complained that data from just a few locations of China only showed a broad quality of air in China. He also said that China’s air quality was just a mistake due to people labeling China’s air quality as “hazardous” which adapted to industrial countries. The American Embassy started tracking and releasing air-quality data in 2008 and in grudging response Chinese and Hong Kong officials released data. The data showed extremely fine particles showing 2.5 micrometers or less in diameter, a size that penetrates particularly deep into lungs and has been linked to cancer and other respiratory problems. This information has been going across 2.5Pm, a popular social media blog similar to Twitter.

Opinion:

            When I think I have China I thought more about poverty and dictatorship but also along the lines of great cities. I thought very little on the air the Chinese people breathe and never noticed how bad China’s air quality could be because it is such a big country. My negligence has brought me astray from the true air quality of China. I can see now that China very well could be releasing lots and lots of dangerous gases into the air because it is such a big country. The country makes tons of industries which can definitely change any country. Though it may not be the country I live in, it gets me a bit frustrated to hear of the air being polluted enough to penetrate the lungs causing cancer or respiratory problems. People could die if they keep inhaling in the gaseous air that covers China especially its cities. In our country we have similar problems but our government tries to keep it under control by creating laws and regulations. For a country like China I feel a bit bad for the government not making enough effort to try keeping the air safe. Keeping the air safe is the same as keeping the people safe. I think our country should be concerned about China because it is affecting us too. We are affected through the global warming that rises higher and higher every day. The air pollution China is creating is adding more fuel to the fire. 

Questions:

1.      What other concerns should we have with China’s air problem? Name 2 reasons and explain.

2.      How is China’s economy and how is that correlating with air pollution? (Think also industry).

3.      China is a big country and Mr. Wu says the air quality data is broad because of the few locations. Do you agree with this or do you think China’s air quality is actually really dirty? Explain why.

"Sequoia National Park: Worst air pollution"

Author - Associated Press

The San Francisco Chronicle

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/05/28/MNC61OOM6M.DTL

Picture: This is the view from the top of the national park. As seen, the smog in the background blocks much of what is visible on a clear day, and is comparable to smog levels in cities such as Los Angeles.

Summary: Air quality in California's Sequoia National Park is horrible. On days when views should be clear and visible for miles, the view is limited (as seen in the picture above). Ozone levels in the area are well above the National Ambient Air Quality standards, and have broken the limit at least 87 times. The ozone levels are so bad that local park rangers are warned they might receive lung diseases from the unsafe levels of pollutants in the air. The unsafe ozone levels have also harmed the nearby pine trees, scientists finding yellowed trees in the area. The ozone inhibits the photosynthesis process, harming the pine trees survival. Most of the air pollution comes from nearby San Joaquin Valley, which has hundreds of farms that produce pollution from tractors and other machinery. Other sources are car exhausts from the nearby highway, the highway being the second busiest in California. The trough shape of the valley traps pollutants, acting like a lid with the high pressure system. Scientists at UC Davis are trying to find out a solution to the problem, but have so far been unsuccessful. 

Opinion: This article really surprised me. How smog in a national park can be similar to that of a large city blew my mind. It was extremely similar to what we were talking about in class about the Donora smog incident in 1948, the pressure system trapping the pollutants. While reading the article, I was wondering whether or not the national park can end up in the same situation. If I were a prospective park ranger, I would not work at this national park because the smog levels are extremely high and unsafe, and I could possibly have respiratory or other health problems.  Putting the highway in the San Joaquin Valley was not the smartest idea, and if I were planning the highway I would of built it around the valley. With all the pollution from cars becoming trapped in the valley, acid rain and other air problems could happen in the valley area. However, I also realize that the farming in the area is a great source of income and jobs, and that without the farms people would become jobless. The people in charge of the area have a tough decision, as they either face a dying national park or jobless people. If I were in charge of the situation, I would try and decrease pollution from the farms, and try to divert the traffic some other route where the exhaust is not trapped. Mass transportation such as trains would be a good solution as the workers can still go the farms and not as much exhaust is released. 

Questions:

1) If you were in charge of the situation, would you save the park or the economy? Why? Consider the pros and cons of each decision.

2) Do you think that this situation is similar to that of the Donora incident we learned about in class? Will it have a similar outcome?

3) If you were a prospective park ranger, would taking the job as a ranger in the Sequoia National Park be worth the health problems? Why?