The health benefits of better air • Hacker News Board

Re: The health benefits of better air

#151

Post by colechristensen » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:27 AM UTC

adrianN wrote: post #128

colechristensen wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an AirVisual Pro, which is quite expensive, but my half finished air quality monitor project had been on the bench for much too long. I have windows open all the time, air conditioning on too often, and dehumidifiers and HEPA filters as well. It is not efficient or particularly environmentally friendly... but I want a CO2 level My next half baked idea is figuring out a way to have a sealed home and an applianc…

Bubbling air through quicklime slush is an easy way of removing CO2. You can turn the calcium carbonate that forms back into quicklime by applying heat. But it's probably better if you invested into a counterflow heat exchanger for ventilating your home. You can recover a large part of the heating/cooling energy.

The question is how much CO2 can I fix with a reasonably sized apparatus and really I would prefer a continuous system (which is why electrolysis) rather than a batch system.

Also I would prefer levels lower than outside, obviously air exchangers will necessarily be worse than just being outside.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#152

Post by colechristensen » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:29 AM UTC

erosenbe0 wrote: post #147

colechristensen wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have an AirVisual Pro, which is quite expensive, but my half finished air quality monitor project had been on the bench for much too long. I have windows open all the time, air conditioning on too often, and dehumidifiers and HEPA filters as well. It is not efficient or particularly environmentally friendly... but I want a CO2 level My next half baked idea is figuring out a way to have a sealed home and an applianc…

What about acetone or ethanol or whatever else we exhale that builds up?

shrug big effects first.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#153

Post by brbsix » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:30 AM UTC

hettygreen wrote: post #25

I'm surprised "having a bonfire" isn't on this list, but I'm afraid to see how detrimental it might be. The nostalgia factor is sort of wearing off now that I'm 40 and don't want my clothes to smell bad or have a low-key asthma attack. The last time I went camping in a campground and everyone had a fire going, the whole park was completely choked with smoke that it made going for a walk really crappy. It's such a wei…

Pretty close to being on the list. "Have a really smoky fire at home. Life cost: 1 day"

Considering the close association of food, warmth, security and socialization with the habitual use of fire for at the very least several hundred thousand years of human history, is it really any surprise that some people still enjoy the practice?

https://dynomight.net/air/#:~:text=Have%20a%20really,1%20day

Re: The health benefits of better air

#154

Post by erosenbe0 » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:31 AM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #130

This article seems to make fantastic jumps from the believable -- mortality from overall air pollution (e.g. in Delhi) to the frankly unbelievable -- your ultrasonic humidifier supposedly reducing your life by nearly an hour each night, or that a daily commute between Newark and NYC takes half a year off your life. According to this logic, anyone who works in the subway should be dying, what, 10 years earlier? Which…

Statistical evidence for high BMI's effect on quality of life and morbidity is more compelling, at least in the developed world. Author's thesis does stand insofar as AQ often being overlooked as a causative agent behind cardiovascular disease.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#155

Post by lm28469 » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:31 AM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #130

This article seems to make fantastic jumps from the believable -- mortality from overall air pollution (e.g. in Delhi) to the frankly unbelievable -- your ultrasonic humidifier supposedly reducing your life by nearly an hour each night, or that a daily commute between Newark and NYC takes half a year off your life. According to this logic, anyone who works in the subway should be dying, what, 10 years earlier? Which…

> According to this logic, anyone who works in the subway should be dying, what, 10 years earlier? Which is obviously not happening.

I don't think you're being honest here, it obviously isn't try to make the point that each commute = 1 year, that's why it's in the "lifestyle" category and not in the "single event" one

Re: The health benefits of better air

#156

Post by modeless » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:32 AM UTC

williamsmj wrote: post #74

modeless wrote: post #28

I'm surprised this doesn't mention gas stoves and ovens. Gas is the "high end" option, yet creates totally unnecessary PM2.5 pollution in your home. Children growing up with gas stoves have higher rates of asthma.

I don't think we should do domestic cooking with gas for reasons that include respiratory health, but it's worth noting that the link between modern domestic gas ovens and childhood asthma is very weak relative to other risk factors, which might be why it's not mentioned in the article. "When the meta-analysis puts everything together, they come to the conclusion that gas cooking produces a small increase in asthma r…

The study in question: "Our meta-analyses suggest that children living in a home with gas cooking have a 42% increased risk of having current asthma, a 24% increased risk of lifetime asthma and an overall 32% increased risk of having current and lifetime asthma."

https://academic.oup.com/ije/article/42/6/1724/737113

To me, a 24% increase in risk of lifetime asthma is significant and well worth avoiding both at an individual level and a societal level, given that good alternatives are readily available.

Given this 24% number, I guess the "1.5 percentage points" you quoted must be the absolute increase in asthma prevalence across the population, i.e. gas stoves in every home would cause 1.5% of people to develop asthma (when they otherwise wouldn't have it). That seems quite bad actually. If true, not using gas stoves (currently in 35% of households) could have prevented over a million cases of asthma in the US alone.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#157

Post by fomine3 » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:32 AM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #151

adrianN wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bubbling air through quicklime slush is an easy way of removing CO2. You can turn the calcium carbonate that forms back into quicklime by applying heat. But it's probably better if you invested into a counterflow heat exchanger for ventilating your home. You can recover a large part of the heating/cooling energy.

The question is how much CO2 can I fix with a reasonably sized apparatus and really I would prefer a continuous system (which is why electrolysis) rather than a batch system. Also I would prefer levels lower than outside, obviously air exchangers will necessarily be worse than just being outside.

Really prefer co2 levels lower than outside? What's your outside environment?

Re: The health benefits of better air

#158

Post by WillPostForFood » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:33 AM UTC

crazygringo wrote: post #130

This article seems to make fantastic jumps from the believable -- mortality from overall air pollution (e.g. in Delhi) to the frankly unbelievable -- your ultrasonic humidifier supposedly reducing your life by nearly an hour each night, or that a daily commute between Newark and NYC takes half a year off your life. According to this logic, anyone who works in the subway should be dying, what, 10 years earlier? Which…

Extinguish candles with a lid.

If you are worrying about the method by which you extinguish a candle, worrying is what's going to shorten your life, not the candle.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#159

Post by occz » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:33 AM UTC

modeless wrote: post #28

I'm surprised this doesn't mention gas stoves and ovens. Gas is the "high end" option, yet creates totally unnecessary PM2.5 pollution in your home. Children growing up with gas stoves have higher rates of asthma.

Very interesting to me that gas is considered the 'high end'-option, I presume in the U.S?

Where I live, the high end-option is to get an induction stove. I have one, and it's extremely pleasant to cook on. Granted, I've never cooked on gas because that alternative is mostly not used, in my experience.

Re: The health benefits of better air

#160

Post by adrianN » Wed, Apr 28, 2021, 6:33 AM UTC

colechristensen wrote: post #151

adrianN wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bubbling air through quicklime slush is an easy way of removing CO2. You can turn the calcium carbonate that forms back into quicklime by applying heat. But it's probably better if you invested into a counterflow heat exchanger for ventilating your home. You can recover a large part of the heating/cooling energy.

The question is how much CO2 can I fix with a reasonably sized apparatus and really I would prefer a continuous system (which is why electrolysis) rather than a batch system. Also I would prefer levels lower than outside, obviously air exchangers will necessarily be worse than just being outside.

I'd assume that some chemist or other has already published a paper about that. But you could probably figure it out yourself experimentally by weighing quicklime, letting it react and weighing it again. Start a youtube channel to finance the project :)