Live data from Hacker News

Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

theguardian.com

51–60 of 103 posts

Re: Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

#51
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I read the article and got excited about eliminating internal combustion engines...

https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/business/145130/fine-part... That won't necessarily solve this problem. [edit] One more source. There are tons though. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/4a4dc6ca-en/index.html?i...

All the more reason to design cities where cars are only needed occasionally and walking, cycling, and public transport serve most people's needs.

Re: Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

#52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The source says 5-19% reduction which is solid but pretty far off from "hardly any" in my view.

Isn't that number for the total particle emissions, rather than just for emissions from the brakes?

No, "PM10 for non-exhaust sources per km" and then the following line has more info about about pm2.5. Please just go read the thing it's not our duty to quote it at you piece by piece to disprove your assumptions about how good EVs are especially when the article is right there and not even long or very technical.

If you have trouble reading or understanding english then I apologize and of course please continue to get the information this way if that is best for you. I mean this seriously and not as an insult. I had a TBI once and had a hard time parsing information like this for a couple years after.

Re: Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

#54
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well I read the article and got excited about eliminating internal combustion engines...

https://www.brusselstimes.com/news/business/145130/fine-part... That won't necessarily solve this problem. [edit] One more source. There are tons though. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/sites/4a4dc6ca-en/index.html?i...

I'm having trouble believing such findings because even in the most congested of cities PM counts are generally low as long as other sources (like heating) are kept in check.

NOx emissions kick in as the main pollutant much earlier in such places.

Re: Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

#55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that number for the total particle emissions, rather than just for emissions from the brakes?

No, "PM10 for non-exhaust sources per km" and then the following line has more info about about pm2.5. Please just go read the thing it's not our duty to quote it at you piece by piece to disprove your assumptions about how good EVs are especially when the article is right there and not even long or very technical. If you have trouble reading or understanding english then I apologize and of course please continue to…

You should be less snarky when you're wrong. Non-exhaust sources also include tires and roads.

Re: Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

#56
post #5
post #2

I wanted to find an account of what the biggest sources of PM2.5 are in the US. This article discusses traffic fumes (24% of PM2.5), but I was surprised to learn that by far, the largest source of PM2.5 - 45% - is “unspecified sources of human origin.” Where does that stuff come from? Well, it’s created in the atmosphere via secondary reactions between agricultural NH3 emissions, SO2 and NOx emissions from shipping a…

The other thing people don’t often talk of is PM2.5 inside their home while cooking. Lot of people have poor ventilation or insufficient air movement capacity in their kitchens.

Unfortunately, this is not simple to rectify. My previous house was expensive and difficult to retrofit to have an externally vented range hood, and I'm renting now, where basically nothing has externally vented range hoods, and looking to buy a place that does. This is a hard non-negotiable requirement for my next house, but the pickings are very slim. This is a severe issue (in the US anyway), and it's difficult to retrofit for most kitchens since most houses in the US are designed with the stove on the interior wall rather than the exterior wall.

Cooking fumes are the primary pollutant in my life, and honestly is one that I struggle with since I have severe asthma but love to cook. I do what I can, but this is something I wish was taken more seriously in society because there's a huge economic hill to climb to solve it yourself vs having to deal with what's available on market.

Re: Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

#57
post #10
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The other thing people don’t often talk of is PM2.5 inside their home while cooking. Lot of people have poor ventilation or insufficient air movement capacity in their kitchens.

From the food, or the fuel?

combustion (burning) byproducts are the primary harmful particulate matter created by cooking, whether that be from gas or food. like most issues, incidental contact isn't enough to worry about, but if you're a cook (commercial or home), then you're likely getting meaningful exposure. it's not an issue for kids unless they're doing the cooking every day. the range hood should either be vented to the outside or sufficiently filtered (or both), but most filters are inadequate, so venting to the outside is the more foolproof strategy.

but this is likely a very small factor for nearly all people. cars (oil) and electricity generation (coal and gas) create most of the harmful particulate matter in the air (and water and ground), so that's where we should focus our anti-pollution efforts first and foremost.

Re: Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

#58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slightly? I barely use the brakes ever. Whoever is out braking in their EV all the time should have their DL revoked

Where I live residential neighborhoods have 4-way stops at every intersection so preferably everyone would be braking all the time, yes. They obviously are not and cruising through stop signs (and sometimes killing children!) is the norm. If EVs encourage this driving style that is another strong point in favor of "electric cars can't solve the problem of cars."

>They obviously are not and cruising through stop signs (and sometimes killing children!) is the norm. If EVs encourage this driving style that is another strong point in favor of "electric cars can't solve the problem of cars."

You reap what you sow. A grid of 4-way stops where the traffic flow is not appropriate for them is a textbook perfect way to train drivers to habitually roll stop signs.

I swear sometimes it seems like urban planners are hellbent on re-learning everything they learned in the 1920s.

Re: Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

#59
post #3
post #2

I wanted to find an account of what the biggest sources of PM2.5 are in the US. This article discusses traffic fumes (24% of PM2.5), but I was surprised to learn that by far, the largest source of PM2.5 - 45% - is “unspecified sources of human origin.” Where does that stuff come from? Well, it’s created in the atmosphere via secondary reactions between agricultural NH3 emissions, SO2 and NOx emissions from shipping a…

I wonder how important the raw amount of emissions is. Density should decrease at a cubic rate of distance, so being close to a small source of emissions might be worse than being somewhat far from a heavier source.

It's pretty hard to separate correlation from causation. There's way more sources of carcinogens than just car generated pollution. And lots of them will tend to correlate with poverty/working class which will tend to correlate with living next to highways.

Re: Cancer breakthrough is a ‘wake-up’ call on danger of air pollution

#60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that number for the total particle emissions, rather than just for emissions from the brakes?

No, "PM10 for non-exhaust sources per km" and then the following line has more info about about pm2.5. Please just go read the thing it's not our duty to quote it at you piece by piece to disprove your assumptions about how good EVs are especially when the article is right there and not even long or very technical. If you have trouble reading or understanding english then I apologize and of course please continue to…

Go back and actually read your parent comment and then tell us who (still) really has the reading comprehension problem…
Post reply on HN