Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 426 posts

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#171

Post by rcxdude »

enquirewithin wrote: post #143
Gigachad wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NO2 is a very hazardous air pollutant which doesn’t get a ton of attention. The main sources are combustion engines and gas stoves. Asthma looks to be mostly caused by gas stoves. I’ve got a sensor that can detect no2 and it noticeably spikes when using gas. Switched to induction after that.

I’ve often wondered about this. Does the area immediately above where the gas stove was have an exhaust fan that vents to atmosphere? I would have assumed a properly specced exhaust fan would capture and remove combustion products from a gas stove?

Can you smell what's being cooked on the gas stove? If so, the combustion products from the stove are also reaching your nose.

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#172

Post by LegitShady »

energy123 wrote: post #61
Aurornis wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Living very close to busy highways is known to generate poor air quality. I recommend anyone in those locations buy an air purifier for their kids' rooms. I bought a couple reasonably priced HEPA purifiers and I change the filters on schedule. Replacement HEPA filters are very cheap. Also watch out for things that we do indoors that can generate bad air quality. I had a friend who bought a VOC meter and noticed very…

It's a good start, but for VOCs and gases you'll need activated carbon. Those 2-in-1 filters do exist but cost more. And many are scams because they don't have enough volume of activated carbon.

My common winix air purifier has a replaceable carbon filter.

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#173

Post by mk89 »

ecshafer wrote: post #3

Anecdata I was living very close to a busy highway, and my young daughter was wheazing when she had a cold, we had to give her medicine via a nebulizer. When we moved out to the country more, far away from any major roads, these issues all disappeared within a couple months.

I don't understand why we keep on building right next to highways which are some of the worst things for our health. You don't need to live in the countryside for that. Just stay roughly 1km away from them and the situation is significantly better.

There is evidence of a lot of ugly diseases caused by this, without even mentioning the constant 40+ dB background noise.

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#174

Post by sokoloff »

nullify88 wrote: post #34
glenngillen wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've not lived in London for more than a decade. I always thought the black snot was from the Tube. Is it not?

I lived on Upper Street in Angel, London by some traffic lights and there was always a layer of black dust inside. I assumed it was brake particulate.

Tire wear was probably a greater source than brake wear.

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#175

Post by stevezsa8 »

The sad thing is... when the ULEZ went into effect, there were some wild conspiracy theories about it. Suddenly even my father was an expert and viewed it as sinister government intervention - all because of youtube crackpots. I couldn't get him to relate to my view that cleaner air must be a good thing.

I bet if some youtube weirdos pushed out videos against "big soap" for making us unnecessarily clean our hands after pooping... we'd have a growing following of angry "freedom from big soap" people.

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#176

Post by throwaway2037 »

My anecdata: I have a Japanese friend who was born in 1964. She grew up in Yokohama for the first ten years. Japan didn't pass its first (serious) environmental protection law until 1967. She said many, many of her friends had asthma. Fast forward 50 years, very few children have asthma in Yokohama.

I will never forget watching this documentary about a Canadian man, Doug Rogers, who went to Japan in 1964 to train martial arts at a dojo. This YouTube video[1], watch it from 1:00 to 1:10. The air pollution is simply stunning. It shows you just how terrible the air pollution was in Tokyo in 1964. Today, it is night and day. The same is true for most large cities in highly industrialised nations.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CBFx1a4L2ig

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#177

Post by wickedsight »

stevezsa8 wrote: post #175

The sad thing is... when the ULEZ went into effect, there were some wild conspiracy theories about it. Suddenly even my father was an expert and viewed it as sinister government intervention - all because of youtube crackpots. I couldn't get him to relate to my view that cleaner air must be a good thing. I bet if some youtube weirdos pushed out videos against "big soap" for making us unnecessarily clean our hands aft…

> I bet if some youtube weirdos pushed out videos against "big soap" for making us unnecessarily clean our hands after pooping... we'd have a growing following of angry "freedom from big soap" people.

At one point during Covid, I tried (not very hard at all) to float a conspiracy that the vaccine was in fact not the poison, but the antidote. That Covid was deliberately designed by governments to filter the 'independent thinkers' (who won't take the vaccine) from the sheep (those who do take the vaccine). So by not taking the vaccine, you were giving the governments what they wanted.

This was because the conspiracy that governments were killing the loyal sheep with the vaccine, therefore only leaving the 'independent thinkers' behind, made absolutely no sense at all to me.

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#178

Post by collabs »

shawabawa3 wrote: post #165
IrishTechie wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The localisation of it struck me when I read an Irish EPA report on traffic-related air pollution a few years ago that recommended carrying your child if you were walking regularly near heavy traffic. The air at 0.8m (their breathing height) has 5-15% more NOx in it than the air at 2m (the height they would breath at being carried by you).

I remember reading something similar about walking on the part of the pavement furthest from the road, because being an extra meter or so away makes a big difference

A quick note for my fellow US Americans -- A British speaker calling it 'pavement' is referring to what we call the sidewalk.

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#179

Post by throwaway2037 »

satvikpendem wrote: post #4

Using scientists being "stunned" should take the same amount of relevance as someone being "slammed" in article titles.

To be fair, BBC is aimed at the normies, not the scientifically literate. (No hate on BBC!) Stunned probably gets more clicks than surprised.

Re: Children's stunted lungs show recovery in ultra low emission zone

#180

Post by hdgvhicv »

mellosouls wrote: post #19
XorNot wrote: post #5

So punchline, probably a good idea to electrify all the cars yeah?

Probably a much better idea first to have a decent public transport and electric car support network throughout the country first. We don't all live in the city.

And those of us who don’t can just plug in at home.
Post reply on HN