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

Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 216 posts

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#171

Post by davepage »

berntb wrote: post #54
davepage wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

$1000! Crazy laowai. As a data point, my current F visa is 2 years, multi-entry, 90 days and cost the nominal fee plus about $100 for the visa company to drop it off at the consulate. Apparently, the F visa has been re-purposed and there is a new M business visa. Any practical experience with that? [of course, China habitually hassles journalists (Bloomberg) over visas]

I assume China is impossible for someone with a bad peanut allergy? (Gets sick just with a bowl of peanuts in the same room.)

Well, food contamination is an issue with even the nominal food supply, so one must be very careful. The culture is more fluid with the truth then some other places. Lots of vegetable markets, though, so you could buy and prepare your own food.

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#172

Post by dreamfactory »

dylandrop wrote: post #72
rz2k wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are astonishing numbers of protests in China every year.[1][2] I also think the culture for factory workers during the industrial revolution was one of deference to authority, and that it took extreme conditions to spur them to protest their conditions. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protest_and_dissent_in_the_Peop... [2] http://www.theatlantic.com/infocus/2012/02/rising-protests-i...

That's good to hear. My only point about protesting in America was that it's very ingrained in our culture to protest, even for small issues. I didn't really know much about Chinese protesting culture, but it's good to hear they do it in large numbers.

As far as I understand, public unrest is one of the greatest fears of Chinese leadership, hence tight control and censorship. That may speak volumes about the willingness of their public to take control along with protesting (as opposed to the West where protest is seen as a safety valve and therefore encouraged in proscribed forms).

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#173

Post by chockablock »

chockablock wrote: post #108
Sharlin wrote: post #16

I wonder how this compares to the worst smogs experienced in London and elsewhere before the West got its act together with regard to particulate pollution. Apparently the Great Smog of 1952 killed on the order of 10000 people in just a few days. I'm not sure many young people nowadays realize how horrible the situation was just half a century ago. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Smog_of_1952

Great smog of 1952 estimated at 3000 ug/m^3 of PM10 Source: Open access journal article linked from the wikipedia page you cited ;) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1241116/pdf/ehp0...

Found some estimates that appear to be better.

Great smog of 1952 had a measured peak daily average of 1620 ug/m^3 of total suspended matter (TSM) [1].

Reported levels in Shanghai of up to 602.5 ug/m^3 PM2.5 (suspended particles We can convert from TSM to PM2.5 using ballpark conversion given by: PM10 = 0.6TSM [1; notes to table 3] PM2.5 = 0.75PM10 [2].

So according to these rough calculations the great smog of 1952 probably had a PM2.5 of about 700 ug/m^3, quite similar to the current Shanghai smog, and lower than levels regularly reported in other Chinese cities.

Open access sources: [1] http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1240556/pdf/ehp1... (Table 3 reports total particulate during the great fog of 1620ug/m^3, and estimates PM10 as 60% of that number = 972)

[2] http://www.epd.gov.hk/epd/english/environmentinhk/air/guide_...

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#174

Post by dreamfactory »

ceejayoz wrote: post #168
dreamfactory wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I know, no coal plants have ever resulted in a Chernobyl-scale effect.

That's the thing, though. They have many Chernobyls worth of effect over the long term, and will continue to do so. Meanwhile, Chernobyl helped nuclear facilities become far safer.

Surprising that nobody here acknowledges the black swan nature of nuclear power. The comparative average is precisely not the point.

FWIW I once had dinner with an architect of one of the early nuclear plants. They had been lied to about the prospects of a solution to waste disposal and no longer considered it a sensible approach.

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#175

Post by sliverstorm »

dreamfactory wrote: post #165
sliverstorm wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That fosters dependence issues.

What does that even mean? Who is dependent on what in that scenario?

The people receiving food stop working to secure food on their own. They grow entitled, and expect food aid.

It's an observed phenomenon in Africa.

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#176

Post by sliverstorm »

Crito wrote: post #158
sliverstorm wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is disheartening. For us, that is.

How does that 50% stack up against how much power they use compared to all other countries that have nuclear power available to them? Wikipedia has China's power usage in 2008 as just below the US's, but growing much faster. It also has much more of their power coming from coal in 2011 (46%, to 13%). It makes sense to me that China would be expanding their nuclear power faster than anybody else right now. Of course i…

Right, I have no issues with China using nuclear, it just highlights how much we aren't.

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#177

Post by sliverstorm »

johansch wrote: post #151
sliverstorm wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is disheartening. For us, that is.

No, you seem to be misinformed.

Somehow your comment manages to be both smugly self-assured and also clear as mud. Bravo!

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#178

Post by dreamfactory »

ChuckMcM wrote: post #169
dreamfactory wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I know, no coal plants have ever resulted in a Chernobyl-scale effect.

Can you say what effect you want comparison with? For example, acid rain has created huge problems in watersheds far away from the original power plants.

I'm talking about a sudden catastrophic global effect. To some extent we got lucky with Chernobyl and it was contained, have yet to see with Fukushima.

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#179

Post by davepage »

thaumasiotes wrote: post #49
davepage wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If cost is a primary concern, the kids can go to local school (just like Chinese kids who come to the US). The expat continuum goes from 'bubble' to 'going native'. Bubble is most expensive. Might as well stay home, no?

They can? Even local chinese kids without 户口 can't go to local schools, to hear them tell it. That was one of the primary reasons students came to the school where I worked in 2010-11.

No first hand experience, but from what I can tell, children of legitimate Z visa holders can send their kids to local schools for a reasonable fee. See shanghaiexpat.

It is also legal for expats to home school their kids (not legal for the locals).

There is a strong sense of entitlement present in American culture which leads to unrealistic expectations when living abroad. This manifests as the so-called 'ugly American'. China is a place where 'zero-tolerance' is literally a foreign concept, and anything is possible with persistence (and good connections). Which also implies the downside -- nothing is permanent or guaranteed, either.

Re: Schoolchildren ordered indoors as air pollution cloaks Shanghai

#180

Post by ChuckMcM »

dreamfactory wrote: post #178
ChuckMcM wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you say what effect you want comparison with? For example, acid rain has created huge problems in watersheds far away from the original power plants.

I'm talking about a sudden catastrophic global effect. To some extent we got lucky with Chernobyl and it was contained, have yet to see with Fukushima.

You lost me, how can a nuclear power plant create a catastrophic global effect? As far as I can tell there isn't any way for Chernobyl to have been worse than it was but would love to hear your thoughts. Email is in my profile.
Post reply on HN