11 ms·
Chinese cities use “mist cannon” to shoot pollution from the sky
- Etheryte 11y agoDoesn't this simply remove some of the symptoms instead of working with the root cause?
- beachstartup 11y agoyes, it would appear that's exactly what it's designed to do.
- drzaiusapelord 11y agoAutocratic governments aren't exactly known for their forward seeking vision. Problems come up and half assed solutions come down. There's no democratic element to demand a higher level of service, say with how the US had its environment movement which led to many laws protecting the land, air, and water and ultimately culminated into several state agencies, federal guidelines, the EPA, etc. These are large holistic changes brought about by the democratic process in Western states. Autocratic states don't have this mechanism so its a lot of basic face saving moves because politically this issue isn't that important and/or interferes with the CCP's ability to grow its economy. This creates a real victimization of innocents who don't have a voice because they're governed without consent. Birth defects have increased about 70 percent in China over the past two decades, now reaching about 900,000 per year, according to the country's Ministry of Health. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soot-and-smog-put-chinas-babies-at-risk/ http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/soot-and-smog-put-... Study Links Polluted Air in China to 1.6 Million Deaths a Year http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/asia/study-links-polluted-air-in-china-to-1-6-million-deaths-a-year.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/asia/study-links-pol... Air pollution is killing about 4,000 people in China a day, accounting for 1 in 6 premature deaths in the world's most populous country, a new study finds. http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/air-pollution-killing-4-000-china-day-us-study-finds-n409516 http://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/air-pollution-kill... A "mist cannon" isn't helping with this. edit: I have made fair cites and laid out my argument. Driveby downvotes just show how biased HN is towards China.
- goldenkey 11y agoPretty easy for you to say that considering the U.S. economy was already developed/grown (as you say) when this environmental discussion came to the forefront. It's always easier to forfeit when your whole hand is not on the table..
- seivan 11y agoYou're totally underestimating the Chinese government but you don't fail to see the trade off they have decided to go for. As you said China has decided that financial growth beats the consequences of pollution. You can discuss that direction as much as you want but that's the direction of overall Asia. It has nothing to do with forward vision or full-assed solution.
- vkou 11y agoYou realize that the level of environmental protection that we currently have in the US is only possible at the current level of consumption because we exported most of our polluting industry to China, right?
- drzaiusapelord 11y agoThis is absolutely untrue. Even in the US's manufacturing heyday we had strict environment laws. In fact, this all happened because people were seeing what industry was doing the environment in the 40's, 50's, and 60's. Some light reading here: http://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-history-1970-1985 http://www.epa.gov/aboutepa/epa-history-1970-1985 China isn't doing much of the above, if any. Excerpt: During this period a great many new environmental laws were passed and some old ones resurrected and refurbished as well as energy legislation that impacted on the environment. Other environmental type laws were enacted, such as the Coastal Zone Management Act (1972), the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuaries Act (1972), the Endangered Species Act (1973), the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act (1976), the Marine Mammal Protection Act (1972), the Deepwater Ports and Waterways Safety Act (1974), the Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act (1974), the Water Resources Planning Act (1977), the Water Resources Research Act (1977), the Environmental Quality Improvement Act (1970), several amendments to the Food Drug and Cosmetics Act, and the Environmental Education Act. There was renewed enforcement of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899. The Rules and Regulations issued under these laws numbered into many thousands. In its early years EPA alone placed about 1500 rulemaking notices in the Federal Register annually.
- krallja 11y agoYes. Sometimes alleviating symptoms is necessary to give you breathing room (heh) to work on the actual solution.
- sjbase 11y agoYeah, it does seem like an "out of the air, into the groundwater" solution. But sometimes you have to stop the bleeding before the injury can heal, and China is making progress [1] on the root cause also. [1]: https://e360.yale.edu/digest/china_anti-pollution_efforts__lead_to_steep_drop_in_sulfur_dioxide_levels/4611/ https://e360.yale.edu/digest/china_anti-pollution_efforts__l...
- anthony_romeo 11y agoYes. Notably, this doesn't preclude the ability to both alleviate symptoms and work on the root cause simultaneously.
- seanmcdirmid 11y agoWhen the root cause is bad government that can't enforce environmental laws due to corruption...and you are the government who doesn't want to change (say by more accountability via elections and a free press), looking for something that instead treats the symptoms is attractive. Make no mistake, China's pollution problem is very much a political one.
- fspeech 11y agoIndia's pollution is as bad, if not worse: http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/02/india-v-china http://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/02/india-v...
- mahranch 11y agoThe biggest relevant fact on that page is half hidden. China pumps out 10 gigatonnes of CO2 every year. India? Just 2 gigatonnes tons. In fact, you could combine the U.S, E.U and India's C02 annual output, and it still wouldn't be as much as China. Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_di... Why does that matter? Because India has roughly the same population size as China, but pumps significantly less C02 into the atmosphere.
- dageshi 11y agoDoesn't India have a generally warmer climate than China, as in no need to burn fossil fuels to keep warm?
- r00fus 11y agoIt probably has more to do with the fact that China is the worlds factory (Foxconn?), while India has a lower portion of their economy in heavy industry. As to why that's the case - again, this could be attributed to a political issue - government looks aside as BigCo craps on the country's environment, as long as it fuels the massive economy, keeping everyone optimistic.
- chapium 11y agoWhy does there have to be a difference? Clearly not having smog in the first place would prevent this, but how does that help Beijing right now? If you have an open wound the doctor does not prescribe staying away from sharp things, they treat the wound.
- Justin_K 11y agoExcellent, they can keep polluting as long as they add more mist cannons. Maybe gross polluters can buy mist credits!
- thrownaway2424 11y agoIt's a real-life ATSHCME air displacement effectuator. David Foster Wallace would be so pleased.
- roymurdock 11y agoI assume the toxic waste catapults aimed at Tibet would be next.
- ihsw 11y agoWhy do the cities pay for them? Why aren't the coal-burning energy utility companies paying for them, out of pocket?
- JadeNB 11y ago> Why aren't the coal-burning energy utility companies paying for them, out of pocket? Because no-one has the power to make them, I think. If it's easier (and probably cheaper) to take measures to address the problem yourself than it is to force compliance, then that's the sensible way to go.
- jsprogrammer 11y agoTheir customers stop sending them money? Would probably shut down most operations pretty quickly.
- mistercow 11y agoWhy would their customers do that?
- jsprogrammer 11y agoSo that less coal product is emitted into the atmosphere? I thought that was the premise.
- scott_karana 11y agoI think he wasn't being literal, and meant, "why wouldn't they want electricity?"
- jsprogrammer 11y agoWell, if the production of your electricity kills or otherwise significantly harms you, you may not wish to have that electricity.
- seanmcdirmid 11y agoLooking out my window right now at 2am in the morning, all I see is misty fog where I would usually see a city here in Beijing. I really don't see how more mist would help. They need a big giant freaking fan to create wind...powered by coal, of course, just for purposes of irony.
- fspeech 11y agoIt's for dust control, which is one source of the problem. Maybe not so much in Beijing.
- TeMPOraL 11y agoAren't they building nuclear plants now?
- seanmcdirmid 11y agoA few, not enough to make a dent in coal usage. And I'm not sure how many self-heated homes in the villages can be converted from coal to nuclear (electric heating is too inefficient...but maybe they can use a waste core like they did in the Martian?).
- TeMPOraL 11y agoElectric-powered heat pumps are much more efficient than any kind of coal burning - they run at 500%+ efficiency (they move heat around instead of generating it).
- seanmcdirmid 11y agoSeems like a nice solution for the future...efficient heat pumps are kind of new technology. Also, more insulation would be nice. China housing is very substandard in the villages.
- shanev 11y agoI wonder if a bigger version of this could be built to inject a cloud of ash into the atmosphere to help mitigate climate change [1]. [1] https://www.ted.com/talks/david_keith_s_surprising_ideas_on_climate_change https://www.ted.com/talks/david_keith_s_surprising_ideas_on_...
- wavefunction 11y agoI think it would safer and more prudent to move away as quickly as possible from fossil fuels as primary fuel sources.
- shanev 11y agoI totally agree. The ash injection approach seems like a temporary emergency solution.
- coldcode 11y agoWouldn't spraying water into air with sulfur oxides just create acid rain?
- dimgl 11y agoI was thinking the same thing... Is the cannon supposed to somehow disperse the sulfur oxides? Or is that not how it works?
- kragen 11y agoSure. With the mist, you get dilute sulfuric acid settling on buildings and streets and attacking the concrete, or maybe being washed away. Without the mist, the dilute sulfuric acid forms in the noses and lungs of your citizens instead, damaging their sense of smell and ability to absorb oxygen. The mist sounds like an improvement. But this is mostly aimed at particulate pollution, not sulfur dioxide.
- limaoscarjuliet 11y agoYes! I lived in Poland in 70's-90's and we got nice massive acid rain which dissolved buildings and anything it landed on. No water cannons present, the natural rain was enough to ruin everything.
- buro9 11y agoMist may be able to "catch" the visible particles and go to some length to then putting it into groundwater, but all of the dangerous stuff is in the small particulates that will remain in the air. Out of sight, out of mind seems to the aim of this.
- LordKano 11y agoEven small particles will be reduced by misting/spraying water. I have worked in industrial settings and water is surprisingly effective in reducing airborne particulates.
- jkrejci 11y agoOr you know, you can just like not pollute the shit out of the Earth. China is the worst.
- jordache 11y agosimplistic view, but ok...
- myztic 11y agohttp://www.theguardian.com/environment/datablog/2009/sep/02/carbon-emissions-per-person-capita http://www.theguardian.com/environment/datablog/2009/sep/02/... + China 9,679.30 GHG emissions (MtCO2e)[1], United States 6,668.79 GHG emissions (MtCO2e)[1] - population China ~1.3 billion[2], population United States ~330 million[3] Do the math! [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhouse_gas_emissions https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhous... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China [3] http://www.census.gov/popclock/ http://www.census.gov/popclock/
- scott_karana 11y agoThat's just CO2. What about sulphur oxides, particulate matter, and the like? "Pollution" is a general term.
- myztic 11y agoBetter late than never: it's hard to get reliable data on such things, CO2 estimates are probably at least somewhat correct. The larger point being that you have to take into account how many people live in a country, you can't just compare countries without that.
- brenschluss 11y agoSay what you will about China and its pollution, it's an interesting attempt at a solution.[1] Could you imagine something like that implemented easily in the US before caught within lawyer-string nets of liability? China has many problems, but many HN readers bashing China have probably never set foot there and are formulating their understanding based off of western media and the socioeconomic + cultural dynamics of Chinese diaspora communities in the west (working in low-paying jobs, less seen as literary/communicative thanks to language barriers). I'm not Chinese nor do I have a particular stake, but I was there for three weeks this summer and was overwhelmed by a kind of social optimism - the shared assumption that services are getting better, progress will happen, and a relentless cycle of innovation (in China's own way; see 'Shanzai'). All this is to say that - pollution sucks. China needs to get its shit together and pass clean air laws. But these devices are emblematic of a very Chinese mode of progress and innovation that I'm not quite describing properly. [1] Yes, I know the technology is not completely new, and controlling particulates by deploying other media is common - when polishing/concrete, for example.
- jcyw 11y agolol. been to some Chinese village cor a holiday and became a China expert.
- ymse 11y agoThe GP never asserted being an expert and made a well-reasoned argument (unlike yours). I spent three weeks in China last year and generally got the same impression. We westerners perceive Chinese people as oppressed and poor, but the people I talked to were extremely friendly and optimistic.
- Htsthbjig 11y ago"I'm not Chinese nor do I have a particular stake, but I was there for three weeks this summer and was overwhelmed by a kind of social optimism" It is normal to fall in love when you meet a different culture. It takes 6 months or so living on a country to start seeing caveats and "not so good things" in any country. "the shared assumption that services are getting better, progress will happen, and a relentless cycle of innovation" It is called a "bubble", I traveled frequently to Spain(my native country) and Ireland while the shared assumption that everything was getting better was at full power and all media was talking about those "economic miracles". When those miracles reversed it was not(and it is not) pretty. My father lived the Japanese "economic miracle" of Japan, the country that was going to rule the world. I lived 5 years in China at the beginning of the bubble. It is an entire world in itself, but they have BIG problems. I continue traveling and doing business in China, and it is getting worse day after day. When I was there I could use a normal VPN without problems, and Chinese authorities could not care less, as it was necessary for the business. But now you have to use like 6 layers of VPN, change patterns of navigation...because people in power is desperate to control their own people.
- reuven 11y agoI'm in Beijing this week. The pollution here has to be seen (and felt, as you breathe) to be believed. I'm not surprised that all sorts of technical solutions are being discussed, just because it's so crazy terrible. Whether such proposals (such as a mist cannon) is a real solution is a good question, but it's worth trying lots of stuff.
- banjobob 11y agoReducing pollution in the air, by polluting the water.
- kctess5 11y agoIt's going to land eventually... Just the water seems better than the water AND people's lungs
- contingencies 11y agoIt's 6:30AM here in the Chinese city of Kunming. I just returned from a 5AM trip to a market to buy some herbs for Christmas dishes. On the way I passed one of our many street cleaning water-tank trucks, which basically drive around all Chinese cities spraying the road and nearby traffic with water and a fine mist (just what you want at 5AM on an e-bike in the winter morning!). While they most operate in the early mornings and are no doubt targeted at dislodging and collecting road-top detritus, they have been about for ages and are very much ubiquitous. A separate fleet of trucks drive about spraying water on roadside gardens, which in some kind of cuddly holdover from socialist central planning are in fact very numerous compared to most western cities (with the exception of the center of older French cities, perhaps). Despite the construction boom going on, it's all Himalayan blue skies here! I pity the poor people in those polluted east-coast cities, and those in the north with their wintery outlook, and particularly those in the northeast like Beijing where not only do you have both problems, but the time dedicated to negotiating traffic every time you leave your house is soul-crushing...
- tokenadult 11y agoIt occurs to me, after reading this story a second time and reviewing the latest comments posted to this thread, that this is a science story that wasn't reported by a science journalist. It's not at all clear--only a company spokesman is quoted on the point--that the machine even WORKS. It's also not at all clear, even if the machine is effective at reducing air pollution (where is the independent evidence?), that it is as good for that or as inexpensive for that as other measures that might be taken to reduce air pollution. The town I grew up in has much less air pollution today than it had when I was young. The newly industrialized countries of east Asia (I am most familiar with Taiwan, but the fact is the same in other countries in the region) have less air pollution today than they had in their worst years. There is a lot known about technology and a lot known about effective regulation for reducing air pollution. This story really needs an experienced science reporter, not a rookie in international reporting, to tell the accurate story about what's the best thing to do to handle China's horrific problem with air pollution.[1] [1] "Study Links Polluted Air in China to 1.6 Million Deaths a Year" (New York Times 13 August 2015) http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/asia/study-links-polluted-air-in-china-to-1-6-million-deaths-a-year.html http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/14/world/asia/study-links-pol... Chinese version of story: "研究称中国每年有160万人死于空气污染" http://cn.nytimes.com/china/20150814/c14pollution/ http://cn.nytimes.com/china/20150814/c14pollution/ Other recent QZ articles about China, by other authors: http://qz.com/on/chinas-transition/ http://qz.com/on/chinas-transition/
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]