39 ms·
> So the report says the world should aim for 5 ug/m^3 or less of PM 2.5 annually, and 15 ug/m^3 or less PM 10 annually. Looks like a decent guideline, but it’
by strogonoff 5y ago
> So the report says the world should aim for 5 ug/m^3 or less of PM 2.5 annually, and 15 ug/m^3 or less PM 10 annually.
Looks like a decent guideline, but it’s important to keep in mind that there appears[0] to be no safe level of particulates.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Particulates
- infogulch 5y agoI wonder if there's a difference in harm caused between human-generated particulates vs particulates from, say, a forest. I assume at some point as air quality improves, natural pollen, bacteria, etc, would become a significant factor in simplified PM-based AQI, and my question is, is that still a problem?
- MichaelZuo 5y agoCertain types of fine particulates are certainly more harmful than even forest fire smoke. For example asbestos, brake dust, leaded gasoline in dust, etc. But the vast majority would probably be roughly the same.
- rubatuga 5y agoSomething like aerosolized salt from a humidifier using tap water is essentially harmless. But it still counts as PM2.5
- aaron695 5y agoThis is incorrect. It kills exactly the same. Filter your water. I think some bottled water might be worse than tap. If you live by the beach, it's like drinking or smoking, risk assess your PM2.5/PM10. Lower stress, less city pollution. Filter your air when you are not using the sea breeze to relax.