From today's news .... UNESCO has recommended that Venice be added to its heritage danger list. The group is calling on the Italian government to “ensure the utmost dedication” to address “long-standing problems” in Venice, which has been “grappling for years with too many tourists and the effects of climate change”, said CNN. The “popular and fragile” destination has been coping with a “veritable seesaw” of weather-related problems in recent years, added the broadcaster. Wasn't Venice supposed to have been submerged a few decades ago? I went there something like 35 years ago and they had already been saying that for many years. I get that there may be structural problems (sinking) but time & again, decade after decade, it's also supposedly 'climate change'.
https://www.independent.co.uk/space/umbrella-asteroid-earth-climate-change-b2386063.html It would be amazing if Brits could be the first to put the umbrella up.
Shades of June 07 today...Its coming down cats and dogs...We'll get a couple of weeks of dry weather and they'll be a hose pipe ban...
It is important to have some level of balance. Car emissions clearly are detrimental to health - the levels of asthma and lung issues in densely traffic populated cities show this. You can smell it, taste it and feel the difference if you go into London, having not lived there for a long time. But if someone dies of a cancer that is linked to NO2, for example, the coroner/doctor isn't going to sign off the death certificate as death from car emissions, as without a full investigation they can't really.. so that data request doesn't prove car emissions are safe, just that they're not directly linked to a death, as of yet.
That's because people like Khan are misusing the data on the health effects of air pollution. The Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP) where the figures can be sourced back to, explicitly stated it was not to be used in the way Khan does, as it is not appropriate. There statement is "Given this complexity, it is not plausible to think of the figure of ‘attributable’ deaths as enumerating an actual group of individuals whose death is attributable to air pollution alone, i.e. the victims of outdoor air pollution." Given that COMEAP is well represented by people from Imperial College, who are the ones that advised Khan, I find it difficult to believe that he is not aware of this misuse. There's a reasonable summary of where the number comes from, with links to the appropriate studies. https://wintoncentre.maths.cam.ac.uk/news/does-air-pollution-kill-40000-people-each-year-uk/ And here's another briefer one if you don't like the first one. https://www.hps.scot.nhs.uk/publica...-associated-with-air-pollutants-no2-and-pm25/
Without any scientific data, or a check with a spirometer, to prove as fact, during lockdown my breathing was a lot easier. I was not exposed to air pollution. However, the first port of call as to the cause of my COPD would be the 40-60 cigs a day I smoked many years ago. Not car fumes.
It sounds like playing around with numbers I've always thought that there would be a range of the shortening of life. If they say 40,000 died each year due to pollution then how many of that 40,000 died one hour early? how many died one day early? how many died one month early? Why dont they come up with similar statistics for smoking, drinking alcohol, taking illegal drugs?
Cars both petrol and diesel are loads less polluting than days of old and consume much less fuel. The burning of coal in open fires stopped years ago, so why is the pollution still high in the cities? Maybe all the eco warriors keeping warm with wood burning stoves.
Modern wood burning stoves hardly pollute if used properly. And open fires still exist and are in use, as is traditional house coal, although most people use smokeless coals these days.
Traditional house coal is no longer in use, it was banned completely in the UK, you can only buy smokeless brickets now.
A look at the data shows that the air is far cleaner now than even a decade ago, but that is for the things they measure in the places they measure them, and those tend to be set by knowledge from that time. Health data does not show that same improvement so something else is going on. It could be indoor or work issues, but I don't think there is much doubt that vehicles play a part in that ill health and I'd include EV's in that.
I have a feeling that plastic And it being in food and water is not too healthy And is worse than emissions
When I was a child, 45 years ago, 65 year olds were roughly in the same condition (as were most children also). Now, in my own extended family and network, there are 65 year olds who run ultra marathons and climb mountains and then there are 65 yr olds who are bedridden and on their way out (partly self caused and partly unlucky). Society seems to be getting more divided healthwise. Work and personal habits seem to be the main causes. I've been surrounded by oil fumes and had long term skin exposure to grease and petroleum related products over 3 decades of work, so supposedly at a much higher risk of skin cancer and other cancers in the future... happy days, but then if you work in a office and are sat down for 8 hours a day, you're more likely to have back, heart and weight problems... So it's swings and roundabouts. And then if you try and avoid it all, by not working, you're likely to get mental issues, get depression and early dementia, so there is no escape.
It doesn't though It says things like "average loss of life expectancy" The average is 3 days reduction of life for everybody over 30 There are so many wild assumptions used for every calculation the numbers have no meaning at all It's like the estimates that a certain country will have the most growth over the next ten years for a certain group of countries and then the actual numbers show the very same country has the least growth over the same ten years There's all the claims that whole countries will be completely under water in the next ten years and then 40 years later the water level is no different
Heard today about the start of the laying of the first of the 297 wind turbines being put in the dogger bank area of the North Sea. Substation is in Beverley area. All just short of the Eiffel Tower in height. All in place by 2026 but will I individually generate from day one. Largest wind farm in the world and will provide electricity for 6 million homes in the UK which is 5 percent of the UKs needs. Pretty impressive.
