A retired chemical engineer in the Environmental Protection Dept in HK sent me this link :
Read More
which you might find of interest. I have not read it yet at this point but thought should convey it promptly.
He made the following points :
- Pls read this regarding the progress of amending the law - Air Pollution Control Ordinance Cap 311 ---- BUT ignore the mathematical transformation from pm10 to pm2.5 in the article.
- HK does not monitor pm 2.5 at this juncture. EPD is still considering amending the law to give effect to that. hk is not monitoring pm2.5 now and is quite far away from that point.
- The Epd department is monitoring pm10 only and is trying to convince people that there is a relationship between pm2.5 and pm 10 and knowing one may know the other. Based on a tiny little experiment it did with both pm2.5 and pm10 equipment side by side, it found the above so called relationship and that hk pm2.5 data were acceptable and hence it asks hk people to be patient (with the usual HKGovt procrastination).
- That assumption of any relationship between the 2 parameters is totally wrong !!!!
- People should be concerned. WHO would not tell government to monitor pm2.5 separate from pm10 if one could derive pm2.5 from pm10.
- Gary Locke, last US Ambassador to China fought for, an won, the pm2.5 indicator to be known to the public. He was coerhsed by BJ not to show the data. He stood firm, to the huge embarrassment of China because no one uses China’s data. She later officially adopted the US Embassy pm2.5 data (that’s from my memory recall. The link here should tell the history accurately:
Read More
- tell her that YES she should be worried because the department is slow in passing the law to monitor pm2.5. Hk has many Diesel engine vehicles that emit particulates 2.5 microns in diameter and many of these vehicles don't have particulate traps. examples of such vehicles are buses, taxis, mini vans (14 sweaters), lorries, etc.
- Having said all that, I cannot comment on the data obtained by bel air mom because air quality equipment are highly sensitive and must be calibrated daily. So I don't know whether the data she obtained are accurate.
I write to salute you for your vigilance and perseverance to post the data. Should contact the NEXT magazine. They have the power to reach scientific institutions (such as the universities) for scientific verifications and may run a story on this which the Govt pays attn to as it reaches many in HK.
I am not a scientist but isn’t Bel Aire right across the 3 chimmeys. Isn’t the chimneys emitting a lot of pollutants ?