A ridiculous article from the guardian.

[matelot]

Is it just me, or is the Guardian being more stingy with its comment option in recent months?

 

Yeah, I think you're right. I think the problem the Guardian has is that they do not have the money (staff) to monitor the comments. I also think they don't like comments on certain articles as the articles are torn to shreds by the readers.

 

Before I was banned, by the Guardian, the most "recommends" I ever had was 400 happy days

[Vespasian]

What a load of cobblers, what next, housing and other building stop the natural airflow in the the environment.. particulates settle on brickwork?...

 

 

What a load of crap...

[spudulike]

Sadly, the only thing that seems to be wrong with this planet is mankind!

[Haironyourchest]

Yeah, I think you're right. I think the problem the Guardian has is that they do not have the money (staff) to monitor the comments. I also think they don't like comments on certain articles as the articles are torn to shreds by the readers.

 

Before I was banned, by the Guardian, the most "recommends" I ever had was 400 happy days

 

I haven't been banned yet, but they did delete one of my comments, and sent me an email explaing why. I can't find the reply I email back, but I remember it ended "...P.S Bite my knob."

[10 Bears]

Although you may not believe it, this Guardian article however poor it may be, is founded on some clearly defined research that has influenced the NICE recommendations:

 

Magnetic biomonitoring of roadside tree leaves: identification of spatial and temporal variations invehicle-derived particulates

Spatial variation in vehicle-derived metal pollution identified by magnetic and elemental analysis of roadside tree leaves

 

If you don't want to read all of the papers, just read the abstract. They are fairly convincing findings...

Edited December 2, 2016 by 10 Bears

[Jon Heuch]

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/dec/01/trees-may-increase-air-pollution-on-city-streets

 

Ah yes, almost as ridiculous as the headline "planting trees in cities is going to save 10,000 lives...." which I think was recently tweeted.

 

The reality is that urban air pollution is a serious but complex problem and planting trees isn't going to solve it - go to any forum considering the issue and planting trees is not really a headline act; there may be locations where vegetation (typically at ground/head level, not 15 metres up) may significantly reduce some aspects of pollution (particulates) but solving the NOx problem requires banning diesil engines.....which is what Mexico, Paris and others are considering; I am led to be believe that Tokyo has done so already and of course Los Angeles is heading towards zero emission vehicles at some point.

 

So, it's the "tree" community that has got itself in its own warp of thinking trees can only do good and that having more of them must be a good thing, assisted by a need to reduce air pollution. Difficult to face evidence that points the other way....

[Mark Bolam]

Jon stop being so bloody sensible and reasonable.

You're ruining the thread.

[Gary Prentice]

I read somewhere, that during the LA Olympics traffic was considerably reduced with people either delaying their journey or not going to work at all. The drop in emergency hospital emissions due to respiratory problems for the same period was staggering.

 

But as Jon says, it's a complex problem which will only be resolved with less emissions.

[TimberCutterDartmoor]

So you ban diesel cars to supposedly deal with the NOx issue. Then you're back to increased H2S, ultrafines and greater CO2. More UHC too for non warmed up motors.

 

Fantastic.

[tree79]

Although you may not believe it, this Guardian article however poor it may be, is founded on some clearly defined research that has influenced the NICE recommendations:

 

Magnetic biomonitoring of roadside tree leaves: identification of spatial and temporal variations invehicle-derived particulates

Spatial variation in vehicle-derived metal pollution identified by magnetic and elemental analysis of roadside tree leaves

 

If you don't want to read all of the papers, just read the abstract. They are fairly convincing findings...

 

 

 

I haven't read the above findings (sorry) but have they taken in to account the pollutes the absorb?