×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

NASA Releases Orbital Photos of Beijing's Air Pollution

Soulskill posted about a year ago | from the lungfuls-of-death dept.

China 143

skade88 writes "This story should remind us all that air pollution controls are not just about addressing global warming. They also help us have cleaner air and fewer health problems resulting from smog and haze. Starting earlier this month, Beijing, China started having worse than normal air pollution issues. On January 14, 2013 the U.S. embassy's air pollution sensors in Beijing found the density of the most dangerous small air particles, PM 2.5, at 291 micrograms per cubic meter of air. The World Health Organization's guidelines for air pollution state that PM 2.5 above 25 micrograms per cubic meter of air is dangerous to a person's health. To put the problem into perspective, NASA has released two orbital photos of Beijing showing before-and-during images of the air pollution. The photo from January 4 shows parts of Beijing still visible from space. The photo from January 14 shows nothing but a huge, thick cloud of haze with no buildings visible."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

143 comments

Oh snap! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598215)

You see that China?! Oh, wait, no, you don't... because of the pollution! Booyah!

Re:Oh snap! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598255)

What you meant to say is "Nothing to see here, move along."

Good news in disguise (2, Interesting)

Taco Cowboy (5327) | about a year ago | (#42598443)

China has been dragging its feet on global warming reforms. China has been emphatically objecting to any cut in its produce of green house gases (and other pollutants).

Now that Beijing (and surrounding cities in China) are being blanketed by the thick polluted and toxic fog, the Chinese leadership may be forced to alter their strategy and move away from pollution-generating industries.

Re: Good news in disguise (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42599513)

B.S. China has had horrible air pollution for years. This isn't a new thing. They aren't going to change their minds about global warming issues over this

Re:Good news in disguise (1)

mug funky (910186) | about a year ago | (#42599883)

citations on any of that?

the pollution part seems to be the only part of your post that is in any way correlated with reality.

Re:Good news in disguise (1)

moeinvt (851793) | about a year ago | (#42601893)

This smog blocks sunlight from reaching the earth, thereby reducing the amount of 'global warming' that is taking place.

Re:Oh snap! (5, Funny)

Moblaster (521614) | about a year ago | (#42598281)

I remember from my youth that's what LA used to look like in the 70s. Those were back in the days we had to walk 5 miles to school each day in the dirty gray snow. Course once we realized it was not actually snow, but several inches of dusty sooty crud, we stopped wearing our parkas.

Re:Oh snap! (1)

sconeu (64226) | about a year ago | (#42598621)

I'm from LA, too... I can't remember the last Smog Alert we had.... And when I was a kid, most of the summer was First Stage, with a few Second Stage alerts every year.

Re:Oh snap! (2)

jamesh (87723) | about a year ago | (#42599129)

I'm from LA, too... I can't remember the last Smog Alert we had.... And when I was a kid, most of the summer was First Stage, with a few Second Stage alerts every year.

Outsourcing works both ways I guess. China might get the jobs but they also get stuck with the pollution.

Re:Oh snap! (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about a year ago | (#42599573)

I'm from LA, too... I can't remember the last Smog Alert we had.... And when I was a kid, most of the summer was First Stage, with a few Second Stage alerts every year.

Outsourcing works both ways I guess. China might get the jobs but they also get stuck with the pollution.

I'm fairly sure it wont be long before they trick us into buying it off them.

Re:Oh snap! (1)

Shavano (2541114) | about a year ago | (#42599799)

I'm from LA, too... I can't remember the last Smog Alert we had.... And when I was a kid, most of the summer was First Stage, with a few Second Stage alerts every year.

Outsourcing works both ways I guess. China might get the jobs but they also get stuck with the pollution.

I'm fairly sure it wont be long before they trick us into buying it off them.

You used to be able to buy LA smog by the can.

Re:Oh snap! (3, Informative)

petsounds (593538) | about a year ago | (#42600053)

Not true. They may get the jobs, but we also get the pollution. The planet is a living thing, and things that happen in China don't stay in China.

Much of the particulate pollution over Los Angeles originates in China, according to the Journal of Geophysical Research. [nytimes.com]

China dust storms travel to California [nasa.gov]

Re:Oh snap! (1)

jamesh (87723) | about a year ago | (#42600215)

Didn't know that. Do now. Still, is it going to be that thick by the time it gets there?

Re:Oh snap! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42601481)

For LA it wasn't the industry but the cars and trucks coupled with a location designed for trapping stagnant air. Pollution controls on vehicles are the primarily reason that the smog has been eliminated.

Re:Sand storms (0)

AssholeMcGee (2521806) | about a year ago | (#42601111)

How much of this is from the sand storms? I do remember reading how sand storms were a problem but I am not sure if they affect Beijing! I believe this is some pathetic attempt by the U.S to smear China, if indeed --part--of what your seeing is sand dust. You think this is bad here is what they are dealing with in Italy------ http://www.npr.org/2012/12/27/167964697/a-showdown-in-italy-over-a-polluting-steel-plant [npr.org]

Re:Oh snap! (1)

cayenne8 (626475) | about a year ago | (#42598379)

Well...it isn't like they have a low population problem or anything.

So, no need to act on this too terribly quickly.

Re:Oh snap! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598691)

NASA, next time show orbital photos of their cheating wives.

that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (0)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | about a year ago | (#42598249)

that's what the job killing lines get you stuff like this when you cheap out and just dump stuff out with not paying the costs to clean it up.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598387)

Don't worry, soon they will be able to buy a bankrupt North American and use it for a garbage & pollutants dump.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (4, Insightful)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#42599823)

You really need to learn about what exactly bankruptcy entails.

Iceland went bankrupt a couple of years ago. The effects make a good case study.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (2)

TheGratefulNet (143330) | about a year ago | (#42598409)

penny wise and pound foolish.

give me 'teh shiney!' right now and I want it cheap. the rest be damned.

sadly, I don't think we'll learn our lesson or see the trend. half of the US is global-warming doubters or deniers and there is little sign of any of those people really wising up. most of them are older guys who DON'T CARE since they'll be dead in a decade or two, tops; and they think that they can stick it out this far on our destroyed earth.

the pessimist in me says that we will only realize what we've done once its too late. and then, well, it will be too late!

but KEEP BUYING and feeding landfills with your old electronics. that 2 yr old phone is 'not worth having' anymore so just chuck it. let it be someone else's problem, "later on".

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (-1, Troll)

fafaforza (248976) | about a year ago | (#42598567)

> half of the US is global-warming doubters or deniers

And I suppose the other half are Al Gore sycophants ready to throw money at whatever scheme portends to fix all of our ills, when all it will do is benefit the few.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (1)

beamin (23709) | about a year ago | (#42598579)

Indeed, clean air and water will be hoarded by the "Al Gore sycophants".

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (2)

saihung (19097) | about a year ago | (#42601191)

I wonder, how sick do you have to be to believe that Al Gore has anything at all to do with global climate change?

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (3, Interesting)

geekoid (135745) | about a year ago | (#42598601)

Landfill is a management issue, not a volume issue.

We could dig a hole a mile to a side, put all are garbage into it and it would be half full in about 700 years at our current rate of growth.

frankly I would have separate holes, for different material so we will have easy access when we figure out how to effectively recycle them.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (2)

Waffle Iron (339739) | about a year ago | (#42599665)

Who is "we"?

If it's the US, each person creates about 3.5 pounds of trash per day. Let's make the generous assumption that it compresses to 1kg/l, and feed it into GNU units:

You have: 3e8 * 3.5lb * 365 * l/kg
You want: mile^3
        * 0.04170626

So the total annual US volume is 0.04 cubic miles, and your cubic mile hole (which would be impossible to actually dig, BTW, and pointless too because where would you put the dirt?) would fill up in only 24 years, not 1400 years.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#42599787)

The US has 3.8E6 square miles of land surface. About 18% of that is arable leaving 3.11E6 square miles of potential landfill. Suppose we close the landfill once the depth is 200 ft. That leaves with a mere 124640 cu miles of capacity. At the current rate of consumption we have over 3 million years left.

The GP is right. Landfills are a political problem.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (2)

Waffle Iron (339739) | about a year ago | (#42599895)

The GP was not right. Being off by orders of magnitude is not something to brush off.

The problem may be largely political, but that doesn't mean it's not real. Each potential landfill site is surrounded by about a hundred of square miles of NIMBY, and rightfully so. Landfills stink, and looking at a mountain of garbage topped by swarming seagulls is downright creepy. Nobody wants to live anywhere near that, and they don't want their property values ruined. That's why they find it hard to open any new landfills.

Quoting theoretical volume numbers without real-world context is silly.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (0)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#42599713)

I'm not a climate denier or anything like that.

The problem is though that it really doesn't matter what the US does. Developing nations are so inefficient and growing so fast that pretty much anything the US does ins't really going to matter much.

So we are going to run a planetary scale experiment and guess what it may not have that great a result.

After all - biologists know that no organism can live in it's own waste products.

Re: that's what the job killing lines get you stuf (1)

skovnymfe (1671822) | about a year ago | (#42601041)

So because it doesnt matter, the US might as well not bother trying at all, is what you're saying, hm?

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (3, Insightful)

saihung (19097) | about a year ago | (#42601207)

That is exceedingly sloppy thinking. Pollution is a problem of combined effects from multiple sources. Your claim that the USA, or Europe, or Japan reducing their respective pollution outputs "won't make a difference" isn't just an overstatement, it is false. EVERY bit makes a difference. The same logic you just used justifies every kind of petty offense in the world.

Collective problems require incremental solutions. Just because you cannot personally observe the effects of every increment doesn't mean it's irrelevant.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (5, Informative)

DerekLyons (302214) | about a year ago | (#42598549)

Nice try, but no. Beijing isn't that big of a manufacturing center (relatively speaking) - most of the pollution comes from IC engines and (especially important this time of year) the decentralized system of coal powered hot water plants that provides most of the cities heating.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (5, Interesting)

ihatewinXP (638000) | about a year ago | (#42599179)

Relatively speaking?

Have you been outside the 5th ring road? Ive seen factories the likes id never seen in my life. Sprawls of smokestacks just chugging away. Not to mention the fact that DAMN NEAR EVERY RESTAURANT AND MANY HOMES STILL USE COAL.

During the Olympics in 08 they had all the factories shut down for a month prior and seeded the clouds for a week to wash the city and air. Worked wonderfully.

Cars are a problem - and a growing one to say the least - but dont be too quick to discount the manufacturing and a city of 16 million still using coal.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42600319)

Cars are not the problem, shitty diesel cars and mopeds are however. Emission standards work. LA proves this. If we were to transplant all of LA where Bejing geographically resides now, there would be a night and day difference in pollution levels.

Re:that's what the job killing lines get you stuff (2)

waveclaw (43274) | about a year ago | (#42599387)

At what point do the particulates start to cause problems with Internal Combustion?

I can find plenty of information on what it does when humans breath that stuff in (hint: a coal miner is you!) but little on when the engines start to choke on their own output.

Diesel engines can operate on some pretty ridiculous fuel mixtures as long as there is enough oxygen. Considering how nasty oxides can be once mixed into water I'd expect something else in the power train (beyond the operator's lungs) would break down before the engine couldn't cycle on that mix of "air".

"meat vacuums" (4, Funny)

hedley (8715) | about a year ago | (#42598275)

In a rather Bender-esque way, the literal translation from Mandarin for its populi (the PM2.5 breathers) is "Meat vacuums", and not in a good way I might add.

H.

It's ok. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598279)

Nothing to worry about here. Pollution is only bad when America does it.

Hiding from Space? (4, Funny)

bobstreo (1320787) | about a year ago | (#42598291)

Go go gadget smokescreen!

Re:Hiding from Space? (1)

Kinky Bass Junk (880011) | about a year ago | (#42598321)

That was my first thought too - it would be quite beneficial for the Chinese government to block satellite imagery through geo-engineering.

Re:Hiding from Space? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598357)

My thougts exaclty, they got bored of those pesky weilos trying to guess ther secret infraestructure visible in google maps

How to tell if it's natural or man-made? (0)

aNonnyMouseCowered (2693969) | about a year ago | (#42599207)

Aside from the obvious correlation, there's smog in our Street View and Haze in our spysat, is there any way to tell if the "smokescreen" is natural or man-made? How can one tell a dust storm from smog, cloud formations, or the plumes of a gigantic volcanic eruption? I know from elementary science that clouds are pollution.

The US is no better (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598293)

Perhaps Americans should consider improving their own woeful environmental standards before throwing stones at other countries, as good as it may make them feel. Not to mention that China's pollution problems are a direct result of American consumer and corporate greed. Oh, but of course, ignorance is blissful.

The US government should mind its own business.

Re:The US is no better (5, Interesting)

magarity (164372) | about a year ago | (#42598363)

Smog in some US cities was bad way back in the '70's but nowhere near what it's like in Beijing this month. When you call US environmental conditions "woeful" attached to an article about the pollution going on in China, it really lets your ignorance shine. The US environment isn't perfect, but yes, it is vastly superior.

Re:The US is no better (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598517)

Exactly!

It's always amazing when folks of the GPs ilk decry the US and it's environmental stance/views/policies/etc... and yet never once raise a finger or voice about China.

At the end of the day it just demonstrates that most of the most vocal environmentalists who spend so much time attacking the US aren’t so much pro-environment... as they are anti-America... ala the GP.

Re:The US is no better (1)

saihung (19097) | about a year ago | (#42601221)

Reading that comment made all of us dumber.

You can't protest against China, because China doesn't give a damn about you or anything you say. If you're going to lobby for policy changes, it helps to lobby something you have an actual chance of changing.

Simple explanation (1)

aNonnyMouseCowered (2693969) | about a year ago | (#42599159)

It's easy to see why US environmental conditions should be better. China is a more dense country. There are more people/polluters per square area than in the US. A more meaningful comparison would be between countries or political units with approximate population densities and levels of development, say the US vs. Europe or China vs. India.

Re:The US is no better (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42601095)

European prejudice coming: You must be american. You confuse "superiour" and "not as bad as the worst".

Re:The US is no better (3, Insightful)

brkello (642429) | about a year ago | (#42598399)

So you should tell us what bliss feels like.

The EPA has actually made huge strides in the U.S. To the point that big cities which used to have smog constantly and you could see the air are now clear.

There is always room to approve...but if you think we are anywhere near China...you aren't really paying attention.

Re:The US is no better (5, Interesting)

hondo77 (324058) | about a year ago | (#42598859)

The EPA has actually made huge strides in the U.S. To the point that big cities which used to have smog constantly and you could see the air are now clear.

So, naturally, Republicans want to end the EPA [google.com]. Can't let the hippies win!

Re:The US is no better (1)

fluffy99 (870997) | about a year ago | (#42599409)

The EPA budget for FY 2013 is $8.6 billion dollars (not including other funding sources like enforcement fines). Many view it as too damn costly for the benefit seen, considering that it overlaps heavily with State functions. It's very reasonable to question this spending when you consider this country is in heavy debt and needs to figure out what can be trimmed from the budget.

Re:The US is no better (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | about a year ago | (#42599689)

Read the news. The Sequester hits the EPA budget pretty hard.

http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/04/13/13greenwire-epa-budget-deal-slams-state-regional-programs-26003.html [nytimes.com]

Of course when you read the article all of a sudden you start wondering whether this was the right priority.

Re:The US is no better (1)

fluffy99 (870997) | about a year ago | (#42599757)

I didn't necessarily think it should be a high priority, just that it was reasonable to look at their budget and nothing should be off-limits for scrutiny. In reality, the EPA budget makes up less than 1/10 of a percent of the overall federal budget. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/total [usgovernmentspending.com]. Or about 1% of the total spending deficit. http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/breakdown [usgovernmentspending.com]. Really insignificant when you consider the total deficit is 17.5-trillion,

No politician is willing to commit political suicide by trying to tackle medicare and social security which are the major spending.

Re:The US is no better (1)

phantomfive (622387) | about a year ago | (#42600457)

No politician is willing to commit political suicide by trying to tackle medicare and social security which are the major spending.

That's not true, Paul Ryan has made a big issue of it. Whatever you may think of the man, he's quite impressive in that way.

Re:The US is no better (2)

Waffle Iron (339739) | about a year ago | (#42599741)

Many view it as too damn costly for the benefit seen,

Mostly tea party types. Considering that 8.6 billion is less than the cost of a single week of all Medicare benefits that those mostly tea party types collect, I'd say the EPA is a bargain.

Why don't we cut out tea party types' Medicare benefits in excess of what they paid in? Now that would really save money.

considering that it overlaps heavily with State functions.

So we could have yet another race to the bottom in standards as various states try to "create jobs" by luring short-sighted business owners from other states with promises of lax regulations.

Re:The US is no better (1)

tippe (1136385) | about a year ago | (#42599779)

I wonder how much of that new-found clean air is actually due to the EPA's actions vs all of the formerly polluting industry moving to China. On the one hand good riddance, but on the other hand the loss of all that industry seems to be causing us other problems...

Re:The US is no better (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598433)

Neither was Europe back in the Industrial Age. You're saying Europeans Slashdotters have no right to criticize the US's energy and environmental policy.

Re:The US is no better (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598451)

heh, Chinese greed is what rapes your country and treats your people like substandard objects, course if you had a pair you might stand up for yourself, instead you dont and you just whine and bitch

poor little china

Re:The US is no better (5, Insightful)

YrWrstNtmr (564987) | about a year ago | (#42598471)

Perhaps Americans should consider improving their own woeful environmental standards before throwing stones at other countries, as good as it may make them feel.

Aaaannndddd there it is.

I propose a new 'law', similar to Godwin and others.

Any discussion pointing out a countries problems will include, within the first 20 comments, a reference to how the USA is worse with regard to that particular problem.
We could call it the 'Dumbfuck Law'.

Re:The US is no better (3, Insightful)

fafaforza (248976) | about a year ago | (#42598581)

I also like how representatives of other countries point to the issues the US had decades ago, in regards to manufacturing standards, health, labor laws, etc. Sure, there were growing pains, but should you not learn from them? The US was after all at the forefront of industrialization. Should you not vaccinate people, but instead wait until your own scientists learn about invisible bacterial, or about penicillin, or about carbon emissions?

That whole argument is very weak to me.

Re:The US is no better (3, Insightful)

beamin (23709) | about a year ago | (#42598615)

US environmental conditions are much better, especially since we decided to offshore our toxic manufacturing needs to China.

Re:The US is no better (1)

G-Man (79561) | about a year ago | (#42600353)

Sounds like something that idiot Michael Moore would say. I propose we call it Moore's Law. Oh wait...

Re:The US is no better (2)

romiz (757548) | about a year ago | (#42600959)

It was a standard Soviet rhetoric tactic, and earned the nickname of "whataboutism [wikipedia.org]".

Re:The US is no better (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42601643)

Actualy, its calling out a hypocrisy.
Doesnt need a special name just because it is not favorable for US.

Re:The US is no better (4, Informative)

Dahamma (304068) | about a year ago | (#42598707)

US standards are PM2.5 of 15ppm annually and 35ppm over 24 hour average, and regions are considered "non-compliant" and have to take corrective action if they don't meet that. China hit 800ppm on 1/12/13. And you know who's fault that is? China's. Don't even pretend their government is somehow owned by US interests. It's getting closer to the other way around.

So, yes, the US is a HELL of a lot better environmentally. Please do the tiny bit of research it takes before saying stupid shit like that.

Re:The US is no better (1, Troll)

khallow (566160) | about a year ago | (#42599101)

Perhaps Americans should consider improving their own woeful environmental standards before throwing stones at other countries

The US did that in the 70s. We've moved on.

The US government should mind its own business.

Why? When was the last general election for the Chinese head of state? It's an out of control, illegitimate government actively harming its citizens. If the free world just lets it fester, then one day, that might harm the rest of us as well (for example, by providing support for a global tyranny). I consider it good international hygiene to publicize the flaws and weaknesses in such a governments and to pressure it to change.

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (2)

Kittenman (971447) | about a year ago | (#42598301)

Those Romans had a phrase for everything. This may be true, but I'm sure we're jumping to a conclusion.

Re:Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598393)

And what conclusion would that be?

Re:Post hoc, ergo propter hoc (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598513)

That pollution caused the cloud cover and not some other mystery force.

Of course it's pollution, same as Athens or the San Fernando Valley, and it has the same problem of airflow or the lack thereof thanks to bordering mountain ranges.

YO !! CHINA !! MAKE MY PHONES AND BE HAPPY !! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598345)

Don't worry !! All will be fine !! Just make my phones !!

Yours,
Big Fat Happy American Camper !!

Nice dot gov (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598453)

That is the nicest .gov I have visited. Well done and thanks.

For those who don't know (5, Informative)

cvnautilus (1793340) | about a year ago | (#42598465)

PM 2.5 stands for particulate matter smaller than 2.5 micrometers.

According to the Wikipedia [wikipedia.org] particles of this size cause a broad array of terrible consequences in the body.

Re:For those who don't know (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42598763)

"Also at the time of the image, the air quality index (AQI) in Beijing was 341. An AQI above 300 is considered hazardous to all humans, not just those with heart or lung ailments. AQI below 50 is considered good. On January 12, the peak of the current air crisis, AQI was 775 the U.S Embassy Beijing Air Quality Monitor—off the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency scale—and PM2.5 was 886 micrograms per cubic meter."

Re:For those who don't know (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42600177)

This AQI thing is interesting, hadn't heard of it before, so I thought I'd look it up. Seems my region over the past 12 days has had an AQI of between 20 and 70, and over the past 24 hours has an AQI between 20 and 40. Hooray for Australia! Or more so, hooray for not China!

Re:For those who don't know (2)

Anubis IV (1279820) | about a year ago | (#42598767)

Additionally, if you read the article (I know, I know), you'll see that the numbers reported by the U.S. embassy climbed up to 886 micrograms per cubic meter, rather than the 291 micrograms per cubic meter stated in the summary (291 was how bad it was when the pictures were taken by NASA, but that wasn't even when it was at its worst), though both the summary and the article agree that 25 micrograms per cubic meter is the cut-off for where things start to get dangerous. That really puts in perspective just how bad the smog got.

Description of AQI and particulates (2)

GrahamJ (241784) | about a year ago | (#42598719)

Here's a handy chart of Air Quality Index and a description of some of the more noxious substances:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/graphic/2013/jan/15/what-in-beijing-polluted-air

This is deliberate policy. (4, Funny)

conspirator23 (207097) | about a year ago | (#42598809)

China has replaced their "One Child" program of population control with a new "One Lung" policy.If you can't get rid of the babies, at least you can weed out the weak, the old, and the heavy breathers.

Why all the fuss? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42599125)

Someone just turned off the "Disable fog of war" cheat.

Woh! (1)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about a year ago | (#42599583)

Lets just thank god they're burning all that coal rather than risking the remote chance of an accident in some super evil Nuclear power plant.

Re:Woh! (1)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about a year ago | (#42601849)

Straw man. Coal power plants are not the cause of this. Even if 100% of energy was nuclear it would not make an appreciable difference.

Nice false dichotomy too. China is in fact the worlds biggest investor in renewable energy, and of course has a fair few gas power stations, and in fact IS building many new nuclear plants as well.

Chinese Cover-Up, Literally. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42599649)

The Chinese have embarked on a daring new plan to obscure themselves from US satellite photography. Operation Brown-Cloud, GO!

ironic (5, Insightful)

csumpi (2258986) | about a year ago | (#42599837)

We send manufacturing over there because it's cheaper. A major reason why it's cheaper is the lack of regulations. No need for smoke filters, no worries about dumping waste in waters. Then we take pictures and post it on the internet. And we feel good about our yard and complain about theirs.

Re:ironic (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42601857)

don't eat where you shit. don't shit where you eat.

It's a horrible truth, i'm not a horrible person for saying it.

Here We GO ! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42600001)

Little Jimmy Hansen, Janet 'Planet' and The Other Political Administrators of DoI, and underlings EPA, and the not to forget our CyberSluts DHS are all masturbating, both male and female, themselves to a bloody climax right about now.

Lordy Lordy. What a Mess !

NO science here ! Just a lot of ejaculate and entrails on the floor and face of the Celebrities (We call them 'Talents' in Japan by the way) One And All.

XD

It was kinda bad in 2001 (1)

djbckr (673156) | about a year ago | (#42600049)

I traveled to China (Beijing, Wuhan, and Guangzhou) in 2001 and I remember when we landed in Beijing how smoggy it was there. Pretty much the entire country (the parts we saw) were all like this. Of course, this is much worse, but I thought it was kinda bad even back then.

Google (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year ago | (#42600145)

It's just China's way to stop google maps!

Why China sucks (2)

GodfatherofSoul (174979) | about a year ago | (#42600571)

* It's communist
* Rampant pollution
* The kleptocracy that festers when communism fuses with capitalism
* One-child policy plus a society that devalues women means women are shrinking as a percentage of the population; translation, China is a sausage fest.

But, it's a capitalist's eutopia!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...