
This isn't an outtake from Blade Runner – it's the real Beijing - doener
https://twitter.com/BrentToderian/status/617498633819172864
======
dockimbel
Beijinger since a year here. That's the famous "Dragon Tower" [1] where IBM
China is having its offices, located north of Beijing nearby the 4th ring and
Olympic Park. Franckly, it is very rarely that bad, maybe 10-15 days a year
with PM2.5 levels over 400 µg/m3.

That picture might even have been taken during the impressive sand storm over
Beijing in April this year [2], that's the most foggy day I've seen in the
last 12 months here. Looking at the sand storm coming and swallowing the
buildings from our offices on 10th floor was quite impressive. :-)

Also, if you live in a big city on any continent, you might want to check your
own pollution levels using the AQI site [3], you might be surprised by the
results. ;-)

[1]
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp7nLlaLaBg](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lp7nLlaLaBg)

[2] [http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/16/beijing-
sandstorm_n...](http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/16/beijing-
sandstorm_n_7081716.html)

[3] [http://aqicn.org/city/beijing/](http://aqicn.org/city/beijing/)

~~~
buro9
Interesting link... some world cities compared (current Air Quality Index at
time of writing before link):

 _VERY UNHEALTHY_

298: [http://aqicn.org/city/chicago/](http://aqicn.org/city/chicago/)

 _UNHEALTHY_

170: [http://aqicn.org/city/usa/washington/seattle/beacon-
hill/](http://aqicn.org/city/usa/washington/seattle/beacon-hill/)

 _UNHEALTHY FOR SENSITIVE GROUPS_

122: [http://aqicn.org/city/beijing/](http://aqicn.org/city/beijing/)

 _MODERATE_

96:
[http://aqicn.org/city/usa/oregon/portland/](http://aqicn.org/city/usa/oregon/portland/)

70: [http://aqicn.org/city/tokyo/](http://aqicn.org/city/tokyo/)

66: [http://aqicn.org/city/berlin/](http://aqicn.org/city/berlin/)

65: [http://aqicn.org/city/london/](http://aqicn.org/city/london/)

61: [http://aqicn.org/city/hongkong/](http://aqicn.org/city/hongkong/)

54: [http://aqicn.org/city/newyork/](http://aqicn.org/city/newyork/)

 _GOOD_

33: [http://aqicn.org/city/zurich/](http://aqicn.org/city/zurich/)

31: [http://aqicn.org/city/stockholm/](http://aqicn.org/city/stockholm/)

24: [http://aqicn.org/city/paris/](http://aqicn.org/city/paris/)

13: [http://aqicn.org/city/california/san-francisco/san-
francisco...](http://aqicn.org/city/california/san-francisco/san-francisco-
arkansas-street/)

~~~
thinkpad20
The number for Chicago doesn't strike me as accurate. I'm in the area right
now and it's a clear day. Plus, the levels for nearby areas in Chicago are far
lower (80 or so) and the historical levels are much lower. Looks like a blip.
That said, I'm sure Chicago is not the clearest city in general.

~~~
buro9
A quick Google and Wikipedia visit says that pm2.5 fine particulates of the
kind reported as being extremely high in some parts of Chicago, are not
visible except as a light haze over the city.

It appears to be true that you can have a bright mostly clear day and very
high levels of fine particulate pollution.

This haze is part of what contributes to smog when combined with other more
visible (course particulates) pollution. But these fine particulates don't
appear to be the product of fireworks as suggested below, and are more likely
to be the product of the coal power stations.

The measure for Chicago is probably skewed by one of the measuring stations
being nearer to, or down-wind from, a coal power station.

~~~
maxerickson
Why do you assume that the sampling methodology and calibration is ridiculous?

------
homarp
as answer tweet indicates
[https://twitter.com/lolamachine/status/617518791375912962](https://twitter.com/lolamachine/status/617518791375912962)

Credit where it's due, Twitter. That Beijing photo is by @nntd and first
appeared here [http://blogs.wsj.com/photojournal/2013/01/14/photos-of-
the-d...](http://blogs.wsj.com/photojournal/2013/01/14/photos-of-the-day-
jan-14-2/)

~~~
tedunangst
Why would you blame Twitter for a user misappropriating a picture?

~~~
homarp
Sorry, I forgot the "..." to indicate I was quoting the tweet. So I don't
know! If I can speculate, I would say that, per the history of
[https://twitter.com/lolamachine/](https://twitter.com/lolamachine/) , it
seems it is not the first time the photo is mis-appropriated, so 'twitter'
could be a short hand (because 140) for people of twitter, both posters and
retwitters.

------
miralabs
I still remember 2001 when I first arrived at Hongkong to work. My first day
at the office, I got teary eyed. I told my boss why is it so..he told me it's
because of the pollution and I should drink lots of water.

It is probably way lot worse now. I saw this documentary recently,
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6X2uwlQGQM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T6X2uwlQGQM)
it is a good watch. FYI China is also destroying marine life in the West
Philippine Sea [http://globalnation.inquirer.net/120699/ph-slams-china-
for-d...](http://globalnation.inquirer.net/120699/ph-slams-china-for-
destroying-marine-life-with-reclamation-works)
[http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2014/05/12/1322282/photos-...](http://www.philstar.com/headlines/2014/05/12/1322282/photos-
dead-turtles-chinese-ship-anger-filipinos)

~~~
STRML
I am not sure it is so bad there. I lived in HK from 2013-2014 and the
pollution was bearable. About 60-120 on the AQI scale (PM2.5)[1]. By US
standards that's orange/red (bad) but you get used to it.

In comparison, Beijing is routinely 500+. Manhattan is about 40. And some
parts of the west coast push 100+, most likely because of Chinese air floating
all the way over the Pacific.

[http://aqicn.org/city/hongkong/](http://aqicn.org/city/hongkong/)

~~~
davorb
> Manhattan is about 40

That's insane. Copenhagen is at 80.

------
badsock
A genuine question for the people on HN who think government should be as
small as possible, and that there shouldn't be agencies like the EPA: what
would be your non-government fix for this?

~~~
raldi
Even arch-libertarians believe in collecting fees to correct externalities.

~~~
badsock
And in what way does that differ from what the EPA does?

~~~
tim333
The EPA issues regulations which is different from collecting fees.

~~~
badsock
My understanding is that the worst of the pollution in Beijing is the many
thousands of people heating their houses and cooking with coal.

So in this scenario, there would be a team from the government who would drive
around and catch people burning coal (as that is clearly an externality) and
ask them to pay them money? Similar to how the BBC drives around and demands
fees if a person is caught watching TV without a licence?

~~~
tim333
The trouble with billing people for damage is it's usually too complicated to
do. The BBC fee is a fixed amount to pay to see its shows. London used to have
smog caused by people burning coal at home but they banned it after the 1952
smog killed 4000 people. Sadly I think the Chinese pollution has killed far
more than that.

------
Nursie
Go see Hong Kong sometime, same thing, massive screens taking up entire sides
of enormous tower blocks. Shenzhen too.

~~~
josai
Pollution in HK is nowhere near as bad as beijing, though. SZ's better but
does have its moments.

It's not everyday, but when the 'Jing has a bad day, it's really something
else. I don't know how people live there, it's terrible and you can just feel
it damaging your lungs. It encourages this positive feedback loop too - the
pollution is so bad you want to take a car everywhere, which of course
contributes to the pollution!

I wouldn't be surprised if a fair portion of uber's success in CN is due to
people not wanting to walk in the toxic smog. Would be interesting to see a
graph of pollution index vs. ride numbers.

[edit: positive not negative]

~~~
seanmcdirmid
You manage. Right now it's spring so the air is quite good. Summer will be a
bit hazy, fall will be very nice, then by late December it will be bad again.
Pollution season is only 3 months/year, though the air is often not super
great outside of that.

Also, uber isn't that successful in the jing, taxis are cheap enough (and ya,
there is an uber-like app for them), and if you want to go upscale there is
didi zhuanche (same app). You either take a car or a taxi, if you can afford
$5-$10, or a bus/subway/bike if you can't, pollution doesn't really affect
that.

~~~
josai
Hm, I've had people tell me that they prefer uber (or the other app you
mentioned - i couldn't remember its name) because the cars tend to be better,
and with better air filtering. Maybe that gave me the impression it's more
popular than it actually is.

Certainly I'd spend a couple bucks more to sit for an hour (or more!) in an
audi or VW over a hyundai..

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Uber is completely off the radar right now, I think they only service some
parts of chaoyang even, I do most of my travel from haidian to chaoyang. Didi
zhuanche offers better cars, but not Audi (maybe you are thinking of
Shanghai?)...at best a VW or Buick.

Taxi is quite ok when the air is really bad. You can only filter so much air
in a car, and it's not like they are putting in giant HEPA filters. The main
problem I have is sleeping with the window closed when the air is bad...even
with the air filter going, it is very hard to sleep soundly.

~~~
josai
Hey, thanks for sharing your local experience. I've only visited! I thought
uber black runs audis in BJ but I only heard that from a friend. Maybe I or he
was confused.

Out of interest, why do you have issues sleeping with the window closed?
Frankly, it would be extremely rare for me to sleep with the windows open no
matter where I am.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Probably because as a Seattleite, it's what I'm used to (no ac or heat
needed). Chinese people think I'm nuts, especially when we have to share rooms
on trips. Couple that with preferred western sleeping temperatures being much
lower than Asian ones...it leads to conflict.

------
orthoganol
You really can feel it in your lungs. People hocking up lougies everywhere in
public (sometimes on your shoes if they don't see you walking by). It's a
desperate state of affairs IMO.

------
mkristian
Meh.. Cool story and all, but Beijing isn't really that bad. Nobody wants to
see a picture of a clear sky and yeah, the picture is real. but you will see
something like this very rarely.

As a kid growing up in Europe, I remember pollution and acid rain and whatnot
being a hot topic on the news every night. Its okay today, but it took time
and it will take time in China also, but the government there is doing
something about it for sure.

------
corysama
Source [http://blogs.wsj.com/photojournal/2013/01/14/photos-of-
the-d...](http://blogs.wsj.com/photojournal/2013/01/14/photos-of-the-day-
jan-14-2/) has a higher-rez version.

------
sysk
Here's another good one:
[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2540955/Beijing-
clou...](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2540955/Beijing-clouded-smog-
way-sunrise-watch-giant-commercial-screens-Tiananmen-Square.html)

------
shoo
if you also suddenly want to listen to the appropriate background music:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwhZ11lcOJQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwhZ11lcOJQ)

------
kazinator
The background image, on the other hand, looks an lot like the False Creek
neighborhood of Vancouver, Canada.

~~~
Tiktaalik
Ironically Vancouver is deeply sepia toned this morning, not too unlike the
Bejing photo, due to a nearby forest fire. I've never seen anything like it.

[http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Smoke+creates+eerie+morning...](http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Smoke+creates+eerie+morning+coast/11189684/story.html)

~~~
kazinator
I took the opportunity to safely stare at the haze-dimmed Sun through a pair
of binoculars.

------
auganov
Going back home from China always feels like you just changed draw distance in
a game.

------
rottyguy
anyone know what time of day this is?

