On 19/9/19 in Today paper "NEA addresses questions over the veracity of PSI, as alternative air quality reading emerge". Same old story over the years every time when haze descends upon Singapore - NEA desperately defending their 24hrs average data.
NEA Dr Khairunnisa Yuhya even accused aqicn.org haze reading as being 'incorrect' compare to NEA 24 hr PSI reading. Aqicn.org is not incorrect but more accurate as it is instantcast reading. Besides their data is obtained from NEA hourly reading, so how can it be incorrect ? If NEA converts its 1 hr PM2.5 reading in ug/m3 into PSI, its reading will be very close to those of aqicn.org too.
Why does NEA not convert its hourly reading into PSI ? Their 24 hr average PSI reading is actually converted from ug/m3. The only reason for not doing so for the 1 hr reading is that they don't want the public have easy comparison. Most folks only remember the number above '100' PSI means unhealthy. But they may not be aware that 56 ug/m3 in the 1 hr reading is equivalent to above 100 PSI. The descriptive 'elevated' in 1 hr reading has the same meaning as 'unhealthy' in 24 hr averaged data. (note: as safe exposure limit for PM2.5 is base on 24 hrs, for conservative safety reason, we can base 1 hr safe expose limit on the 24 hr recommendation ie 56 ug/m3 'elevated' being the start of unhealthy range)
NEA don't seems to understand that for public safety - its 24 hr average reading is not helpful at all. As an analogy, if there is a chemical gas leak in a factory - workers will be evacuated base on real time reading. Emergency response team will put on protective mask base on real time reading. This is the same for environmental pollution - public should base their decision on real time reading and NOT averaged down 24 hrs data.
Environment pollution 24 hour data is used to gauge exposure health issues that may arises. Public decision to wear face mask or to stay indoor or not - should be based on real time reading (1 hr data). It is NOT safe to base decision on 24 hour averaged down reading !
Aqicn.org under their FAQ explains in details how they derive their reading. They also explained why they think 24 hr averaging is a "very bad idea" as air pollution is dynamic and no one can wait for 24 hrs before knowing that the air quality is good.
NEA should consider using Nowcast data formula suggested in aqicn.org website which is more reflective of haze suitition.
The NowCast is computed from the most recent 12 hours of PM monitoring data, but the NowCast weights the most recent hours of data more heavily than an ordinary 12-hour average when pollutant levels are changing. The NowCast is used in lieu of a 24-hour average PM concentration in the calculation of the AQI until an entire calendar day of hourly concentrations has been monitored."
NEA should stop being so defensive and get their priority right by making the haze reading/descriptive easy for public to understand.
Showing posts with label Environmental. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Environmental. Show all posts
Saturday, September 21, 2019
Saturday, September 14, 2019
TV haze broadcast of 1 hr reading is NOT in PSI
Many are not aware that there is a difference in PSI reading and ug/m3
(microgram per meter cube). This is because the health warning levels
are different.
NEA 24 hour average reading is in PSI. However NEA 1 hour average reading is in ug/m3.
S'pore official health advisory is based on 24 hours average PSI reading. For our personal health concern, we should base our activities on 1 hour real time reading ie to stay indoor or not, when to use face mask.
Table 1 : Health advisory by NEA in PSI for 24 hour averaged reading:
0 -50 Good
51-100 Moderate
101-200 Unhealthy
201-300 Very Unhealthy
above 300 Hazardous
Table 2 : Health advisory by NEA in ug/m3 for 1 hour averaged reading,
0-55 Normal
56-150 Elevated
151-250 High
above 250 Very High
Table 3 below is the previous descriptive reference from NEA website from past years which is no longer found in their current site :
Table 3:
Index Category PSI 24hrPM2.5 ug/m3
Good 0-50 0-12
Moderate 51-100 13-55
Unhealthy 101-200 56-150
Very Unhealthy 201-300 151-250
Hazardous above 301 above 251
As there is no safety limit given for 1 hr reading, we could take the unhealthy range level as 56 ug/m3 and above.
For the haze reading broadcast over TV provided by NEA, the 24 hr data is in PSI. But the 1 hr data does not have a unit a measurement attached to it - this may mislead the public into thinking it is in PSI. We can see from Table 3 - unhealthy level is at 56 ug/m3.
NEA is not helping the public as they could have easily converted the reading into PSI which the public is familiar with. They could have also used the same descriptive for both 24 and 1 hour data. Public may not understand that 'elevated' is 'unhealthy'.
NOTE :
1) US EPA adopts 35 ug/m3 as unhealthy limit for 24 hrs PM2.5 which is a more stringent standard than S'pore.
2) For real time 1 hourly data on haze please refer to : aqicn.org - which provides air pollution Air Quality Index (AQI) for more than 60 countries in the world. AQI descriptive :
NEA 24 hour average reading is in PSI. However NEA 1 hour average reading is in ug/m3.
S'pore official health advisory is based on 24 hours average PSI reading. For our personal health concern, we should base our activities on 1 hour real time reading ie to stay indoor or not, when to use face mask.
Table 1 : Health advisory by NEA in PSI for 24 hour averaged reading:
0 -50 Good
51-100 Moderate
101-200 Unhealthy
201-300 Very Unhealthy
above 300 Hazardous
Table 2 : Health advisory by NEA in ug/m3 for 1 hour averaged reading,
0-55 Normal
56-150 Elevated
151-250 High
above 250 Very High
Table 3 below is the previous descriptive reference from NEA website from past years which is no longer found in their current site :
Table 3:
Index Category PSI 24hrPM2.5 ug/m3
Good 0-50 0-12
Moderate 51-100 13-55
Unhealthy 101-200 56-150
Very Unhealthy 201-300 151-250
Hazardous above 301 above 251
As there is no safety limit given for 1 hr reading, we could take the unhealthy range level as 56 ug/m3 and above.
For the haze reading broadcast over TV provided by NEA, the 24 hr data is in PSI. But the 1 hr data does not have a unit a measurement attached to it - this may mislead the public into thinking it is in PSI. We can see from Table 3 - unhealthy level is at 56 ug/m3.
NEA is not helping the public as they could have easily converted the reading into PSI which the public is familiar with. They could have also used the same descriptive for both 24 and 1 hour data. Public may not understand that 'elevated' is 'unhealthy'.
NOTE :
1) US EPA adopts 35 ug/m3 as unhealthy limit for 24 hrs PM2.5 which is a more stringent standard than S'pore.
2) For real time 1 hourly data on haze please refer to : aqicn.org - which provides air pollution Air Quality Index (AQI) for more than 60 countries in the world. AQI descriptive :
0-50 Good
51-100 Moderate
101-150 Unhealthy
for sensitive groups
151-200 Unhealthy
201-300 Very
Unhealthy
301-500 Hazardous
Friday, August 26, 2016
HAZE - NEA 1 hourly averaged data is not PSI but in ug/m3
Many are not aware that there is a difference in PSI reading and ug/m3 (microgram per meter cube). This is because the health warning levels are different.
NEA 24 hour average and 3 hour average readings are in PSI. NEA 1 hour average reading is in ug/m3 (not PSI).
S'pore official health advisory is based on 24 hours average PSI reading. However, for our personal health concern, we should base our activities on 1 hour real time reading in PSI, a reference we are familiar with. NEA does not provide real time 1 hour data in PSI.
*Health advisory by NEA in PSI for 24 hour averaged reading:
0 -50 Good
51-100 Moderate
101-200 Unhealthy
201-300 Very Unhealthy
more than 300 Hazardous
*Health advisory by NEA in ug/m3 for 24 hour averaged reading:
less/equal 55 Normal
56-150 Elevated
151-250 High
more than 250 Very High
It seems that NEA has changed their reference parameter this year for haze reporting in ug/m3. It has chosen to use such neutral descriptive words, which render them useless for public health reference.
**Formal descriptive reference from NEA and MOH website last year:
Index Category PSI 24hrPM2.5 ug/m3
Good 0-50 0-12
Moderate 51-100 13-55
Unhealthy 101-200 56-150
Very Unhealthy 201-300 151-250
Hazardous above 301 above 251
Thus, on 26/8/16 at 12 noon Spore West area hitting 216 ug/m3 (not PSI) is very alarming, as it is in the very unhealthy range !
NOTE :
1) US EPA adopts 35 ug/m3 as unhealthy limit for 24 hrs PM2.5 which is a more stringent standard than S'pore.
2) For real time data on PSI please refer to : aqicn.org - which provides real time air pollution information for more than 60 countries in the world
NEA 24 hour average and 3 hour average readings are in PSI. NEA 1 hour average reading is in ug/m3 (not PSI).
S'pore official health advisory is based on 24 hours average PSI reading. However, for our personal health concern, we should base our activities on 1 hour real time reading in PSI, a reference we are familiar with. NEA does not provide real time 1 hour data in PSI.
*Health advisory by NEA in PSI for 24 hour averaged reading:
0 -50 Good
51-100 Moderate
101-200 Unhealthy
201-300 Very Unhealthy
more than 300 Hazardous
*Health advisory by NEA in ug/m3 for 24 hour averaged reading:
less/equal 55 Normal
56-150 Elevated
151-250 High
more than 250 Very High
It seems that NEA has changed their reference parameter this year for haze reporting in ug/m3. It has chosen to use such neutral descriptive words, which render them useless for public health reference.
**Formal descriptive reference from NEA and MOH website last year:
Index Category PSI 24hrPM2.5 ug/m3
Good 0-50 0-12
Moderate 51-100 13-55
Unhealthy 101-200 56-150
Very Unhealthy 201-300 151-250
Hazardous above 301 above 251
Thus, on 26/8/16 at 12 noon Spore West area hitting 216 ug/m3 (not PSI) is very alarming, as it is in the very unhealthy range !
NOTE :
1) US EPA adopts 35 ug/m3 as unhealthy limit for 24 hrs PM2.5 which is a more stringent standard than S'pore.
2) For real time data on PSI please refer to : aqicn.org - which provides real time air pollution information for more than 60 countries in the world
Tuesday, February 23, 2016
LTA on CRL (Cross Island Line)
LTA has written to the media (Today Paper on 22 Feb 16) to say that "Govt studying route impact, has not made decision yet". Reading what LTA Chief Executive, Chew has written, the conclusion is clear to us who are familiar with govt double talk, - it has already made its decision. It is just waiting for the ground assessment result before making the announcement that CRL will cut beneath our nature reserve.
LTA Chew kept silent on the negative impact of cutting across the nature reserve, but highlight all the negative impacts should it run along the alternate route - saying it would cost $2 billion more, involve home acquisition which would affect families...etc
Even doing ground investigation has environment impact - that is why they reduce the the number of bore holes. What more tunneling beneath the nature reserve. According to the environment impact assessment done - the impact is serious as it is in the 2nd highest adverse category which is term 'moderate'. This is what govt has been telling us - 'moderate' - so that those who are not familiar with the environment assessment stuff will think it is 'mild'.
Ultimately it is only cost that matters to the govt. Yes, $2 billion may sound like a lot, but Temasek and GIC lost much more than this. Why is our govt silent on their losses - while the concern about the amount which will save our last remaining patch of nature reserve. We can't put a price tag on nature which benefit is intangible and damage is irreversible.
Besides, since when has the govt been sensitive to re-homing residents? They have been doing it for decades - acquiring lands dirty cheap in the past till they are now the biggest landlord of S'pore.
Have they shown compassion when they announced that the 4 blocks of HDB flats at Rochor Center will be torn down to make way for infrastructure development? Residents in those 4 blocks are mainly from lower income with high percentage of senior folks.
The difference is govt dictate the cost of acquisition in Rochor Center, but the acquisition area for CRL are private residential housing, so they can't get them cheap.
So $$$ is all our govt cares about. All the other justifications are just excuse. They are short sighted and irresponsible.
LTA Chew kept silent on the negative impact of cutting across the nature reserve, but highlight all the negative impacts should it run along the alternate route - saying it would cost $2 billion more, involve home acquisition which would affect families...etc
Even doing ground investigation has environment impact - that is why they reduce the the number of bore holes. What more tunneling beneath the nature reserve. According to the environment impact assessment done - the impact is serious as it is in the 2nd highest adverse category which is term 'moderate'. This is what govt has been telling us - 'moderate' - so that those who are not familiar with the environment assessment stuff will think it is 'mild'.
Ultimately it is only cost that matters to the govt. Yes, $2 billion may sound like a lot, but Temasek and GIC lost much more than this. Why is our govt silent on their losses - while the concern about the amount which will save our last remaining patch of nature reserve. We can't put a price tag on nature which benefit is intangible and damage is irreversible.
Besides, since when has the govt been sensitive to re-homing residents? They have been doing it for decades - acquiring lands dirty cheap in the past till they are now the biggest landlord of S'pore.
Have they shown compassion when they announced that the 4 blocks of HDB flats at Rochor Center will be torn down to make way for infrastructure development? Residents in those 4 blocks are mainly from lower income with high percentage of senior folks.
The difference is govt dictate the cost of acquisition in Rochor Center, but the acquisition area for CRL are private residential housing, so they can't get them cheap.
So $$$ is all our govt cares about. All the other justifications are just excuse. They are short sighted and irresponsible.
Friday, February 19, 2016
MRT Cross Island Line - another wayang
While the govt is currently in the process of gathering feedback from the public on the proposed MRT Cross Island Line (CIL) route, it looks like it is just another wayang pretending to listen while it has already made up its mind to go ahead to run it under our nature reserve.
Last night news report over the TV, we have the latest govt propaganda which is indicative that CIL line will be cutting beneath the nature reserve. In the news clip, first they tell us that the start of the tunneling will be outside the reserve to minimise impact. Then they said they rather not have it running near residential areas as it will affect residents. They also mentioned there are elderly around the area and it will inconvenient them. Isn't this a self contradiction - if the impact is minimum why the concern then?
How stupid and lame to use seniors as an excuse! What is the senior population there? Are they saying it is exceptionally high? Are our past and on-going MRT construction all over the island not also an inconvenient to senior residents in those parts of S'pore?
Which is the greater evil - the possible irreversible damage to the fauna and flora, even dead and extinct of endangered species in the nature reserves OR the temporary inconvenience to residents? What they are really concern with is cost of construction, so please stop all the dishonest lies!
We have seen first hand how underground digging cause so much disturbance above ground. So don't try to bull shit us about minimum impact on the nature reserve.
Only in Spore we have this irony where nature reserve has little meaning as the govt can do what they like with it. Look at the resident housing right at the door step of our Bt Timah nature reserve. No buffer zone. So when folks choosing to live near nature, yet complained when they have monkeys around their homes, - monkeys are culled. All fauna and flora are protected in nature reserve, but not so in S'pore.
Govt are pushing for the 6.9 million population so they are sacrificing our scarce nature reserve to cater for the foreign influx. We the citizens and all the fauna and flora in Spore are the sacrifice lambs in our govt political manoeuvres and GDP growth.
Last night news report over the TV, we have the latest govt propaganda which is indicative that CIL line will be cutting beneath the nature reserve. In the news clip, first they tell us that the start of the tunneling will be outside the reserve to minimise impact. Then they said they rather not have it running near residential areas as it will affect residents. They also mentioned there are elderly around the area and it will inconvenient them. Isn't this a self contradiction - if the impact is minimum why the concern then?
How stupid and lame to use seniors as an excuse! What is the senior population there? Are they saying it is exceptionally high? Are our past and on-going MRT construction all over the island not also an inconvenient to senior residents in those parts of S'pore?
Which is the greater evil - the possible irreversible damage to the fauna and flora, even dead and extinct of endangered species in the nature reserves OR the temporary inconvenience to residents? What they are really concern with is cost of construction, so please stop all the dishonest lies!
We have seen first hand how underground digging cause so much disturbance above ground. So don't try to bull shit us about minimum impact on the nature reserve.
Only in Spore we have this irony where nature reserve has little meaning as the govt can do what they like with it. Look at the resident housing right at the door step of our Bt Timah nature reserve. No buffer zone. So when folks choosing to live near nature, yet complained when they have monkeys around their homes, - monkeys are culled. All fauna and flora are protected in nature reserve, but not so in S'pore.
Govt are pushing for the 6.9 million population so they are sacrificing our scarce nature reserve to cater for the foreign influx. We the citizens and all the fauna and flora in Spore are the sacrifice lambs in our govt political manoeuvres and GDP growth.
Tuesday, October 20, 2015
Haze reading on 19 Oct 15 night shows NEA reporting needs to improve
I happened to check the NEA haze reporting site on 19 Oct 15, Mon at 10pm. I was shocked to note that the 1 hr average PM2.5 reading was 442 microgram per cubic meter for West Spore, which was worst hit by haze that night. (it hit 471 at 11 pm).
I noted down the various reporting on NEA as there is a wide variation in the data range. These readings are all from NEA site as at 10pm on 19/10/15 :-
* 24 hrs average PM2.5 = 89 microgram per cubic meter, which translated to 138 PSI
* 3 hrs average = 152 PSI
* 1 hr average PM2.5 = 442 microgram per cubic meter.
NEA does not translate 1hr PM2.5 into PSI
I looked at the real time reporting on Aqicn website and it was 214 PSI.
We can see that the NEA averaged 24 hrs and 3 hrs data do not reflect that the current situation and there is a wide margin between them and Aqicn real time reading.
Officially, based on NEA averaged 24 hrs data - it was in the unhealthy range only.
However, Aqicn real time reflected that it was at very unhealthy range.
As for NEA data given in microgram per cubic meter, most folks are not familiar with the unit of measurement and its associate level of health advisory is also not widely known to public.
Officially, our health advisory is only link to 24 hrs average PSI.
Just like 3hrs PSI reading, NEA 1 hr PM2.5 is not link to health advisory.
NEA/MOH Reference
Index Category PSI 24hrPM2.5 in microgram per cubic meter
Good 0-50 0-12
Moderate 51-100 13-55
Unhealthy 101-200 56-150
Very Unhealthy 201-300 151-250
Hazardous above 301 above 251
Knowing that the real time data will be higher than the NEA 1hr average which at 442-471 is pretty alarming given that the unhealthy range is 56 microgram per cubic meter. Since there is no health advisory for 1 hrs, the sensible safety approach is to adopt the 24 hrs health advisory.
US EPA adopts 35 microgram per cubic meter for 24 hrs PM2.5 which is a more stringent standard than S'pore.
In conclusion, it is obvious that NEA needs to improve their method of reporting which is currently confusing and yet does not reflect the current situation. NEA 24 hrs PSI healthy advisory only tells us if we have been exposed, what has been our exposure level. BUT it does not tell us what will be our real time exposure for us to be proactive in taking safety precautions.
What is the point of giving 3 hrs average when it neither reflect current situation nor is it link to health advisory? 1 hr average PM2.5 better reflects the current situation but it is also not link to health advisory. Besides, public are not familiar with its unit of measurement.
- NEA should educate the public on it just like they do with PSI health index category.
- Provide the microgram per cubic meter table next to the PSI health index table (we have to dig it up as not easily accessible)
- Provide public with real time 1 hour PM2.5 data (without averaging it down)
- Convert it to PSI reading (to minimise public confusion)
- Remove the 3 hrs averaged PSI data as it is useless
I noted down the various reporting on NEA as there is a wide variation in the data range. These readings are all from NEA site as at 10pm on 19/10/15 :-
* 24 hrs average PM2.5 = 89 microgram per cubic meter, which translated to 138 PSI
* 3 hrs average = 152 PSI
* 1 hr average PM2.5 = 442 microgram per cubic meter.
NEA does not translate 1hr PM2.5 into PSI
I looked at the real time reporting on Aqicn website and it was 214 PSI.
We can see that the NEA averaged 24 hrs and 3 hrs data do not reflect that the current situation and there is a wide margin between them and Aqicn real time reading.
Officially, based on NEA averaged 24 hrs data - it was in the unhealthy range only.
However, Aqicn real time reflected that it was at very unhealthy range.
As for NEA data given in microgram per cubic meter, most folks are not familiar with the unit of measurement and its associate level of health advisory is also not widely known to public.
Officially, our health advisory is only link to 24 hrs average PSI.
Just like 3hrs PSI reading, NEA 1 hr PM2.5 is not link to health advisory.
NEA/MOH Reference
Index Category PSI 24hrPM2.5 in microgram per cubic meter
Good 0-50 0-12
Moderate 51-100 13-55
Unhealthy 101-200 56-150
Very Unhealthy 201-300 151-250
Hazardous above 301 above 251
Knowing that the real time data will be higher than the NEA 1hr average which at 442-471 is pretty alarming given that the unhealthy range is 56 microgram per cubic meter. Since there is no health advisory for 1 hrs, the sensible safety approach is to adopt the 24 hrs health advisory.
US EPA adopts 35 microgram per cubic meter for 24 hrs PM2.5 which is a more stringent standard than S'pore.
In conclusion, it is obvious that NEA needs to improve their method of reporting which is currently confusing and yet does not reflect the current situation. NEA 24 hrs PSI healthy advisory only tells us if we have been exposed, what has been our exposure level. BUT it does not tell us what will be our real time exposure for us to be proactive in taking safety precautions.
What is the point of giving 3 hrs average when it neither reflect current situation nor is it link to health advisory? 1 hr average PM2.5 better reflects the current situation but it is also not link to health advisory. Besides, public are not familiar with its unit of measurement.
- NEA should educate the public on it just like they do with PSI health index category.
- Provide the microgram per cubic meter table next to the PSI health index table (we have to dig it up as not easily accessible)
- Provide public with real time 1 hour PM2.5 data (without averaging it down)
- Convert it to PSI reading (to minimise public confusion)
- Remove the 3 hrs averaged PSI data as it is useless
Monday, October 12, 2015
NEA please get your priority right!
No one is disputing that NEA continues to use the 24 hr averaged PSI for their health advisory. However, in order that the public to make informed decision to minimize exposure (use of N95mask or remain indoor), we need realistic data to do so. We are talking about proactive measure to safe guard our health. Why do NEA not get it?
We agree that public should not base on visibility nor smell to determine how bad the haze is, as humidity and other factors affect it. But neither can the public base on the past 24 hrs historical averaged data, as it does NOT reflect the current situation! It is precisely for this reason that the public took to guessing by using visual and odor check. Get it NEA?
That is why we are asking for instant cast data. Since NEA has now included the 1 hr PM2.5 data, they should give it to us without averaging it down. Why must NEA insists on averaging all their data, be it 24, 3 or 1 hr reading?
Safety and health data for public consumption should be simple and easy to understand. However, NEA is making it into a web of complication which only confuses the public.
Not only we have reading base on different hours (24, 3 and 1) we have different unit of measurement! So 24 and 3 hrs are base on PSI, while 1 hr PM2.5 uses microgram per cubic meter. The public is used to PSI reading, they are unfamiliar with microgram per cubic meter. They may think the reference point for unhealthy / hazardous level is the same. They are NOT.
* For 24 & 3 hrs PSI reading, the unhealthy range is above 100 PSI.
* For 1hr PM2.5 the unhealthy range is from 56 microgram per cubic meter.
US EPA (environmental protection agency) gives the 24hr reading for PM2.5 to be equal or less than 35 microgram per cubic meter. Their annual limit for PM2.5 is 15 microgram per cubic meter. These limits are based over 3 years period.
Since we have been expose to the haze for decades and NEA has been collecting data, can NEA let us know if our 24 hours and annual exposure has exceeded EPA recommendation?
The very fact that 90% of the public do not use protective mask even during days of terrible haze is a reflection of how low is our public safety awareness of the hazardous nature of PM2.5 which is link to lung cancer risk besides other health problems. NEA and MOH should be concerned that a developed country like S'pore, our public safety and health awareness is same as those of 3rd world nations.
NEA please get your priority right. Public safety and health is number one. Making the data looks better should never be your focus!
Note : NEA may wish to consider removing their 3hrs averaged PSI reading as it neither reflects the current situation nor can it be used as health advisory. It was introduced in 1997 as 'stop-gap' measure to provide reading closer to current haze situation, since NEA did not wish to provide instant cast data. After 18 yrs, we are still stuck in the same situation!
We agree that public should not base on visibility nor smell to determine how bad the haze is, as humidity and other factors affect it. But neither can the public base on the past 24 hrs historical averaged data, as it does NOT reflect the current situation! It is precisely for this reason that the public took to guessing by using visual and odor check. Get it NEA?
That is why we are asking for instant cast data. Since NEA has now included the 1 hr PM2.5 data, they should give it to us without averaging it down. Why must NEA insists on averaging all their data, be it 24, 3 or 1 hr reading?
Safety and health data for public consumption should be simple and easy to understand. However, NEA is making it into a web of complication which only confuses the public.
Not only we have reading base on different hours (24, 3 and 1) we have different unit of measurement! So 24 and 3 hrs are base on PSI, while 1 hr PM2.5 uses microgram per cubic meter. The public is used to PSI reading, they are unfamiliar with microgram per cubic meter. They may think the reference point for unhealthy / hazardous level is the same. They are NOT.
* For 24 & 3 hrs PSI reading, the unhealthy range is above 100 PSI.
* For 1hr PM2.5 the unhealthy range is from 56 microgram per cubic meter.
US EPA (environmental protection agency) gives the 24hr reading for PM2.5 to be equal or less than 35 microgram per cubic meter. Their annual limit for PM2.5 is 15 microgram per cubic meter. These limits are based over 3 years period.
Since we have been expose to the haze for decades and NEA has been collecting data, can NEA let us know if our 24 hours and annual exposure has exceeded EPA recommendation?
The very fact that 90% of the public do not use protective mask even during days of terrible haze is a reflection of how low is our public safety awareness of the hazardous nature of PM2.5 which is link to lung cancer risk besides other health problems. NEA and MOH should be concerned that a developed country like S'pore, our public safety and health awareness is same as those of 3rd world nations.
NEA please get your priority right. Public safety and health is number one. Making the data looks better should never be your focus!
Note : NEA may wish to consider removing their 3hrs averaged PSI reading as it neither reflects the current situation nor can it be used as health advisory. It was introduced in 1997 as 'stop-gap' measure to provide reading closer to current haze situation, since NEA did not wish to provide instant cast data. After 18 yrs, we are still stuck in the same situation!
Sunday, October 4, 2015
NEA Director's reply confusing public and not addressng public concern
NEA Director, Fong P K in his reply to a reader feedback to Voices in Today papers on 3 Oct 15 said that, "The National Environment Agency (NEA) is providing hourly, real-time haze information on our various platforms."
He is confusing the public because even though NEA data tables give the hourly reading, these readings are NOT real time.
On NEA website it is clearly stated be it the 24 and 3 hours PSI or the 1 hourly PM2.5 reading, they are AVERAGE over 24 or 3 hours. The 1 hourly reading is also average data. These 2 statements are from NEA website under their FAQs on PSI :
He is confusing the public because even though NEA data tables give the hourly reading, these readings are NOT real time.
On NEA website it is clearly stated be it the 24 and 3 hours PSI or the 1 hourly PM2.5 reading, they are AVERAGE over 24 or 3 hours. The 1 hourly reading is also average data. These 2 statements are from NEA website under their FAQs on PSI :
1) For PM2.5, the new 24-hour PSI reflects the
PM2.5 concentration levels averaged across 24 hours. The new 3-hour
PSI reflects the PM2.5 concentration levels averaged across 3 hours.
2) The 1-hour PM2.5 concentrations
reflect the PM2.5 levels averaged over one hour, and can give you an
indication of the current air quality.
So why is NEA Director misleading the public to think they are real time reading? Besides, he did not address the reader's concern which is lack of real time data for the public to make informed decision.
The shortcoming of historical average data is the time delay between when we are hit by unhealthy or hazardous level of haze to the time NEA data does reflect it. It defeats the purpose to have people wearing mask or staying indoor after the high PSI level has passed. Is this not too late where our safety and health is concern?
For safety best practice in taking precaution, it is real time reading that matters. When evaluating the health concern due to exposure, perhaps the 24 hours PSI reading could be useful.
NEA is already in possession of real time data, why is NEA so reluctant to share with the public? There have been repeated feedback year after year that we need such data to make informed decision regarding our daily activities during the haze period.
By down playing* the PSI level, NEA is putting public safety and health at risk. We know PM2.5 can be inhaled into our lungs and could be carcinogenic. Could the public take class action against NEA if there is a high incident of lung cancers in the future due to under reporting* of the PSI level, resulting in public complacency in taking proactive measures to protect ourselves?
*Note : Besides, time delay in critical haze occurrence, the averaging of data by NEA has resulted in much lower level of PSI when compare to real time reading.
For real time data on PSI please refer to : aqicn.org - which provides real time air pollution information for more than 60 countries in the world
*Note : Besides, time delay in critical haze occurrence, the averaging of data by NEA has resulted in much lower level of PSI when compare to real time reading.
For real time data on PSI please refer to : aqicn.org - which provides real time air pollution information for more than 60 countries in the world
Friday, September 25, 2015
NEA psi reading is historical averaged out data
I am not sure if I heard it correctly when our minister said when interviewed by the media broadcast during the news on 24/9/15 night that if we want hourly reading we can refer to NEA website and not use other sources.
As far as I know, NEA only provide us with processed data base on AVERAGE 24 hours and AVERAGE 3 hours reading. The heading and the data table in the NEA website could be misleading the public to think it is spot hourly reading - it is NOT. So is our minister also confused by his own agency website ?
The NEA data table heading does not have the word 'average' in it. It only says :
PSI Readings over the last 24 hours and 3-hr PSI Reading. It then go on to list the reading at 1am, 2am, 3am....etc. Link to - nea data table
It is in other area on NEA site that we find information on how the their psi reading is derived and the formula use. Quote from NEA website :
For PM2.5, the new 24-hour PSI reflects the PM2.5 concentration levels averaged across 24 hours. The new 3-hour PSI reflects the PM2.5 concentration levels averaged across 3 hours.
So it means if the 24 hrs reading at 1 am states it is 200 psi, it is average reading from 1 am yesterday to 1 am today. If it is 3 hrs average at 6 pm, it means the reading is average from 3 to 6pm.
There have been public feedback for years that NEA should provide us with hourly spot reading. Real time data is more useful and safer than past historical averaged data in making decision. For example, if the school has a basket ball game that day at 10 am, real time data can help decide if the event can continue without compromising on students health. Besides due to averaging effect, the time NEA reading says we are hit by hazardous range is normally delay by 1 or more hours.
For nation wide decision like school closure, perhaps the more stable 24 hours averaged out historical data can be used.
Besides, historical averaged 24 hrs and 3 hrs readings are always much lower at the start of the haze compare to spot reading. The difference can be as much as 30 or more psi. It is only when the haze continues to worsen for a few days that the NEA historical averaged data move closer to spot reading.
There has been some improvement to the NEA data due to public feedback. It was only in 2012 that PM2.5 particulate was incorporated into NEA 24 hrs psi reporting. For the 3 hrs psi, it was in 2014 that PM2.5 particulate was incorporated.
It has been observed over the years, the PM2.5 reading is normally much higher than PM10. Besides, PM2.5 can be inhaled into the lungs, making it much more hazardous than PM10 which can be filter by our nostril hair. Thus, it is strange that NEA took so long to make the changes to adopt safety best practices though we have been hit by the haze for decades.
If other countries can provide their citizens with official real time reading, why is our govt so reluctant to do so all these years despite public feedback ? We need it to make safe informed decision with regards to our daily activities when we are hit by the recurring haze year after year !
If govt wants us to refer to NEA data then provide us what we need - hourly reading. Don't chide the public for turning to other websites if NEA is reluctant to share real time raw information with us. Processed data can be unhealthy for our lungs.
As far as I know, NEA only provide us with processed data base on AVERAGE 24 hours and AVERAGE 3 hours reading. The heading and the data table in the NEA website could be misleading the public to think it is spot hourly reading - it is NOT. So is our minister also confused by his own agency website ?
The NEA data table heading does not have the word 'average' in it. It only says :
PSI Readings over the last 24 hours and 3-hr PSI Reading. It then go on to list the reading at 1am, 2am, 3am....etc. Link to - nea data table
It is in other area on NEA site that we find information on how the their psi reading is derived and the formula use. Quote from NEA website :
For PM2.5, the new 24-hour PSI reflects the PM2.5 concentration levels averaged across 24 hours. The new 3-hour PSI reflects the PM2.5 concentration levels averaged across 3 hours.
So it means if the 24 hrs reading at 1 am states it is 200 psi, it is average reading from 1 am yesterday to 1 am today. If it is 3 hrs average at 6 pm, it means the reading is average from 3 to 6pm.
There have been public feedback for years that NEA should provide us with hourly spot reading. Real time data is more useful and safer than past historical averaged data in making decision. For example, if the school has a basket ball game that day at 10 am, real time data can help decide if the event can continue without compromising on students health. Besides due to averaging effect, the time NEA reading says we are hit by hazardous range is normally delay by 1 or more hours.
For nation wide decision like school closure, perhaps the more stable 24 hours averaged out historical data can be used.
Besides, historical averaged 24 hrs and 3 hrs readings are always much lower at the start of the haze compare to spot reading. The difference can be as much as 30 or more psi. It is only when the haze continues to worsen for a few days that the NEA historical averaged data move closer to spot reading.
There has been some improvement to the NEA data due to public feedback. It was only in 2012 that PM2.5 particulate was incorporated into NEA 24 hrs psi reporting. For the 3 hrs psi, it was in 2014 that PM2.5 particulate was incorporated.
It has been observed over the years, the PM2.5 reading is normally much higher than PM10. Besides, PM2.5 can be inhaled into the lungs, making it much more hazardous than PM10 which can be filter by our nostril hair. Thus, it is strange that NEA took so long to make the changes to adopt safety best practices though we have been hit by the haze for decades.
If other countries can provide their citizens with official real time reading, why is our govt so reluctant to do so all these years despite public feedback ? We need it to make safe informed decision with regards to our daily activities when we are hit by the recurring haze year after year !
If govt wants us to refer to NEA data then provide us what we need - hourly reading. Don't chide the public for turning to other websites if NEA is reluctant to share real time raw information with us. Processed data can be unhealthy for our lungs.
Tuesday, September 23, 2014
Reading the 'Right' stuff is NOT Safe
How to trust the govt when they are only interested that we read the 'right' stuff regardless of our well being and safety. I am referring to the official PSI reading put up by them.
For years, before 1st April 14, they have been giving us PSI data base on PM10 (particular size) and leaving out PM2.5 in their compilation. PM2.5 are more hazardous as they can be inhaled into the lungs and could be carcinogenic (cancer causing). In the context of S'pore, the haze from Indonesia has always resulted in much higher PM2.5 reading compare to PM10.
It is after much constructive 'noise' from enlightened public during last year when we were hit with the worst haze ever, that they finally incorporate PM2.5 reading into their PSI reporting effective 1st April this year.
From such official data they chose to provide the public with, it is clear that our health is the last thing on the govt mind. They only want the data to look 'good'.
Another public feedback is their useless past historical data based on 3 and 24 hours averaging. They are still sticking to such reporting. The govt is directly compromising public safety and health as no one will be taking precaution when they are hit with unhealthy/hazardous level of haze. After the concern period is over (likely 1 to 2 hours later), then the official reading will show we had been hit, isn't that too late ? Besides, the reading will be much lower, when the spot reading could have been 50 to 100% higher.
We have a Minister who is a doctor heading NEA. Surely he is well verse with health and safety issues. It is sad that a professional doctor turned politician puts reading the 'right' stuff as priority over public health.
For years, before 1st April 14, they have been giving us PSI data base on PM10 (particular size) and leaving out PM2.5 in their compilation. PM2.5 are more hazardous as they can be inhaled into the lungs and could be carcinogenic (cancer causing). In the context of S'pore, the haze from Indonesia has always resulted in much higher PM2.5 reading compare to PM10.
It is after much constructive 'noise' from enlightened public during last year when we were hit with the worst haze ever, that they finally incorporate PM2.5 reading into their PSI reporting effective 1st April this year.
From such official data they chose to provide the public with, it is clear that our health is the last thing on the govt mind. They only want the data to look 'good'.
Another public feedback is their useless past historical data based on 3 and 24 hours averaging. They are still sticking to such reporting. The govt is directly compromising public safety and health as no one will be taking precaution when they are hit with unhealthy/hazardous level of haze. After the concern period is over (likely 1 to 2 hours later), then the official reading will show we had been hit, isn't that too late ? Besides, the reading will be much lower, when the spot reading could have been 50 to 100% higher.
We have a Minister who is a doctor heading NEA. Surely he is well verse with health and safety issues. It is sad that a professional doctor turned politician puts reading the 'right' stuff as priority over public health.
Monday, September 22, 2014
PSI - Real Time and NOT Average Past Historical Data
Our government is hard of hearing. We the public have been telling them we want real time PSI reading and not be fed with useless average past 3 and 24 hours historical data. Likely the only real reason they insist on giving us average past data is to make the reading look 'good'.
It is against logic and safety practices to give us past data which would not help us to make decision whether to carry on with our activities or remind indoors. PSI reading is similar to weather forecast. We want to know what is the current weather outlook and what is the forecast for the next few days. Since they do not give us historical report base on the past 3 days weather, why do they insist on giving us historical data for PSI?
Take last Sun (21 Sep) for example. It was reported that "The 3-hour PSI readings hovered in the moderate range through most of the day but crept up slowly from noon and broke into the unhealthy band of 116 at 8pm. At 9pm, it stood at 129."
If we were given real time data, likely the PSI spot reading would be much higher than 129 (which was based on 3 hr average). The time when we were hit with the strong haze would likely be around 6 to 7 pm and not 8 to 9 pm.
My nephew was having his Taekwando outdoor practice with his Sun class from 5.30-7pm. The instructor did not cancel the class because according to NEA report, the PSI reading was below 100psi which was suppose to be moderate during that period. The whole group of youngest were exposed to unhealthy level of haze due to the useless outdated PSI official reading.
How can construction companies make decision when to stop work when the official govt PSI reading is based on past average data ? Outdoor workers would have been exposed to hazardous haze level since the PSI reading is not real time.
For our own safety, do not rely on govt official PSI reporting. Check out the real time data on this website instead: http://aqicn.org/city/singapore/east/
Don't read the 'right' stuff determine by the govt, as their data makes a lousy reference. The irony is that the govt is getting S'pore to be a 'smart' city. Yet they are so dumb to think they can fool us with such unreliable information.
It is against logic and safety practices to give us past data which would not help us to make decision whether to carry on with our activities or remind indoors. PSI reading is similar to weather forecast. We want to know what is the current weather outlook and what is the forecast for the next few days. Since they do not give us historical report base on the past 3 days weather, why do they insist on giving us historical data for PSI?
Take last Sun (21 Sep) for example. It was reported that "The 3-hour PSI readings hovered in the moderate range through most of the day but crept up slowly from noon and broke into the unhealthy band of 116 at 8pm. At 9pm, it stood at 129."
If we were given real time data, likely the PSI spot reading would be much higher than 129 (which was based on 3 hr average). The time when we were hit with the strong haze would likely be around 6 to 7 pm and not 8 to 9 pm.
My nephew was having his Taekwando outdoor practice with his Sun class from 5.30-7pm. The instructor did not cancel the class because according to NEA report, the PSI reading was below 100psi which was suppose to be moderate during that period. The whole group of youngest were exposed to unhealthy level of haze due to the useless outdated PSI official reading.
How can construction companies make decision when to stop work when the official govt PSI reading is based on past average data ? Outdoor workers would have been exposed to hazardous haze level since the PSI reading is not real time.
For our own safety, do not rely on govt official PSI reporting. Check out the real time data on this website instead: http://aqicn.org/city/singapore/east/
Don't read the 'right' stuff determine by the govt, as their data makes a lousy reference. The irony is that the govt is getting S'pore to be a 'smart' city. Yet they are so dumb to think they can fool us with such unreliable information.
Sunday, February 16, 2014
NEA sticking to its confusing PSI reporting method
Last year when we were badly hit by the haze, it was
crystal clear that our govt and NEA were not adequately
prepared, thought the haze has been returning without
failed annually for decades.
There has been many feedback on NEA complicated way of
PSI reporting which only confuses the public. It is
also not useful as it is based on past historical 3 hrs
and 24 hrs average, depending on which particle size
(PM10 and PM2.5)is used as reference.
What the public wants is spot reporting base on PM2.5
levels as these particles could be inhaled into the
lungs and are known to be hazardous to our health.
When the weather is fine, no one gives much attention
to the PSI reading. However once the haze hits us, all
eyes will be on the PSI reporting.
Playing down the haze issue is not in the interest of
public health, as those PM2.5 which can be inhaled into
the lungs are known to be carcinogenic. From last year
observation, the PM2.5 readings were normally higher
the PM10. NEA average down the PM2.5 using 24 hrs,
while PM10 with 3 hrs.
Looks like NEA has not improved its complicated andconfusing PSI reporting method after all the publicfeedback. Is NEA and the govt trying to give thepublic a false sense of safety with their pasthistorical data average down to a smaller number?
Thursday, February 13, 2014
Haze vs Warships
The number of hot spots in Indonesia are in the region of 200 to 400. The yearly haze will be back, it is just a matter of time that the wind will blow our way. How bad it will be depends on the political will of Indonesia and her affected neighbours. Most of the time from past experience it is more noise from all sides than concrete action.
So is our nation lungs more important or nation pride ? When the haze hit us, more than 5 million lungs are at stake. Not forgetting that of tourists which number more than 1 million per month, plus all the fauna and flora on this little red dot, I would think our govt should give more priority to the haze issue now before it hit us. Making noise after we are hit is too little too late.
Yes, our pride is bruised by our neighbour insensitivity in naming their warships. But then LKY placed flowers on the terrorists grave. At least the Japanese political leaders pay respect to their own citizens whom commit war crimes. But here we have our own political leader paying respect to terrorists from other country who killed our citizens. So what to make of it ?
Besides, our PAP leaders love to say "let's move on" when they make mistakes. What are they going to do now ? Force Indonesia into a corner with economical sanction ? If they want to do such thing, I rather they implement it because of the haze to save all our lungs.
S'pore would be viewed as a 'hero' as we save not only our lungs but that of other affected countries, plus those lungs belonging to ordinary citizens in Indonesia. Take tough action where it matters and have the grace to accept apology. Make the right political move to benefit the citizens.
Bruise pride does not kill us, but those minute haze particles which could be inhaled can cause cancer. And we have been inhaling it for decades due to our incompetent govt.
So is our nation lungs more important or nation pride ? When the haze hit us, more than 5 million lungs are at stake. Not forgetting that of tourists which number more than 1 million per month, plus all the fauna and flora on this little red dot, I would think our govt should give more priority to the haze issue now before it hit us. Making noise after we are hit is too little too late.
Yes, our pride is bruised by our neighbour insensitivity in naming their warships. But then LKY placed flowers on the terrorists grave. At least the Japanese political leaders pay respect to their own citizens whom commit war crimes. But here we have our own political leader paying respect to terrorists from other country who killed our citizens. So what to make of it ?
Besides, our PAP leaders love to say "let's move on" when they make mistakes. What are they going to do now ? Force Indonesia into a corner with economical sanction ? If they want to do such thing, I rather they implement it because of the haze to save all our lungs.
S'pore would be viewed as a 'hero' as we save not only our lungs but that of other affected countries, plus those lungs belonging to ordinary citizens in Indonesia. Take tough action where it matters and have the grace to accept apology. Make the right political move to benefit the citizens.
Bruise pride does not kill us, but those minute haze particles which could be inhaled can cause cancer. And we have been inhaling it for decades due to our incompetent govt.
Tuesday, June 25, 2013
CNA, Talking Point : Haze
The NEA representative on Talking Point also asked the public to look out the window to decide how severe the haze is and whether to close the window or not. Sigh ! He is actually admitting all these PSI reporting based on historical 3 and 24 hours averaging is useless. We the public has been telling NEA and the govt the obvious and yet they turn a deaf ear.
But the chap from NEA still insisted that there is no need to change to hourly reporting. Basically, he is trying hard to defend NEA illogical reporting method. It goes against common sense and is an unsafe practice.
Looks like he cannot even recall the range for PM2.5 for healthy, moderate and hazardous level. He kept asking the public to refer to NEA website during the program. If NEA representative has problem, imagine how confuse the public is with all these different range, averaging and health advisory.
Why make things so complicated. Just do hourly reporting base on PM2.5. The health advisory guideline should be based on this range too.
The doctor they invited to the program is very professional and give sensible advise. In fact, he is so good that the incompetent NEA chap tries to play taiji and ask the public to consult their doctor when they are in doubt if they should use respiratory protection. NEA is hopeless !
But the chap from NEA still insisted that there is no need to change to hourly reporting. Basically, he is trying hard to defend NEA illogical reporting method. It goes against common sense and is an unsafe practice.
Looks like he cannot even recall the range for PM2.5 for healthy, moderate and hazardous level. He kept asking the public to refer to NEA website during the program. If NEA representative has problem, imagine how confuse the public is with all these different range, averaging and health advisory.
Why make things so complicated. Just do hourly reporting base on PM2.5. The health advisory guideline should be based on this range too.
The doctor they invited to the program is very professional and give sensible advise. In fact, he is so good that the incompetent NEA chap tries to play taiji and ask the public to consult their doctor when they are in doubt if they should use respiratory protection. NEA is hopeless !
Monday, June 24, 2013
NEA should adopt best safety practices
Previously, NEA provides 3 hours average for both PM10 and PM2.5 reading on their website. But for public data announcement, they used PM10 (eg over the media)
But the PM2.5 is always much higher than PM10. So now they use 24 hours average on PM2.5 to bring the figure lower and closer to that of PM10 (which is still base on 3 hours averaging).
Data for public safety should be simple, clear and easy to understand. Why confuse the public with different reference of PM particle size and also different hours of averaging ? Besides, the health advisory reference level for PM10 and PM2.5 is also different. (PM10 above 100 PSI is unhealthy, while PM2.5 above 40 is unhealthy).
NEA should adopt best safety practice and use PM2.5 reading given on the spot. What is the point of giving us historical reading as we cannot make decision and take precaution base on what is already over. Their current messy method of PSI reading reporting is a disservice to the public.
PM2.5 are respiratory hazard and some of those PM 2.5 could be carcinogenic. We would want to avoid if not minimise exposure to these 2.5 micron particles. We should never carry on as usual and get used to the haze ! Complacency is an enemy to our health.
But the PM2.5 is always much higher than PM10. So now they use 24 hours average on PM2.5 to bring the figure lower and closer to that of PM10 (which is still base on 3 hours averaging).
Data for public safety should be simple, clear and easy to understand. Why confuse the public with different reference of PM particle size and also different hours of averaging ? Besides, the health advisory reference level for PM10 and PM2.5 is also different. (PM10 above 100 PSI is unhealthy, while PM2.5 above 40 is unhealthy).
NEA should adopt best safety practice and use PM2.5 reading given on the spot. What is the point of giving us historical reading as we cannot make decision and take precaution base on what is already over. Their current messy method of PSI reading reporting is a disservice to the public.
PM2.5 are respiratory hazard and some of those PM 2.5 could be carcinogenic. We would want to avoid if not minimise exposure to these 2.5 micron particles. We should never carry on as usual and get used to the haze ! Complacency is an enemy to our health.
Sunday, June 23, 2013
PSI reporting goes agaist Safety/Health Principle
The present method of PSI reporting base on the past 3 hours and 24 hours average data is NOT useful to the public.
What we need is current hourly reading which will be helpful for us to make decision whether to proceed our activity and what safety precaution we should take to protect our health.
Providing us with the past 3 hours or 24 hours average reading does not reflect the current situation and may also give a false sense of safety as the spot reading could be very much higher.
Most of us have learn not to rely on the reported PSI reading to make daily 'haze' precaution decision. We use our visual judgement.
What is the point of having all these high tech monitoring system when the public have to relay on their own personal judgement.
Besides, it time NEA change our reference public reporting base on 2.5 micro particle size used in API standard instead of the current 10 micro, since the formal is more hazardous to health.
The current method of PSI reporting goes against safety and health principle. For public well- being, NEA needs to be more transparent and not give the public a false sense of safety.
What we need is current hourly reading which will be helpful for us to make decision whether to proceed our activity and what safety precaution we should take to protect our health.
Providing us with the past 3 hours or 24 hours average reading does not reflect the current situation and may also give a false sense of safety as the spot reading could be very much higher.
Most of us have learn not to rely on the reported PSI reading to make daily 'haze' precaution decision. We use our visual judgement.
What is the point of having all these high tech monitoring system when the public have to relay on their own personal judgement.
Besides, it time NEA change our reference public reporting base on 2.5 micro particle size used in API standard instead of the current 10 micro, since the formal is more hazardous to health.
The current method of PSI reporting goes against safety and health principle. For public well- being, NEA needs to be more transparent and not give the public a false sense of safety.
Thursday, June 20, 2013
We are smoked left and right
None of my family members smoke. But our health is compromised yearly due to the haze from Indonesian. Businesses spend million to ensure their factories discharge does not cause air pollution. Drivers pay a premium for petrol locally as it contains less lead content to minimize air pollution.
The list can go on.... but what is the point when our air is polluted yearly and our govt kept saying there is not much they can do as it is Indonesian domestic affair ? How can it be their domestic affair if the air pollution is spreading to so many neighbouring countries and affecting millions of people ?
Only short sighted irresponsible politicians can push away responsibility for not doing enough to protect their citizens by uttering such lame excuses.
There are long term consequences and our future generation will suffer from global warming and weather changes.
But year after year, all we see is both Indonesian and our local officials giving excuses regarding the serious problem. The haze has been around for nearly 2 decades ! No excuse is acceptable anymore.
We have enough of smoked inhalation and our own govt also wants to smoke us with suspicious PSI reading. How to trust a govt when the 'right thing' they want us to read may not be the true thing ?
Why are our cleaners not issue with face mask ?
I am disappointed to note that none of the cleaners around my area is using face mask to protect against the smoky haze.
The PSI has already hit unhealthy level on 17/6/13. The PSI was 321 on 19/6/13. How high must the PSI level be before Town Council issues face mask to their cleaners ? They have ample time to act or is it they do not even have any safety procedure inspite the haze being with us for around 2 decades ?
It is an irony as they put up posters at all lift lobbies recently to remind us on International Cleaners' Day in appreciation to our hard working folks. Is this how they show appreciation by not taking care of their cleaners health ?
The PSI has already hit unhealthy level on 17/6/13. The PSI was 321 on 19/6/13. How high must the PSI level be before Town Council issues face mask to their cleaners ? They have ample time to act or is it they do not even have any safety procedure inspite the haze being with us for around 2 decades ?
It is an irony as they put up posters at all lift lobbies recently to remind us on International Cleaners' Day in appreciation to our hard working folks. Is this how they show appreciation by not taking care of their cleaners health ?
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
Save My World ??
It is an irony that we have this environmental song clip 'Save My World' blasting away every day and the air pollution in S'pore has reached the highest unhealthy level in 16 years on 17/6/13, reaching an unhealthy range of 155 psi.
What is the point of having all these legislation on air population locally to keep our air clean when every year without fail we are hit by haze attack from Indonesia. This has been happening for around 2 decades!
All these high level talks between countries year after year have not shown any concrete result in solving the problem. Funds have been wasted for years trying to help Indonesia control the haze. It is just money down the drain. We have in the past also send equipment and personnel over to help fight their fire.
Our govt loves to sue, but look like they are only quick to take action against their own citizens. But when it comes to protecting well being of the citizens, they are helpless. Walk the talk if they are serious in environmental protection and take legal action against Indonesia on pollution Asia. Show some leadership and get Asean countries suffering the same fate to act against Indonesia. The problem is there is a lack of political will amongst Asean leaders to resolve the issue.
Talk is cheap. Campaign which our govt is very good at is easy to execute. Just pour money and get advertising agency and civil service to carry it out. But effective action is what counts. The haze problem has a long term impact and contribute to global warming. It is a bigger issue than just yearly health problem suffer by unlucky neighbours of Indonesia. So if S'pore govt is serious about contributing to 'Saving' the world - ACT (action and not wayang) and stop talking. Two decades of verbal exchange has gotten us no where !
Our govt should not spent so much money on the air time for 'Save My World'. Might as well use it to buy face mask for distribution to all the citizens. In all likelihood, they will wayang their way about the haze issue again this year.
What is the point of having all these legislation on air population locally to keep our air clean when every year without fail we are hit by haze attack from Indonesia. This has been happening for around 2 decades!
All these high level talks between countries year after year have not shown any concrete result in solving the problem. Funds have been wasted for years trying to help Indonesia control the haze. It is just money down the drain. We have in the past also send equipment and personnel over to help fight their fire.
Our govt loves to sue, but look like they are only quick to take action against their own citizens. But when it comes to protecting well being of the citizens, they are helpless. Walk the talk if they are serious in environmental protection and take legal action against Indonesia on pollution Asia. Show some leadership and get Asean countries suffering the same fate to act against Indonesia. The problem is there is a lack of political will amongst Asean leaders to resolve the issue.
Talk is cheap. Campaign which our govt is very good at is easy to execute. Just pour money and get advertising agency and civil service to carry it out. But effective action is what counts. The haze problem has a long term impact and contribute to global warming. It is a bigger issue than just yearly health problem suffer by unlucky neighbours of Indonesia. So if S'pore govt is serious about contributing to 'Saving' the world - ACT (action and not wayang) and stop talking. Two decades of verbal exchange has gotten us no where !
Our govt should not spent so much money on the air time for 'Save My World'. Might as well use it to buy face mask for distribution to all the citizens. In all likelihood, they will wayang their way about the haze issue again this year.
Saturday, November 24, 2012
Banning Plastic Bags
Delhi, India is enforcing a ban on the use of plastic bag, due to environmental issue generated by 250,000 tons of plastic waste annually. They have tried unsuccessfully to do so before in 2009. Let us hope they will meet with success this time.
Then, Delhi will become a shinning example for the rest of the world major cities to follow.
In S'pore, plastic bags are given out generously by all shops. In many instances, it is not necessary to bag the item purchase, but all shop assistants will automatically put the item in a plastic carrier. We have become a city of plastic bag culture.
Supermarkets are one of the main culprits, as they are extremely generous when it comes to the use of plastic carriers. They will double and even triple bag groceries. When customers ask for more bags (for personal use), the cashiers willingly oblige.
The only retailer that walk the talk on environmental issue is IKEA. They have successfully 'trained' their customers bring their own bags. Customers will be charge a nominal fee for plastic carrier if they don't.
In fact some supermarkets give a token discount to customers who bring their own carriers. However, the outcome is pathetic.
They just don't get it - it is human psychology that we don't like to be charged for carrier bags. It 'hurts' more to pay for them no matter how small the amount is. The token reward does not entice consumers to make the effort to bring their own carriers.
If only our supermarkets will do as IKEA does, our plastic bags culture will change for the better.
Then, Delhi will become a shinning example for the rest of the world major cities to follow.
In S'pore, plastic bags are given out generously by all shops. In many instances, it is not necessary to bag the item purchase, but all shop assistants will automatically put the item in a plastic carrier. We have become a city of plastic bag culture.
Supermarkets are one of the main culprits, as they are extremely generous when it comes to the use of plastic carriers. They will double and even triple bag groceries. When customers ask for more bags (for personal use), the cashiers willingly oblige.
The only retailer that walk the talk on environmental issue is IKEA. They have successfully 'trained' their customers bring their own bags. Customers will be charge a nominal fee for plastic carrier if they don't.
In fact some supermarkets give a token discount to customers who bring their own carriers. However, the outcome is pathetic.
They just don't get it - it is human psychology that we don't like to be charged for carrier bags. It 'hurts' more to pay for them no matter how small the amount is. The token reward does not entice consumers to make the effort to bring their own carriers.
If only our supermarkets will do as IKEA does, our plastic bags culture will change for the better.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
