Yes, obviously. That’s why they’re almost all illegal in huge swaths of the country.
…and also for sale in those same areas 🙄
> Ten volunteers based in a rapidly gentrifying Bristol inner-city neighbourhood with one of the highest concentrations of solid fuel-burning appliances in the city, recorded 11 breaches of World Health Organization daily guidelines for ultra-fine particulate pollution over a period of six months.
Does that mean 95% of the days were within WHO guidelines?
> Oluwatosin Shittu, 40, who lives in St Pauls, found his sensor picked up more pollution during the weekend when some residents were burning wood and during rush hours when cars queued on local roads.
So which is is? And weekends also can be busy on the roads.
> “At the weekend [pollution] was high because obviously up the hill [in Montpelier] people were burning wood,” he said.
So he does not know that people were burning wood, it’s just a guess?
> the number of days exceeding WHO pollution guidelines in the ward were broadly in line with the city average, but still a cause of concern.
So the assumption that wealthier areas of Bristol have more wood burners and therefore contribute more to air pollution is false?
I’m sorry, I have no reason to doubt that wood burners make the air worse, but…
“Citizen scientist” sounds to me like the idiots who “did their own research” on Facebook and decided that vaccines install windows 11 in your brain
The thought of a wood burner is nice. But I think most of the houses down our close have one, and it really does get stinky, and not in a nice way. But that said, the fuckers in our area have bonfires in the summer, when all your windows are open, and if you don’t realise quick enough you have a house full of stink. It’s especially annoying cos I have asthma. There are also a lot of elderly folks nearby and it can’t be good for them either!
4 comments
Yes, obviously. That’s why they’re almost all illegal in huge swaths of the country.
…and also for sale in those same areas 🙄
> Ten volunteers based in a rapidly gentrifying Bristol inner-city neighbourhood with one of the highest concentrations of solid fuel-burning appliances in the city, recorded 11 breaches of World Health Organization daily guidelines for ultra-fine particulate pollution over a period of six months.
Does that mean 95% of the days were within WHO guidelines?
> Oluwatosin Shittu, 40, who lives in St Pauls, found his sensor picked up more pollution during the weekend when some residents were burning wood and during rush hours when cars queued on local roads.
So which is is? And weekends also can be busy on the roads.
> “At the weekend [pollution] was high because obviously up the hill [in Montpelier] people were burning wood,” he said.
So he does not know that people were burning wood, it’s just a guess?
> the number of days exceeding WHO pollution guidelines in the ward were broadly in line with the city average, but still a cause of concern.
So the assumption that wealthier areas of Bristol have more wood burners and therefore contribute more to air pollution is false?
I’m sorry, I have no reason to doubt that wood burners make the air worse, but…
“Citizen scientist” sounds to me like the idiots who “did their own research” on Facebook and decided that vaccines install windows 11 in your brain
The thought of a wood burner is nice. But I think most of the houses down our close have one, and it really does get stinky, and not in a nice way. But that said, the fuckers in our area have bonfires in the summer, when all your windows are open, and if you don’t realise quick enough you have a house full of stink. It’s especially annoying cos I have asthma. There are also a lot of elderly folks nearby and it can’t be good for them either!