Air pollution is a major problem of the Moscow city. In the last years, people have been constantly rising concerns on the topic: the smoke above the head is visible to a naked eye, and the air doesn't feel like 'fresh' when inhaling. But after the incandescent summer of 2010, when huge concentrations of toxic substances have been thrown into the atmosphere, the uneven complaints ofthe muscovutes have become clear and loud. The air is dirty, and it is obviously unhealthy.
The popular folk joke "I see what I breathe" no longer entertains the inhabitants of Moscow. Something must be done to protect the lungs and, generally, well-being of people from air pollution. However, prior to taking any measures one should study out what is actually happening in the air, and how it is interfering with health.
Scientific studies of the last decade have established the relationship between air pollution and illnesses, and it is shown that both short-term and chronic exposure to contaminants cause acute health effects. Under “effects” we understand morbidity and mortality, and the outcomes are mostly respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. Above those, there is a relationship between long-term exposure to pollution and brain activity. As well, pollutants are known to cathalyse allergies, as impairing the condition of those persons who suffer from them.
Traffic, that in Moscow is severe, is a number one source of such contaminants. Scientists all over the world are involved in assessment of traffic-related air pollution. At the present moment, nearly 4 million cars circulate in the city, and the Moscow region appends some 3 million to this amount.
The most widespread pollutants are: fine particles also referred to as partictulate matter, ground-level ozone, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and sulfur dioxide. The WHO in its 2005 Air Quality Guidelines sets up the limit values for the concentrations of those pollutants, while the US’s EPA in its National Ambient Air Quality Standards also considers lead. Of those pollutants, particulate matter provoke major anxiety, because it affects people at most. It is represented by tiny particles of solid and liquid substances that are suspended in the atmosphere. Particulates are classified by size i.e. aerodynamic radius, and the smaller they are the most dangerous they get, because once inhaled they subside in the lungs and may interfere with their function. Long-term exposure to particulate matter may provoke a number of cardiovasular and respiratory diseases, and it could even be associated with lung cancer. The resting pollutants are less widespread but nonetheless they affect lungs, heart and brain, and in high concentrations might be deathful.
What could be done for reducing the burden of traffic-related air pollution? The first evident solution that comes into one's mind is: give up on cars! However, it is a totally unprobabilistic measure, especially taking into consideration Moscow's huge distances and the cold weather in winter. Moreover, the effete muscovites won’t trade their comfy cars for a dewy jogging at a chilly day.
Instead, they could opt for electric vehicles. Unlike those with the combustion engine, electric cars do not emit pollutants into the atmosphere, and they could save a penny to their owners considering the permanently increasing oil prices. The only drawback of this solution is that the global infrastructure in its current state does not provide enough charging stations for electric cars. However, according to recent news, Moscow’s energy provider JSC “MOESK” will take care of installing those stations in the city.
Another feasible solution is to use public transport when it could be used. Here the city’s govermnent should step towards the needs of its inhabitants, as increasing the quality and diverisity of means of transport. For instance, common diesel buses could be replaced by hydrogen “zero-emitting” ones, at least, partially - as done by the Transport of London.
At last, muscovites could follow the lead of their European fellows by biking instead of driving. This is not only healthier as being a fitness activity, but also a bike does not emit pollutants, and the cost of manteinance is really low. The disadvantage of biking in Moscow is that due to the climate conditions, it is pertinent for about six months when the weather is relatively warm. There exist some enthusiasts of “snow biking” i.e. riding in winter time, but this option is not sutable for all, and more, it might be traumatic. However, a random car owner could reduce the emissions of their vehicle by up to a half as switching to bike for the “suitable” six months. Not too bad.
Thanks for all of you who've kept heading till here. Do you have any suggestions on the topic?
P. S. There has been a while since the last entry here. The reason for that hiatus is that I have been busy figuring out what my research is actually about. Now, when the things are clearer than ever, I am happy to share some random knowledge I obtain. At least with myself - not to forget things. :-)
