Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Earth NASA

NASA Satellite Data Show 30% Drop In Air Pollution Over Northeast America (nasa.gov) 72

Posted by EditorDavid from the bluer-skies dept.
Long-time Slashdot reader lkcl quotes NASA: Over the past several weeks, NASA satellite measurements have revealed significant reductions in air pollution over the major metropolitan areas of the Northeast United States. Similar reductions have been observed in other regions of the world....

March 2020 shows the lowest monthly atmospheric nitrogen dioxide levels of any March during the OMI data record, which spans 2005 to the present. In fact, the data indicate that the nitrogen dioxide levels in March 2020 are about 30% lower on average across the region of the I-95 corridor from Washington, DC to Boston than when compared to the March mean of 2015-19.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NASA Satellite Data Show 30% Drop In Air Pollution Over Northeast America More

NASA Satellite Data Show 30% Drop In Air Pollution Over Northeast America

Comments Filter:

  • Clearly COVID-19 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by The New Guy 2.0 ( 3497907 ) on Saturday April 11, 2020 @05:37PM (#59933782)

    Less driving, less pollution... too bad we're going back to normal eventually!

    • Re:Clearly COVID-19 (Score:5, Interesting)

      by jellomizer ( 103300 ) on Saturday April 11, 2020 @06:07PM (#59933874)

      Yes COVID-19 is the cause. As well this 30% Number decline is consistent with other numbers that I am tracking for work. (I work in healthcare)
      I expect 30% of work can be done at home or considered nonessential services.

      I heard that unemployment is currently at around 10% so that shows that 20% additional of the economy should be able to do their work remotely.

      When this finally gets back to normal. I wonder how much more work from home will happen. Now that companies that rejected the idea now have an infrastructure in place.

      This will also change the economy in the long run. Moving restaurants away from commercial zones and closer to residential areas. Additional increase in online shopping and home delivery.

      • I wonder how much more work from home will happen. Now that companies that rejected the idea now have an infrastructure in place.

        I have my doubts the change will be more than a percentage or two. When there aren't governmental orders in place, middle managers are the ones making these decisions... and from what I've seen and heard most of them *hate* not having their employees within shouting distance.

        I've been lucky in that I was given a telecommute day from our then-department head back when I was hired, so it's harder for a middle-manager to take that away without reason. Plus my immediate manager is a reasonable person. But I sti

        • People realize that many of their workers can be remote and still get their job done. So the big question is: why keep a large office on the balance sheet? There is a lot of money to be saved by making people remote. That should sufficiently motivate the bean counters.
          A distributed remote workforce is also highly disaster resistant, as companies are still chugging along with a remote workforce even through a global pandemic. We'll see how important this is viewed, as people become complacent again once

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by rikkards ( 98006 )

          I am a little more optimistic but I too expect it will probably go back to what it was before not because of management but that most workers are inherently lazy. Sure they may find they get the most work done with no distractions but they will slowly get back to performing how they did in the office.

          At that point Management will think they can get more out of them looking over their shoulder

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by kot-begemot-uk ( 6104030 )

      Less driving, less pollution... too bad we're going back to normal eventually!

      I am frankly more interested in what would be the results of modelling the event.

      We have performed this experiment TWICE so far - full removal of all aircraft from the air. Once after 9/11 and now. In both cases we saw immediate temperature drops ~ 1-2C. By the look of it, this is not CO2, but jet contrails.

      We really need to account for this in our climate modelling because at the moment it is obsessed with CO2. There are other factors - water vapour (contrails), particulates, etc.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by amorsen ( 7485 )

        We really need to account for this in our climate modelling because at the moment it is obsessed with CO2. There are other factors - water vapour (contrails), particulates, etc.

        Be quick! Tell the climate researchers! It is very sad that they have to this day completely forgotten about the most potent climate gas of all, water vapour, I am sure they will be delighted to hear from you!

  • We did it Reddit!

    • Of curse the question is how fast will the recovery be?

      A whiplash rebound may cause more pollution as companies go on overboard to catch up.

      • There will be no "whiplash", "V-shaped", or otherwise "Amazing. Beautiful. The best." recovery.

        Manufacturing - People will (best case) resume buying at their previous rate. I don't see anyone buying 2 cars in September because they couldn't buy one in April. I don't see them buying their second car sooner because they got delayed buying the first, either.

        Energy - The oil people will use tomorrow is already being pumped today. Worldwide storage is nearing 100% capacity; some grades are being sold at a net lo

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by aliquis ( 678370 )

        Bring back gold backed USD for the environment?! ;D

  • Nice investigating..... Having been charged for Jaywalking for walking the ½ mile to the local store, rather than driving. I'm glad!!!!

    • Having been charged for Jaywalking for walking the ½ mile to the local store, rather than driving.

      You seem to have left out the main element of the charge, Sir.

      Nobody cares where you were going when you did it. Or why.

    • Consider yourself lucky. Those in my state who can't see easily-visible crosswalks aren't given a driver's license.

  • Mass graves are better than mass cremations (Score:3)

    by bobstreo ( 1320787 ) on Saturday April 11, 2020 @05:44PM (#59933804)

    Less people commuting is probably a good thing anyway.

    The only other thing we're using is natural gas for heating, hot water, cooking and maybe clothes drying. It's still cold here. (and I have an electric dryer)

  • They are measuring Nitrogen Dioxide as the pollutant, in case anyone is interested.

  • Fantastic. (Score:3)

    by Gravis Zero ( 934156 ) on Saturday April 11, 2020 @06:02PM (#59933858)

    This makes it abundantly clear that everyone should be moving over to using battery EVs because it does have a substantial impact. It also make quite clear that we need to force (by law or taxation) corporations to reduce and eliminate their pollution emitted from industrial processes. It can be done, we have the technology and with some recent huge-ass tax breaks, they have the money.

    Cleaner air has been proven to have clear health benefits (so it would even reduce our health care costs), so I don't understand why anyone would be against this.

    • Pollution would be even lower if we moved to using electric trains, which don't shed tire dust.

      As well, any jobs which can be done remotely should be done remotely.

      • People who already have powered personal transportation are going to continue choosing it. There is no way around that.

        Electric cars are currently the only thing that can reasonably be done in most places to lower air pollution in cities.

        Reducing tire dust is not even remotely the most realistic way to reduce plastic pollution in the oceans, which is an entirely different issue.

        • "People who already have powered personal transportation are going to continue choosing it. There is no way around that."

          If there are realistic alternatives available, they will choose to use them part of the time. Those vehicles also have to be replaced periodically. Some will choose not to replace them if we simply don't build more highway lanes, but we do build more rail. Many homes have two associated vehicles; that can reasonably decrease to one vehicle used less frequently if commuting needs are solve

        • "People who already have powered personal transportation are going to continue choosing it. There is no way around that."

          You provide incentives to use alternative transportation. Perhaps you get slightly better food or more vacation days if you use non-ICE equipment, or get to live in a carless enclave that naturally provides cleaner air. I'm gunning for that future.

    • This makes it abundantly clear that everyone should be moving over to using battery EVs because it does have a substantial impact.

      Not to diminish how nice it is that the air in cities globally seems to be clearing up, but neither nitric oxide nor nitrogen dioxide are greenhouse gases, although they are important in the process of creation of tropospheric ozone which is a greenhouse gas.

      Clean air is certainly nice and even essential, but to counteract global warming there is little individuals can do. The major greenhouse gas contributors are not how many people drive cars. What is causing our planet to heat up is burning (coal and w

      • And for the nuke fiends, nuclear is not a carbon-free or even low-carbon energy source for all the necessary concrete and transportation involved, it is only low-car carbon compared to burning coal. We literally need to slow and nearly stop energy consumption and energy production to make this work.

        Enough energy is generated that you can go "carbon negative" by powering CO2 capture plants. SMRs would greatly help decentralize nuclear power and LFTR would drastically reduce the mineral requirements. We don't need to use less energy, we just need to stop externalizing the costs of making it.

        • And for the nuke fiends, nuclear is not a carbon-free or even low-carbon energy source for all the necessary concrete and transportation involved, it is only low-car carbon compared to burning coal. We literally need to slow and nearly stop energy consumption and energy production to make this work.

          Enough energy is generated that you can go "carbon negative" by powering CO2 capture plants. SMRs would greatly help decentralize nuclear power and LFTR would drastically reduce the mineral requirements. We don't need to use less energy, we just need to stop externalizing the costs of making it.

          I think that is a great idea, and will work, if only we could control the chaos of all the entrepreneurs and venture capitalists scrambling to make a fortune on building and profiting off of CO2 capture plants.

          When the lights go out, we will adapt. Before that even happens, decentralized carbon-free individual power generation is perfectly viable. The off-grid folks showed us how. It starts with regulations requiring all new structures to self-generate some small percentage of their energy needs. Then eve

          • The size of the human population has never been an issue, it's always been how badly we manage our resources. Ultra-cheap energy and a financial responsibility to prevent pollution will address most of the issues with human habitation.

  • Data will help with climate change modelling (Score:5, Interesting)

    by robbyyy ( 703254 ) on Saturday April 11, 2020 @06:03PM (#59933864) Homepage
    The data garnered from this will significantly help with the long-term understanding (and modelling) of the human impact on climate. Something similar happened post Sep 11, 2001 when flights were grounded for a time. The data that yielded helped researchers model impacts of pollution. One of the few silver linings.......
  • Is this Trump's fault or is everything still Obama's fault?

  • A song about I-95 (Score:4, Interesting)

    by DevNull127 ( 5050621 ) on Saturday April 11, 2020 @07:45PM (#59934228)
    There was a really beautiful song about I-95 by the band "Fountains of Wayne." [youtube.com].

    Constellations are blinking in the sky
    The road is open wide
    And it feels so cinematic
    'Til a van
    Driven by an elder gentlemen
    Cuts right in front of me
    From then on, that's all I see

    It's a nine hour drive
    From me to you
    South on I-95 and I'll
    Do it 'til the day that I die
    If I need to
    Just to see you
    Just to see you

    The co-author of that song died this month from coronavirus at age 52 [rollingstone.com].

  • Turning off industry alters the amount of pollution we have. It takes at least a 6 year old's intellect to make that kind of connection.

    Now let's use our adult brains. If there is no industry running how do we feed millions of people? Do you think grocery stores being "essential" means that farms have no bottlenecks in raising chickens right now? Guess what our summer harvest is going to look like when we've closed the borders off to Mexico.

    "There are only nine meals between mankind and anarchy." -- Alfred

    • "Now let's use our adult brains. If there is no industry running how do we feed millions of people?"

      Food production is essential, and still running.

      "Do you think grocery stores being "essential" means that farms have no bottlenecks in raising chickens right now?"

      Industries supporting food production are also essential.

      "Guess what our summer harvest is going to look like when we've closed the borders off to Mexico."

      That's actually a real problem. But the biggest shortages will be in fruit. We'll have to eat

  • Ted Cruz is gonna be pissed, he wanted NASA to stop examining pollution across the global as airborne carcinogens are somehow partisan.

    • Hah! Yea I'm also wondering what type of mental gymnastics Republicans are using to avoid the cognitive dissonance now. Remember when their argument in both directions was that we couldn't possibly make a dent improving it or making it worse, because "God's plan, yadda yadda..."

  • 30% less of a particular pollutant dosen't mean pollution is down 30%. Pollution isn't down at all for the bulk of pollution: CO2, methane, halogen ozone depleters....

    • Lots of businesses have shut down, so lots of pollutants are probably down. Transportation is way down, so CO2 is way down. Methane is probably pretty well unaffected as you say, though.

  • The current disruption and the coming recession/depression offer the opportunity to finally update our work week and slash the time/pollution of commuting.

    Make the 'new normal' something like "2 days in, 2 days out = 4 day week".

    The service economy could really use an added leisure day for a faster recovery.

  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

Slashdot Top Deals

The opossum is a very sophisticated animal. It doesn't even get up until 5 or 6 PM.

Close