This isn't an outtake from Blade Runner – it's the real Beijing

https://twitter.com/BrentToderian/status/617498633819172864

by doener • 11 years ago

96 59 11 years ago

twitter.com

Nursie• 11 years ago

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

josai5• 11 years ago

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

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

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

[edit: positive not negative]

arbuge• 11 years ago

You mean, positive feedback loop. Negative feedback tends to be self-correcting.

seanmcdirmid4• 11 years ago

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

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

Renaud• 11 years ago

Fortunately not reaching Beijing's pollution levels, at least not as often, yet.

shoo• 11 years ago

if you also suddenly want to listen to the appropriate background music: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FwhZ11lcOJQ

homarp2• 11 years ago

as answer tweet indicates https://twitter.com/lolamachine/status/617518791375912962

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

tedunangst• 11 years ago

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

homarp2• 11 years ago

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

kazinator2• 11 years ago

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

icebraining• 11 years ago

That's likely, since the profile user is from Vancouver.

troymc• 11 years ago

Are you sure it's not Central City?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYtDw06d-R0

Tiktaalik• 11 years ago

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

http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Smoke+creates+eerie+morning...

kazinator2• 11 years ago

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

rottyguy• 11 years ago

anyone know what time of day this is?

miralabs• 11 years ago

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

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

STRML• 11 years ago

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

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

http://aqicn.org/city/hongkong/

davorb• 11 years ago

Manhattan is about 40

That's insane. Copenhagen is at 80.

dockimbel• 11 years ago

Beijinger since a year here. That's the famous "Dragon Tower" [1] where IBM China is having its offices, located north of Beijing nearby the 4th ring and Olympic Park. Franckly, it is very rarely that bad, maybe 10-15 days a year with PM2.5 levels over 400 µg/m3.

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

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

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

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

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

buro92• 11 years ago

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

VERY UNHEALTHY

298: http://aqicn.org/city/chicago/

UNHEALTHY

170: http://aqicn.org/city/usa/washington/seattle/beacon-hill/

UNHEALTHY FOR SENSITIVE GROUPS

122: http://aqicn.org/city/beijing/

MODERATE

96: http://aqicn.org/city/usa/oregon/portland/

70: http://aqicn.org/city/tokyo/

66: http://aqicn.org/city/berlin/

65: http://aqicn.org/city/london/

61: http://aqicn.org/city/hongkong/

54: http://aqicn.org/city/newyork/

GOOD

33: http://aqicn.org/city/zurich/

31: http://aqicn.org/city/stockholm/

24: http://aqicn.org/city/paris/

13: http://aqicn.org/city/california/san-francisco/san-francisco...

rayiner3• 11 years ago

The problem in Chicago and Illinois is the same as in Beijing. Cheap dirty coal power. Environmentalists in Chicago recently won a battle to shut down two coal plants that were in city limits and costing citizens hundreds of millions a year in health damage. But a lot remains to be done in the state.

josai5• 11 years ago

Hm. I wonder about some of these results. That number for chicago is wild - that would be clearly visible, serious pollution. And my old haunt BKK, which I left specifically because of the awful air, 32!? The city where I would come home from work with a grey shirt that was white when I left is cleaner than zurich? From personal experience in both cities I assure you it is not.

It's anecdotal, I know, but I wonder about some of this data.

tptacek• 11 years ago

Chicago might be something to do with the 4th holiday. The AQI maps for the city seem fine through last week until 7/3 and then a sharp spike on 7/4. Meanwhile: you can walk outside and still smell fireworks here. It was really bad last night.

thinkpad20• 11 years ago

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

contingencies• 11 years ago

The part of the city the reading was taken and time of day seems to play a huge factor.

For example, the previous posted said Paris was 24, Paris - where I am now, with the window open, slightly after midnight - is currently reporting 53.

Kunming, a city of 6+ million where I usually live in China's southwest, is a little higher at 68. (This counters the 'China is dirty' western media BS)

Sydney, where I grew up, is higher at 75. However, in another reading closer to the area of town where I used to live it's much lower at a mere 13.

So, check which part of the city you are looking at and what time of the day the reading was taken. Also, don't assume all of China is all dirty and horrible like the east coast megacities (though much of it may be, to varying extents).

chowyuncat• 11 years ago

The Seattle data is heavily biased by for the fourth of July fireworks. Look at data before the fourth and across the city.

stcredzero• 11 years ago

Seems like they tried to give the skyscraper a Mao haircut!

http://efisherhistory12.weebly.com/uploads/2/3/5/2/23527216/...

tim3333• 11 years ago

Apparently it was taken Saturday 12 Jan 2013 'when the PM2.5 reading reached 886 micrograms per cubic metre, according to the [US] embassy's "BeijingAir" Twitter feed.'

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/article/1127398/smog-threat-r...

(date taken from the wsj thing http://blogs.wsj.com/photojournal/2013/01/14/photos-of-the-d...)

rayiner3• 11 years ago

It's better to look at annual averages: http://sedac.ciesin.columbia.edu/downloads/maps/sdei/sdei-gl...

orthoganol• 11 years ago

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

mkristian• 11 years ago

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

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

sysk• 11 years ago

Here's another good one: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2540955/Beijing-clou...

auganov• 11 years ago

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

badsock3• 11 years ago

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

raldi4• 11 years ago

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

jeremyjh• 11 years ago

And exactly how does one go about collecting that fee from someone who doesn't want to pay it in a way that is totally cool with arch-libertarians?

badsock3• 11 years ago

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

kbutler• 11 years ago

The real question is, which externalities merit such fees? Chemicals in water? Particulates in air? CO2 in air? Odor? Sunlight? Panorama? Noise? Solitude?

mcguire• 11 years ago

The problem quickly devolves into an argument over the difference between a legitimate externality and an unwarranted intrusion.

corysama• 11 years ago

Source http://blogs.wsj.com/photojournal/2013/01/14/photos-of-the-d... has a higher-rez version.

This isn't an outtake from Blade Runner – it's the real Beijing

Related Stories