HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Engineering


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2014, 6:26 PM
M II A II R II K's Avatar
M II A II R II K M II A II R II K is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 52,200
Skyscraper water spraying to mitigate air pollution

Skyscraper water spraying to mitigate air pollution


JANUARY 26, 2014

Read More: http://nextbigfuture.com/2014/01/mor...per-water.html

Quote:
.....

Air pollution is a big problem in China and this is approach to pollution mitigation is being developed there. In addition, the process is natural, technologically feasible, efficient and low cost. All the necessary technologies and materials required to make it work are already available, Yu says, from high buildings, towers and aircraft, to weather modification technology and automatic sprinkler heads.

- Tests will be performed at Zhejiang University campus first and then Hangzhou city if everything goes well. If we are successful, our work can be followed by the other cities in China and around the world." --- Air pollution in China has progressively worsened over the past 30 years, particularly in its megacities, due to rapid economic growth and expansion of industrial activity. According to a Greenpeace report released last week, in 2013, 92 per cent of Chinese cities failed to reach the national standard of a PM2.5 density of no greater than 35 micrograms per cubic metre. Thirty-two cities were double the standard, while the top 10 cities were three times the standard.

- Yu's system is designed to spray raindrops of specific sizes and rain intensity, and at different heights, for the most efficient pollution reduction depending on the conditions. Water should be sprayed into the atmosphere from at least 100 metres high, he says, because most air pollution is below this height. For areas with no tall buildings, towers of 100 to 200 metres high can be built.

- The spraying would need to be done daily to avoid the accumulation of air pollution. Ideally, the water will be obtained from rivers and lakes to keep costs low, he says, and can be collected and reused, thereby preventing any exacerbation of existing water shortages. Although there are potential problems - such as flooding, humidification of the low atmosphere, and slippery grounds - Yu says these are outweighed by the benefits.

- Dr Chan Chak-keung, a professor at Hong Kong University of Science and Technology's division of environment, says Yu's proposal is "interesting" but is concerned about the scheme's water usage. --- "Where will we find that much water? You could recycle the water, but that itself is a challenging task," says Chan. "If I spray water from the roof, what about pollution above the roof? Assuming his team can find a system that works, and they've done enough economic analysis and considered the handling of water resources, this could be a viable option. --- "I would also recommend he considers spraying water right at the street level, especially along heavy traffic roads."

.....



__________________
ASDFGHJK
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jan 27, 2014, 6:32 PM
Chadillaccc's Avatar
Chadillaccc Chadillaccc is offline
ARTchitecture
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Cala Ghearraidh
Posts: 22,842
Excellent idea. I wonder if that will severely negatively effect ground vegetation though? I guess that isn't a major concern in major cities though.
__________________
Strong & Free

Mohkínstsis — 1.6 million people at the Foothills of the Rocky Mountains, 400 high-rises, a 300-metre SE to NW climb, over 1000 kilometres of pathways, with 20% of the urban area as parkland.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2014, 3:43 AM
Rizzo Rizzo is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 7,280
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chadillaccc View Post
Excellent idea. I wonder if that will severely negatively effect ground vegetation though? I guess that isn't a major concern in major cities though.
I don't think so. It's avoiding the big issue that other better technologies should prevail as to mitigate / eliminate the source of emissions, not lessen the harm that has already been done.

Even if this technology is feasible, it would still require lots of resources and money to build and operate. Not to mention, that it uses the valuable resource of clean potable water to combat pollution, thereby polluting another resource.

Some may argue that this is an interim solution to addressing public health since lowering pollution levels substantially is years off. But I'd argue that the time and resources it would take to get this up and running aren't worth effort when new technology and innovation in source pollution reduction are already available or have been for decades.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jan 28, 2014, 4:39 PM
Deepstar's Avatar
Deepstar Deepstar is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 6,291
What about those flowers that they were planting in Los Angeles that soak up smog. Would it be more feasible to plant those on the top of multiple buildings? Maybe they wouldn't take out as much smog?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jan 29, 2014, 7:54 AM
Allan83 Allan83 is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Calgary
Posts: 1,410
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hayward View Post
I don't think so. It's avoiding the big issue that other better technologies should prevail as to mitigate / eliminate the source of emissions, not lessen the harm that has already been done.

Even if this technology is feasible, it would still require lots of resources and money to build and operate. Not to mention, that it uses the valuable resource of clean potable water to combat pollution, thereby polluting another resource.

Some may argue that this is an interim solution to addressing public health since lowering pollution levels substantially is years off. But I'd argue that the time and resources it would take to get this up and running aren't worth effort when new technology and innovation in source pollution reduction are already available or have been for decades.
This is the kind of perverse logic that has destroyed the credibility of many of the prominent “environmental” groups. The fact is that China is building coal power plants and they’re going to continue to build them, so this kind of thing done in populated areas like the cities could easily save many lives. If you actually care about people, then yes this is a good thing.

Keep in mind that China is also installing solar power like crazy, and as they continue to do this the coal plants will eventually be phased out. The immediate problem here is the smog, which actually kills people.

Last edited by Allan83; Jan 29, 2014 at 8:33 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Engineering
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:56 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.