Thread: Interesting e-mail I've received today "Fuel: The Mass Debate"

Originally Posted by JDNSW

I am aware of your views, but we have heard in the above that the particulates are caused by fossil fuel, and you are saying they are mostly due to wood heaters. Both cannot be right. The figures quoted for mortality from this cause are estimates, and there is no way of telling which deaths are caused by particulate matter, but there is a test as to whether the figures are accurate - a ten year difference in life expectancy should show up in the statistics, and it doesn't.

There are plenty of similar examples in different areas - a good example is mandatory annual roadworthiness tests; obviously they make a worthwhile difference to road safety, right? So why is it that states that have them don't have better road statistics than those that don't?

Similarly, it is obvious that using mobile phones while driving is dangerous - and although illegal, we all know that a lot of people do it. But ten years ago mobile phones were rare, now everyone has them, so there are far more used while driving than there were then - but road safety has improved, not got worse in that time. (Also, if we go overseas, to the USA, in some states using phones is illegal, some it isn't, and there is no perceptible difference in the trend of road statistics since phones were introduced, nor when they have been made illegal). (I do not answer my mobile when driving, despite these statistics)

Getting back to medical matters, tobacco smoking has been easily shown to be dangerous, because tobacco smokers are a definable group, and you can reasonably accurately separate those that smoke from those that do not, and show that the health outcomes are far worse for those that do compared to those that do not, despite the fact that the mechanism of the damage is still, after all these years of research, not clear (although there are ideas). But it has been almost impossible to 'prove' that environmental smoke from smokers is hazardous, since there is no statistical source for this, since it is so difficult to say who has been exposed and who has not.

But we seem to have gone a long way from the subject of this thread, which was a proposal to solve the fuel price problem, which unfortunately was based on a number of critical errors of fact, including the such basic ones as the rate of excise and the proportion of Australia's oil imported.

John

Quote: "I am aware of your views, but we have heard in the above that the particulates are caused by fossil fuel, and you are saying they are mostly due to wood heaters. Both cannot be right. The figures quoted for mortality from this cause are estimates, and there is no way of telling which deaths are caused by particulate matter, but there is a test as to whether the figures are accurate - a ten year difference in life expectancy should show up in the statistics, and it doesn't."

John, it is Not me that is saying that during Winter the Majority of PM2.5 air pollution is caused by Domestic Wood Heaters (DWH) it is reputable published studies by CSIRO (DAR), EPA NSW (and other State EPA's), NSW Dept. of Health, the AMA, the Australian Lung Foundation.
EPA Nephlometers placed around Sydney to collect PM particles (During periods of no Burn-offs or Bushfires) over a period of days and in positions where you would expect transport pollution to be paramount, e.g. Victoria rd. Rozelle, in Sydney NSW, showed after Carbon Dating the collected Particles that 65% of the Particles were "Recent" and the remaining 35% were in the Millions of years old, meaning Fossil Fuels, the "Recent" readings were less than a few hundred years old, being Wood.
John the NSW EPA issues Warnings "Dont burn Tonight" to owners of DWH and the State Government will buy back your DWH if you switch to Cleaner alternatives. You dont see this happening with Cars and Trucks.
NSW DoH's Dr.J. Morgan did extensive studies on PM air pollution in Sydney over many Winters and published his findings showing that each Winter there were over 400 premature deaths in Sydney hospitals (doesn't include deaths outside of hospitals) as a direct result of PM Pollution.
I know that it has gone off topic, BUT PM pollution kills more people in Australia than Cars and using your example that road safety has improved, it surely has, but it is solely due to safer cars, we are still having the accidents, it's just that nowadays more people survive, the greatest cause of car accidents in Australia is "INATTENTION" (can see where the Mobile Phones come in) not speeding as the revenue collectors would have you believe to justify their grab for your speeding dollar.
Tobacco smoke, Woodsmoke and Diesel smoke all contain a Very similar witches brew of Toxic and Carcinogenic compounds, there is NO DOUBT that Tobacco smoke causes death and is the most Preventable of all, Woodsmoke has the same Cancer causing agents as Tobacco smoke, except it is 12 times more Toxic, Diesel smoke is 25 times more toxic as shown in "Ames tumour tests". So if you agree that Smoking cigarettes is dangerous to your health and costs the Taxpayer Billions in health costs then you must surely agree that PM2.5 pollution is at least as deadly, Regards Frank.

John,

I've started putting together links to the pollutants discussed and their effects on human health, if you are interested.

Particulate Matter and PM (NPI register)

Benzene

Its rather time consuming, so instead, here's the link to the US EPA mobile source air toxics homepage. You'll find loads of info there. For diesel emissions and their health effects in particular, follow this link. For those that don't have the time or inclination to trawl through pages and pages, a watered down overview of health effects of vehicle emissions attached.

Cheers

Bojan