Pandreco - I shared your post with a friend who was brought up in India. He gave a reply that will interest you, and I'm hoping you'll have a few comments.
"Thanks for sharing the article. As the article mentions, air pollution has always been a problem in Pakistan - and in recent years it has become much worse. As a kid growing up in Lahore, I distinctly remember that on clear days it was possible to see the Himalaya mountains to the north. That is no longer the case. When Fawn and I visited in 2019, there was one morning when it was hard to see a wall only 100 yards away. You could directly look at the sun without hurting your eyes - it looked like an orange ball in the sky. In the past, the smog cleared up pretty well once you left the major cities. Not so any more. When we were there this last time, the smog stayed with us on a trip to a village probably 40 or 50 miles from the city.
Having said all that, something the article didn't mention is that smog in the Punjab (where the city of Lahore is) is, to a certain extent, seasonal. Subjectively, I would say that vehicle emissions are down from when we lived there. For example, the city of Lahore has banned rickshaws with two-stroke engines which were a major source of pollution. I have often seen hordes of rickshaws pouring out huge clouds of blue smoke from the oil mixed in with the petrol they ran on. You don't see that any more. Similarly, a large proportion of the other vehicles have been converted to run on natural gas - of which Pakistan is a major producer. (Going by the article, Pakistan is no longer self-sufficient in gas, but they do produce much of what they use.)
So what is the major source of the air pollution which plagues the country and why do I say it's seasonal? It's because much of it comes from burning off the fields in the Fall. During that part of the year, the prevailing winds come from the East. So, it isn't just the Pakistani farmers who are to blame. The winds bring in huge quantities of smoke from the burn-off in India. Then, about this time of year (November), when the main harvest is over and the fields are plowed for the new crop, air pollution goes way down and the air becomes breathable again. During the monsoon season, which in Lahore begins July 15, the heavy rains wash all the crud out of the air. During the monsoon, there is little sustained pollution.
It would be interesting to know where Pakistan is getting the coal to run the generating plants mentioned in the article. India has huge coal deposits, but Pakistan does not (unless there have been new discoveries since we lived there). I would have thought they would pursue the nuclear option. Since they have the knowhow and expertise to build a bomb, surely they can build a reactor and generating station? Why they don't pursue small plants to run individual cities is a puzzle to me."
Hi Al, Many thanks for this great feedback. Because my aim was to underline the "unintended consequences" of European energy policy - I drew a straight line between EU gas purchases and Pakistan's return to coal (a thesis I support) - but recognized that the smog problem is not just about coal-fired power stations ("The smog is due to stable meteorological conditions that trap air-masses, combined with lots of human-made particulate matter - mostly the result of combustion: cooking fires, vehicle emissions, brick kilns, and coal-fired power stations." and "To be clear, burning coal for electricity is one part of a much bigger and more complex smog problem. That said, cheap and abundant gas could be used for electricity, brick-kilns and cooking…"
Many excellent points, so herewith a few comments from my side.
1) Pakistan has coal resources that represent several hundred years of current production - "A new coal mining project in the Thar desert is expected to provide enough power to last 200 years" (from google). That said it is currently a net importer of coal, partly because local coal is poor quality. Top sources are South Africa, Indonesia and Afghanistan. Equally it is a net importer of gas.
2) The meterological conditions that cause smog are regional and can also be local. Both tend to be seasonal. The regional effect is a kink in the jet-stream which leaves a patch of high pressure - what used to be called a "blocking anticyclone" - since they tend to stay put for weeks at a time. Hot British summers, the so-called "heat domes" in Western Canada, and now the northern European dunkelflaute are all manifestations of this same effect. More local effects are topography which can trap air also. The Chamonix valley can have very poor air quality in winter for example.
3) Farming is one I didn't think of - but yes makes a lot of sense.
4) 2 and 3-wheelers : this is an area we don't hear much about - but there is definitely a quiet revolution happening across asia with stinky 2-strokes being replaced by gas and electric alternatives. Individually they are perhaps modest, but the numbers are vast!
5) Nuclear - don't know the answer - but "geopolitics" must be part of it!
Pandreco - I shared your post with a friend who was brought up in India. He gave a reply that will interest you, and I'm hoping you'll have a few comments.
"Thanks for sharing the article. As the article mentions, air pollution has always been a problem in Pakistan - and in recent years it has become much worse. As a kid growing up in Lahore, I distinctly remember that on clear days it was possible to see the Himalaya mountains to the north. That is no longer the case. When Fawn and I visited in 2019, there was one morning when it was hard to see a wall only 100 yards away. You could directly look at the sun without hurting your eyes - it looked like an orange ball in the sky. In the past, the smog cleared up pretty well once you left the major cities. Not so any more. When we were there this last time, the smog stayed with us on a trip to a village probably 40 or 50 miles from the city.
Having said all that, something the article didn't mention is that smog in the Punjab (where the city of Lahore is) is, to a certain extent, seasonal. Subjectively, I would say that vehicle emissions are down from when we lived there. For example, the city of Lahore has banned rickshaws with two-stroke engines which were a major source of pollution. I have often seen hordes of rickshaws pouring out huge clouds of blue smoke from the oil mixed in with the petrol they ran on. You don't see that any more. Similarly, a large proportion of the other vehicles have been converted to run on natural gas - of which Pakistan is a major producer. (Going by the article, Pakistan is no longer self-sufficient in gas, but they do produce much of what they use.)
So what is the major source of the air pollution which plagues the country and why do I say it's seasonal? It's because much of it comes from burning off the fields in the Fall. During that part of the year, the prevailing winds come from the East. So, it isn't just the Pakistani farmers who are to blame. The winds bring in huge quantities of smoke from the burn-off in India. Then, about this time of year (November), when the main harvest is over and the fields are plowed for the new crop, air pollution goes way down and the air becomes breathable again. During the monsoon season, which in Lahore begins July 15, the heavy rains wash all the crud out of the air. During the monsoon, there is little sustained pollution.
It would be interesting to know where Pakistan is getting the coal to run the generating plants mentioned in the article. India has huge coal deposits, but Pakistan does not (unless there have been new discoveries since we lived there). I would have thought they would pursue the nuclear option. Since they have the knowhow and expertise to build a bomb, surely they can build a reactor and generating station? Why they don't pursue small plants to run individual cities is a puzzle to me."
Hi Al, Many thanks for this great feedback. Because my aim was to underline the "unintended consequences" of European energy policy - I drew a straight line between EU gas purchases and Pakistan's return to coal (a thesis I support) - but recognized that the smog problem is not just about coal-fired power stations ("The smog is due to stable meteorological conditions that trap air-masses, combined with lots of human-made particulate matter - mostly the result of combustion: cooking fires, vehicle emissions, brick kilns, and coal-fired power stations." and "To be clear, burning coal for electricity is one part of a much bigger and more complex smog problem. That said, cheap and abundant gas could be used for electricity, brick-kilns and cooking…"
Many excellent points, so herewith a few comments from my side.
1) Pakistan has coal resources that represent several hundred years of current production - "A new coal mining project in the Thar desert is expected to provide enough power to last 200 years" (from google). That said it is currently a net importer of coal, partly because local coal is poor quality. Top sources are South Africa, Indonesia and Afghanistan. Equally it is a net importer of gas.
2) The meterological conditions that cause smog are regional and can also be local. Both tend to be seasonal. The regional effect is a kink in the jet-stream which leaves a patch of high pressure - what used to be called a "blocking anticyclone" - since they tend to stay put for weeks at a time. Hot British summers, the so-called "heat domes" in Western Canada, and now the northern European dunkelflaute are all manifestations of this same effect. More local effects are topography which can trap air also. The Chamonix valley can have very poor air quality in winter for example.
3) Farming is one I didn't think of - but yes makes a lot of sense.
4) 2 and 3-wheelers : this is an area we don't hear much about - but there is definitely a quiet revolution happening across asia with stinky 2-strokes being replaced by gas and electric alternatives. Individually they are perhaps modest, but the numbers are vast!
5) Nuclear - don't know the answer - but "geopolitics" must be part of it!