I visited my one of my old colleagues yesterday, and talked with him about on-going and prospective business-related topics. He is ten years older than me, and has been working as an environmental consultant for a long time. His comments on environmental issues is based on his years of experience, and I learn much from the discussion with him.
We discussed recent topics on air quality management policies in the world. During the discussion, I asked him to give me his comments on a prospective terminal point of the air quality management policy.
I have been engaged in various types of consulting services on air quality management policies since I started working. From my experience, I have reached some basic ideas.
Firstly, the current air quality in Japan seems to be cleaner than 50 years ago. While Japan had been experiencing high economic growth in the late 1950s to mid 1970s, severe environmental pollution had occurred during that period. The Yokkaichi asthma is one of the most identified incidents. Residents living on the leeward side of a large petrochemical industrial complex in Yokkaichi city had had a high tendency to get severe asthma. Some were killed by the air pollution, and others suffered from permanent damage.
The air pollution, including the Yokkaichi asthma and other pollution occurring in Japan at that time, triggered the Japanese government to establish The Air Quality Control Act in the beginning of 1970. In accordance with the Act, industrial factories in Japan started to regulate their emission of air pollutants. The Act has been revised again and again since its establishment, and the air quality has been cleaned accordingly.
Pictures of air in Yokkaichi, Kita-Kyushu, Kawasaki, and other industrial areas in Japan taken during the 1960 to 1970 remind us of the very fact that air was indeed highly polluted by the emissions from industrial complexes. In addition, the monitoring data taken by the Ministry of Environment shows that the concentration of sulfur oxides and nitrogen oxides (the two most common air pollutants) has decreased since that time. Although much more (for example, a regulation for the emission gas from motor vehicles) still remains to be done, I sense that the air quality has become cleaner than 50 years ago.
On the other hand, when I traveled to Mumbai this May, I found that the air quality had deteriorated compared to Tokyo. After that trip, I suffered from a constant cough for about two weeks. I had the exact same experience when visiting Beijing in 2006. I stayed there for about one week, and my respiratory system did not work normally during the stay. Both the air in Mumbai and Beijing were not clear, and there were identified dusts hovering in the air here and there. Although I have never been to Asian countries except for India and China, I assume that the current air quality in other Asian megacities such as Ho Chi Minh and Bangkok is more or less the same as in the Mumbai and Beijing.
These facts and assumptions lead me to reach the conclusion that the air pollution in Asian countries other than in Japan is our primary concern, and that the air pollution in Japan is the secondary one. In this sense, the air quality management policy in Japan is at the near stage to its terminal point. The Japanese government has its know-how to overcome the past severe air pollution, and it seems like good idea that the government distributes its knowledge to Asian countries in order to strengthen their capacity.
My former colleague acknowledged my ideas, and provided me with his comments. However, I have already written much, so his comments will be updated in my future blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment