Persuasive Essay - A Letter to Beijing

An Open Letter to the City of Beijing Regarding Air Pollution

Dear Municipality of Beijing,

                The news, web articles, and online images have all been showing the dense, cloudy, toxic smog that lingers in your streets, surrounds skyscrapers, and torments the blue sky into a sorrowful grey. It is a shame to see you, the cultural capital of the world’s second biggest economy degrade yourself to such a contaminated wasteland. Air pollution in Beijing has reached outrageous levels and it is time to put a stop to the self-destruction. Current policy and enforcement of environmental law is weak and it is downplayed by prioritizing profit over protection. Take control of the honor, dignity, and responsibility you owe to the people of Beijing and China.

Last year, the world was shocked as you declared a red alert in response to the smog-drenched wave of toxins that enveloped the city in what people have come to call an “airpocalypse”. That December of 2015 was the first time the alarm had been signaled to the highest level since its conception in 2013 (Wong). During the red alert, schools were canceled, cars were removed off the road, and certain factory work was paused. People were told to take all precautions necessary to avoid the small particles from the smog as PM2.5 readings exceeded hazardous levels. PM, or particulate matter, refers to particle pollution. Sources of these fine particles come from a range of pollutant sources such as automobiles, factories, and power plants. The PM 2.5 scale is a reading of quantity of small, fine particles 2.5 micrometers and smaller in diameter. A human hair is “30 times larger than the largest fine particle” (EPA). The sheer comparison to a human hair follicle is enough to understand that these particles pose serious health risks (see fig. 1). According to the EPA, particles less than 10 micrometers in diameter are extremely hazardous as they “can get deep into your lungs, and some may even get into your bloodstream” (EPA). This leads to various health issues including asthma, strokes, lung cancer, and heart attacks and has contributed to more than 1.6 million deaths per year in China (Levin).

Before 2012, PM2.5 pollutants were not included in environmental policies and were not considered per the standards of Beijing. Only after the third amendment to the Ambient Air Quality Standards was made by the Ministry of Environmental Protection was an official record started of these measurements (Hefeng et al.). Local emissions contribute to 64-72% of your bad air, 31.1% of which come from motor vehicles, and 22.4% of which come from coal combustion (Hefeng et al.). As of 2013, the total vehicle population of Beijing was 5.43 million (Hefeng et al.). In the past, air quality degradation was seen as due to coal burning, but with the growing number of vehicles on the road, the major source today is dominated by a mix of coal burning and vehicle emissions and should be the first place of attention (Hefeng et al.).

AQI Category	Index Values	Previous Breakpoints (µg/m3, 24-hour average)	Revised Breakpoints (µg/m3, 24-hour average)
Good	0 - 50	0.0 - 15.0	0.0 – 12.0
Moderate	51 - 100	>15.0 - 40	12.1 – 35.4
Unhealthy for Sensitive Groups	101 – 150	>40 – 65	35.5 – 55.4
Unhealthy	151 – 200	> 65 – 150	55.5 – 150.4
Very Unhealthy	201 – 300	> 150 – 250	150.5 – 250.4
Hazardous	301 – 400	> 250 – 350	250.5 – 350.4
Hazardous	401 – 500	> 350 – 500	350.5 – 500

                In fact, Beijing, you did manage to tackle these sectors during the 2008 Olympic Games. It was then in 2008 that you began taking “long-term control measures before the Games and short-term stringent control actions during the Games” (Hefeng et al.). During that time you “converted 1500 coal furnaces into clean fuels, retire[d] 23,000 old cars, [cut] major pollutant emissions of 30,000 tons, and increase[ed] green coverage of 100 km2 “ (Hefeng et al.). You restricted vehicles based on an even-odd system (even/odd license plate ending cars driving every other day) from August 17, 2007 to August 20, 2007 and from July 20, 2008 to September 20, 2008 (Hefeng et al.). [l1] 

This, however, was only short-termed and is only enacted under red alerts. Shortly after the Games ended, concentration readings of major pollutants increased. The beginning of 2008 through 2013 saw an increase in PM2.5 pollutants rising from just about 80 ug/m-3 to over 100 ug/m-3 in annual concentrations reaching unhealthy levels (Hefeng et al.). These measurements indicated unhealthy air quality as per the AQI category (see fig. 2).

What was your sudden motivation to manage so many emission cuts at once? Was it not in your interest to give the world a good impression during the international Olympic Games? The fact that grey skies returned after the Games shows the lack of responsibility in balancing economic over community priorities. It was unethical to avoid focus on the improvement of air quality until the moment a political or economic interest arose.  

The pollution situation is urgent. In response to the increased PM readings after the Games, in September of 2013, China issued the Action Plan on Prevention and Control of Air Pollution which stated that PM2.5 concentrations in Beijing were required to be within a 60 ug/m^-3 annual average (Hefeng et al.). This is just under the category unhealthy for sensitive group (see fig.2). However, despite these new provisions in place, January 2013, brought “several haze pollution episodes, which were the most serious particulate pollution events in the past two decades” (Hefeng et al.). For nearly a month, PM2.5 measurements exceeded the 60 ug/m^-3 limit in downtown Beijing (Hefeng et al.). [l2] 

The situation has not improved much today. Readings from this year may seem like an improvement, but in reality possess an illusion of clean air. As seen in figure 3, you have been reaching your goal of maintaining an annual average of PM2.5 below 60 ug/m^-3. However, this does not mean that you have taken responsibility for the health of your citizens. The fact of the matter is an average is not representative of reality each day in Beijing. This year has experience numerous fluctuations in partical matter that reach hazardous levels over 250 ug/m^-3 (see fig. 3). The average is a worthless value to depend on when pollution levels exceed hazardous limits and 49% of days over 7 years have been rated unhealthy under the AQI index (see fig.4).

	Average  Values 60.0372

 

 ]

Despite the current environmental plans and legislation currently in place, this past year has seen many peaks into hazardous pollution and indicates that there is a need for a change in the enactment of environmental policy. Coal burning remains to be over 70% of China’s energy source and is one of the major contributors to Beijing’s particular matter along with vehicle emissions (Hefeng et al.). Beijing, in order to hold responsibility for the people, it is necessary to take swift action to renewable energy sources and reduce the dependence on coal significantly. Policies regarding removing vehicles from roads need to be assisted with promotion of public transportation and an enforcement of fees on drivers with vehicles not meeting emissions standards. It is imperative that the preservation of air is placed above profit and industrial interest for the good of the people of Beijing. Beijing, are you willing to sell your sky, your air, and you lungs for profit? 

Sincerely,

Prospective visitor

Works Cited

EPA. "Particulate Matter (PM) Basics." Environmental Protection Agency, 12 Sept. 2016. Web. 09 Dec.

2016

Hefeng, Shuxiao, et al. “Air Pollution and Control Action in Beijing.” Journal of Cleaner Production, Apr.

2015, pp.1519-1527.

Levin, Dan. "Study Links Polluted Air in China to 1.6 Million Deaths a Year." The New York Times. The

New York Times, 13 Aug. 2015. Web. 09 Dec. 2016.

Wong, Edward. "Beijing Issues Red Alert Over Air Pollution for the First Time." The New York Times. The

New York Times, 07 Dec. 2015. Web. 09 Dec. 2016.

---

 [l1]Characters: Beijing, Games,

Topic string logic: Beijing did X, X was so and so, So and so means: this (explains),

 [l2]Characters: China,Pollution

Topic string logic:

China issues Action Plan. Action Plan states X, X is bad. X is increasing in degree of “Bad”