***** OWNED! Now let's move them to the moon!

East Tn Turf Surf Chinese or factories? :P

Factories

***** Clean Air Act of 1970, development of nuclear power, a centralized power grid, CARB, invention of fuel injection and major advances in the internal combusion engine, the fuel crisis, silicone valley, etc. Ask anyone who lived through the 60s and 70s and they will tell you about the huge improvement in air quality before the collapse of the steel industry and the American manufacturing.

+Dimitri T WHAT A SMART MOVE

Jose Angel Hernandez worrdd

would've made for a good ending, "In Memory Of Shawn Basset who was tragically killed by a train as you just saw." Next video... "How we can make louder trains"

That was nuts!

the train conductor didn't even attempt to warn him with his horn, he obviously wanted to kill the American lol.

Jose Angel Hernandez why is he even on the train tracks?!

and do it on every car ?

Haven't you watched the video? - the point is not to provide a scalable solution, but to give people incentive to change their behavior. Or you thought they literally talked about carrots there?

I like giraffes

Day Mal that is a very agreeable statement

Oskar Elek but why no ambition dream bigger find and make the solution "we" the people can't really do much its them... Produce it already

That was a good blooper

Who the fuck stands on a railway?!

makes a good shot.

Connor C He was hoping to score some sick leave

Connor C natural selection

+Vugz Hir China refuses to incorporate adequate carbon footprint restrictions onto factories as they fear it would challege their ability to produce cheap products for the international market. It has been a hot topic for many many years now. Chinese citizens have been trying to take matters into their own hands, but their hands have been tied. This is just one technology to help control factory pollution without making the factories do it. It is not the right solution, but it will at least make them feel a little less helpless, and allow them to show they care.

If they were to try and do that it would cost billions of dollars and would cause some factory's to shut down and the economy to lose money.

Richard Smith China has already dropped drastically their coal usage.. I hope every country would change to nuclear energy for this transition time, until we find better solution..

"Chinese citizens have been trying to take matters into their own hands, but their hands have been tied" ok so what? why are you faking empathy for the Chinese people? want to create another iraq, libya or syria out of that? you should be happy and let the chinese produce more smog since this will eventually cause chinese nation to suffocate to death and the west will win the cold war

so you dont care that 1.3 BILLION people die?

yes.

Wonder what that jewelry would look like.

***** what the fuck dude. Thats some racist shit. Chinese people are people too. Theh are not farts.

no, farts are harmless.... breath it back in

Not exactly true, some farts can carry particulates.

MrEndzo or the sun or the wind or the water or nuclear plant

Yeah, try getting solar energy in the middle of smog filled bejing.

oh watch out, ancap over here haha. - ancom.

Mrgruntastic not everything is so black and white that people are ancaps and anarchists. I'm not sure what anyone's political views have to do with any of the comments here.

maybe the "fruuh murkut" can't really fix everything heh?

Remember how he admitted it was NOT a solution to the polution problem and instead just an incentive for the future?

as long as you're creating less waste than you're removing, it's beneficial.

China is actually a leading country in renewable energy, believe it or not

It's ok, it's somebody else's problem now.

They try to change to be better environmentally - for example china has a plan to cut on meat consumption by half for example I hope china is successful in all this changes

what do you mean BUY THIS TECH? its a friggin ionizer. i had one in my bedroom IN THE EIGHTIES. they are nothing new. just that the average yuppie doesn't know about anything that doesn't come from walmart or they haven't seen advertised. there is TONS of technology out there that the average joe has no clue about. and I own plenty of things that use those odd technologies.

Link Knight please share some other cool obscure technologies

***** cardboard house I won, solar powered fridge in my house, propane powered freezer, you ever seen those thermos flasks that the 2 sides flip out with mirrors on them and you have an evactuated tube in there (like new solar hot water technology). it looks like a thermos flask but actually heats the water in it. solar cooking dishes, common in india and china. then there is stirling engines which I show on my channel (most not running, they even had an austrian made desk fan), plus a steam powered sawmill, steam powered earth moving, gasification which is running petrol vehicles off gas extracted from wood by pyrolisis (I done a video with The Do It Yourself World where I improvised one with a coffee tin), peltiers and thermo electric generators, Titanium Dioxide air purifiers. quite a number of these things are on my channel which you would find with the search bit on my channels front page.

its fine a 2 bedroom apt costs about 1 million dollars( i mean us dollars) in Beijing, poor ppl dont even get to live there no worries XD :)

Link Knight Lol, Its not just an ionizer you nob, The problem in the past was creating durable filters that could filter such tiny particles as the once viewed in this video, If you are seriously arsing around and saying we have not come a single step forward in technology since the 80's. then sir you have no clue

I was scrolling down just to see if anyone mentioned this :p

I wonder which power plant will be powering this park?

We could use ozone done in NZ since we have a hole above our country.

haha its a win win....

no need to mine nothing because they use the coal extracted from the air...

Like the guy in the video said, "it's complicated"

The Chinese culture is all about having no care for human life. China will never change unless there is a profit to be made.

***** That's what my Australian wife thinks about me, though I believe it's less to do with my soul than me being sometimes a bit aspergery

+EVOLICIOUS It's not "Chinese culture". It's just Communist.

china relies heavily on industry for economic growth but its expansion is slowing down. imposing regulations will further slow down the growth thus not worth it. (in chinese government's perspective)

+Mike M oh like out to sea with all of our plastic? cause that was a great idea.

Magical Fungi You obviously don't get the reference.

+Magical Fungi yeah, I get the reference lol. Honestly some people need to get a good sense of humor

+Alyssa Cunha Cape Town has clean air, a strong wind called the "Cape Doctor" blows the pollution out to sea.

+Mike Slammers send it to space

Or toners maybe

Aminnudin Jasmani jewelry's can be sold at a higher price, hence this project is more sustainable as it can then pay for itself.

eventually demand will go down and then you have a bunch of black blocks in the environment no one wants.

Michael Rosche you think thats jewelry? More like a novelty. They could make synthetic diamonds from that stuff but they choose not to lol

xDJOx Rex It's both, still a form of jewelry.

it can impact the economy so china wont do anything against it.

Back in the day, America was huge on industry! We never had issues like China because we have something called the EPA, and enforce our environmental regulations on companies that manufactured here. This is the very reason why companies moved to China; they don't enforce environmental regulations (or even child labor) making manufacturing very cheap. We are not to blame, China is to blame. I always choose American over Chinese products whenever available. Its the least I can do. But yes, you have a point, we should stop buying Chinese stuff as it makes the issue more global.

Regardless of whether you can compare now to then, the fact of the matter is that China does not enforce laws for protecting the environment and air quality. Thus it is their problem. If they enforced these laws, cost of manufacture would go up, and wasteful manufacture would go down.

It's basically just a guy making a park that has significantly reduced smog. Not really solving an issue. More like placing a band-aid on a massive wound.

China spent 900 billion on renewable energy sources last year alone, so yes they're doing something

we are talking about a regime who thought putting glass into soil makes crops grow

Because that would be another cost. The reason all countries gather their manufacturing factories in China is because it is cheap. If China increases the cost for a foreign company to make their products in China, then the company will go somewhere else where it is cheaper, and does not have costly environmental friendly regulations. It's easy to think it's China's problem, when in fact it is a matter of supply and demand, which involves both the supplier and buyer.

They just want China to die

korsez cuz it's run by corporate hacks

Because Hong Kong has a avg life expectancy of 84 years so they don't really care

Are you trying to be funny?

Wow your in a bad mood today, I'd say it was a meager attempt at being funny but it did it's job.

no just a honest question.

wasnt trying to be funny, just sceptical.

Joep b worked for me :)

Divergent Evolution did you know that living in a heavily populated city gives you a smaller carbon footprint?

+Joecgml I doubt it breaks even, but it's not meant to. It's basically an art installation.

nahhhh

@bobwatters That was in the Netherlands

Better yet, put it inside the smokestack. This has been done for decades in the United States and in Europe. It's called a "precipitator" when it is designed to capture solid particles or a "scrubber" for gases. Coal-fired plants usually use a combination of the two, so the only thing coming out of the stack is water and carbon dioxide. The only way to emit less pollution is to use nuclear energy instead.

Progress starts with a first step and this is a step in the right direction.

well it's better to do something than to do nothing. nothing will be ever be done if the first step is "make world peace"

Your temporary solution, as all industrial and government ..... use mask and give time to think or still dying. . Great solution.

Did you watch the video? Half the video is them talking about just that. The entire point is to create a contrast to battle normalization of the issue. Nobody is ever going to do anything if they are so accustomed to pollution that they don't care. But if there is one pollution-free place they can go and breathe fresh air, that will inspire people and set the standard they should strive for. It's a way to strengthen the clean energy effort.

Now your a real dynamic thinker. This guy has the right idea. We need more human beings thinking the way you do, Problem solvers and solutions based thinkers. Those are the real progressives. We need Progress, and not people that refuse to solve issues in a smart way because it affects their political base.

Nohalfsteps That's quite possibly some of the nicest things anyone's ever said to me. Thank you for making my life better with your kindness.

My pleasure. Just keep asking those kinds of questions and you'll make everyone's life better. Ignore the haters. Just about every great invention started with the words: Why not use this to create that?

Nohalfsteps Why not use graphene to make carbon and sell it to the Chinese?

***** because it's not economically viable. Consider that the collected particulate is heavily contaminated, not pure carbon. It's really not a good starting material. I really think this is probably one of the best ways they could use the collected smog. Not only does it help to finance these systems, but it makes a clear point, creates something nice, and gets the topic discussed. Take a ring, or earrings. Every time someone comments on them to someone wearing them, that's a chance to start the discussion. People also tend to like those little things that say "I'm helping!" so I can see them being fairly popular.

Jean-Luc Picard nuclear energy is a ticking timebomb, not good at all unless they can figure out how to use thorium.

@Mr Cabot And you're too ignorant to know what "Nuclear" is. Currently most reactors run off fission. But fusion, which we are currently attempting at making it self sufficient is even cleaner then fission. There are many types of fuel and reactions that are in theory extremely beneficial. just lack the funding for the research to be done.

This isn't a solution. A solution would be cutting down the pollution being put into the air.

what about previously existed smogs.....smogs can be created when anyone's house,cars is on fire....u can't control that.....and while building houses

Sadly, it is not that easy to "stop the polluting". To put it in perspective, China produces ~70% of it's power from burning coal which is roughly 13,252,000,000,000,000,000 joules in 2014 alone. To run a 100 watt light-bulb for 1 year straight you would need 3,162,240,000 joules of energy. So the amount of power China alone creates from coal can run 4,190,000,000 100 watt light-bulbs for a year. For future reference a joule is equal to one watt.

Taylor Rice Very little thought went into your comment.

even better. put rooftop gradens on top of every building.

Even better, put both on the roofs of buildings.

even better put roofs on top of building roofs building tops boofs tuilding rop

buildings, better even roof on top the of both

Ellavina *"The cost to run the park in its entirety is the equivalent of a household vacuum cleaner."* And how much particulate matter does that create from coal burning? That doesn't answer the fucking question. People don't seem to understand that technology doesn't clean up the environment, it pollutes it. If there was no electricity, no automobiles, no heating, we'd live in an entirely pristine natural environment - in the stone age.

+fuzzywzhe As they mentioned in the video, this isn't a solution to the problem. If you live in a place that always has smog and have never experienced what it's like without it, you wouldn't reasonably push for it's removal. This is to give people a taste test, that's it. Also the key factor is more efficient technologies pollute the environment less. Sure electric running off renewable electricity still pollute in the manufacturing process, but they do it far less than combustion engine cars.

+fuzzywzhe The park consumes 1,700 Watts. A typical coal power plant produces 500,000,000 Watts. The answer to your "fucking question" is "not very fucking much". Keep things in perspective, man.

+fuzzywzhe Allow me rephrase. The answer to "how much particulate matter does that create from coal burning" is: "insignificant because it uses virtually no power, and inconsequential because its purpose is not to clean the fucking pollution you dumb fucking idiot." It's an art project to remind the people immersed in air pollution of what it's like without air pollution. It's not a proposed solution. Did you watch before commenting?

Ben Simmons *"Allow me rephrase. The answer to "how much particulate matter does that create from coal burning" is: "insignificant because it uses virtually no power"* And it cleans virtually no air, dummy. When will you MORONS understand that energy consumption by technology ALWAYS creates pollution? Always. Even with solar energy, the reason it takes 7 years to recoup the cost of the cells it takes 7 years of energy to make the cells. They are sold at almost no margin. After 7 years, yeah, you're golden.

HAAAA.

I wish it were true. If it were, then why has it not been implemented?

Robert Zraick Retooling and reinfrastructure costs. If we were buying our energy supply now, we would buy solar and wind for local use close to home. The current cost of wind is actually cheaper than coal and solar cheaper than gas and nuclear. We would not have to pay for the grid, the millions of tons of wire, the steel towers and transformer cores, the trillions of dollars for nuclear reactors, mining, processing and clean up, the coal fired generators, the mines and mining equipment, the trucks, the trains to haul it, the wear on the highway system from heavy trucking, but now we have to replace all that with solar panels and thermosolar generators and wind turbines situated locally and without much grid to shuttle power around, we merely will have to move a small percentage of electricity around to meet shortages due to wind or sun decreases. And we also have to super insulate our homes and buildings, instead of having built them properly in the first place. Add earth source geothermal with surface earth insulation and that's housing. Then eliminate transport of things grown locally, only ship stuff that has to be grown or made elsewhere, and do it by slow wind powered trains with sails, and restructure cities to have work near the workers, and stop lighting all the unoccupied streets at night, and the earth will recover. THAT'S why we don;t have it, and how we will now have to.

rstevewarmorycom I was only commenting on Cballin's statement about solar energy and electric cars. I thought is a but simplistic. The problem regarding the energy need of our civilization are pretty complex. I agree with what you posted. When we first started to burn fossil fuels, particularly oil and its derivatives, we were enticed by how easy it was and we did not make the best use of it. I would like to se the grid eliminated. Every home built with the ability to power itself and every car be totally electric and chargable at home. We are going to have some problem with air travel as there does not seem to be a viable alternative to jet fuel. Everything else is too heavy (a plane trying to fly loaded with enough batteries would just never get off the ground. Perhaps that can be address with synthesizing hydrocarbons. I think we could put motion sensors on street lighting so that they would only light when needed. Things are going to change.

Robert Zraick Efficiency is the reason for centralized burning of fossil fuels, if you are going to use fossil fuels the largest possible generation equipment is very much more efficient. But losses on the required grid very nearly eat up that advantage, so you're right about solar and wind anyway, and perhaps neighborhood fossil fuel supplementation. Also, centralized laundry and refrigeration is waaay more efficient, as is recapture of waste heat from manufacturing for heating purposes and cogeneration for chemical processes. There are ways to synthesize butanol and biodiesel that could be used for medical helicopters and some air travel, They have a plane or two that run solely on canola oil, the military wanted to know that. And yes, street lighting controls and store lighting controls are big ways to save power. The key to transport being lower energy is to make enclosed two and three wheeled battery-powered vehicles with light weather shells that run on small electric motors, typically under a kWatt. That and rail should do it.

rstevewarmorycom I had never heard about a plane running on canola oil. Thanks for that. Just curious, was it a jet? In any case I am encouraged to hear about it. The time to work in developing strategies for a post fossil fuel world is now.

There is no UV technology involved so afaik no. The hub just charges up the air certain way, hardly any chemical reaction happens.

are you trolling ? as of now nothing on this planet is good for the ozone incl humans.

they don't hurt ozone (O3)... it's a gaseous compound and is difficult to filter out. not like there would be much there anyways. the sulfur and hydrocarbons make pretty short work of Ozone particles.

BAD FOR THE OZONE? get off the drugs. i HAD ONE of these ionizers in my bedroom as a kid. its like an electrostatic charge in the way it makes all of the airborne particles fall to the ground. it has NOTHING to do with gasses that may harm the ozone. you think that something with a top consumption of a lousy 1500 watts, less powerful than an electric kettle is going to screw up some layer of gas 60 kilometers up! you don't know ozone from bath salts.

Link Knight actually it does effect O3 particles (ozone) but not so bad that it would hurt the part of the O zone that helps us. Ozone in your house isn't good. just because it's 1 more oxygen molecule larger than O2 doesn't mean it's good for us (to be fair it would take a very large amount of arching electricity to produce enough 0zone to hurt some one. ps- when you create a large static shock then smell that weird ionized air- a small part of that air is Ozone

Johnathan Morris How? It funds the whole project

Thomas Druce The fact that that is wrong is literally shown to you using the model

that's why they put it on top of buildings

It's a shame it's taken me this long to finally stumble on a comment that makes sense here! Exactly... Prevention before cure.