Love this series! One thing I have heard is that beaches create a lot of dust, whether it's beside the ocean or a river. I guess dust from deserts is a major source too. And construction/earthworks nearby the house. I heard that when the Salton Sea in California was drying up in the recent droughts that it created a serious dust hazard for nearby residents due to the agricultural chemical resides that had settled on the bottom when the now-dried up parts were previously underwater.
It is! Desert aerosols tend to be from efflorescence. Lakes and rivers and ocean environments contribute particles that are in suspension or in solution. That is very interesting about the Salton Sea, we took some samples a few years ago. We will have to take another look and put out a video. Thank you for your comment!
Gratitude for teaching without hype! I'm aware that electrical conditions that correspond to less water vesicles/moisture will 'raise dust' or as with rain conglomerate of clump particles to heavier or even reactively different compounds. I'm also aware that the Green politic is focusing on urban pollution by particle size alone and not by any chemical assay. But as with tyre dust, there are pollutants from industrial processes including industrialised agriculture and even 'geoengineering programs' that must in various conditions come into the home. I thought a negative ioniser might lower the positive ionic dust in the home. I'm aware that many have specific sensitivity allergy to different 'dusts' - as well as of a basis for anaphylaxis that can prime us for such reactions. In a world migration to computer models and screens I have become more appreciative of empiric science. While alluding to potential negatives from dust I also feel to state the body is an extraordinarily adaptive and resilient self-healing organism and that this is hardly reinforced in a world where 'risk' modelling drives public perceptions and funding streams. My guess what be that there are also chemicals in the air that do not show up or readily identify under microscopy. Anyway - you have my sub!
Thank you for your comment. There is so much to explore it is hard to wrap everything up in 11 minutes. It is an assemblage of particles that can give you an idea of what chemicals might be present given the source of the particle. It takes thought and time to properly analyze an environmental sample. We appreciate your input!
Love this series! One thing I have heard is that beaches create a lot of dust, whether it's beside the ocean or a river. I guess dust from deserts is a major source too. And construction/earthworks nearby the house. I heard that when the Salton Sea in California was drying up in the recent droughts that it created a serious dust hazard for nearby residents due to the agricultural chemical resides that had settled on the bottom when the now-dried up parts were previously underwater.
It is! Desert aerosols tend to be from efflorescence. Lakes and rivers and ocean environments contribute particles that are in suspension or in solution. That is very interesting about the Salton Sea, we took some samples a few years ago. We will have to take another look and put out a video. Thank you for your comment!
Gratitude for teaching without hype!
I'm aware that electrical conditions that correspond to less water vesicles/moisture will 'raise dust' or as with rain conglomerate of clump particles to heavier or even reactively different compounds.
I'm also aware that the Green politic is focusing on urban pollution by particle size alone and not by any chemical assay.
But as with tyre dust, there are pollutants from industrial processes including industrialised agriculture and even 'geoengineering programs' that must in various conditions come into the home.
I thought a negative ioniser might lower the positive ionic dust in the home.
I'm aware that many have specific sensitivity allergy to different 'dusts' - as well as of a basis for anaphylaxis that can prime us for such reactions.
In a world migration to computer models and screens I have become more appreciative of empiric science.
While alluding to potential negatives from dust I also feel to state the body is an extraordinarily adaptive and resilient self-healing organism and that this is hardly reinforced in a world where 'risk' modelling drives public perceptions and funding streams.
My guess what be that there are also chemicals in the air that do not show up or readily identify under microscopy.
Anyway - you have my sub!
Thank you for your comment. There is so much to explore it is hard to wrap everything up in 11 minutes. It is an assemblage of particles that can give you an idea of what chemicals might be present given the source of the particle. It takes thought and time to properly analyze an environmental sample. We appreciate your input!