State of Air Quality and Noise Pollution -...

[33]THAILAND STATE OF POLLUTION REPORT 2003

POLLUTION CONTROL DEPARTMENT

State ofAir Qualityand Noise Pollution



AIR QUALITY

The status of air quality problems in Thailand in 2003continued to be particulate matter in size smaller than 10 micron(PM

10), which exceeded standards in many locations similar to the

preceding year. Most of these were the same places, such asSamutprakarn, Bangkok, and Chalerm Prakeat District, Saraburiprovince.

Secondary issues were ozone gas1 (O3), which was found to exceed standards in some areas, i.e.,

Bangkok and surrounding provinces, and eastern region. Carbon monoxide gases (CO) exceeded standards in

areas located near certain Bangkok roadsides. Other air pollutants, i.e., sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen dioxide

(NO2), were within limits.

Air Quality in BangkokAir pollutants found to have exceeded standards in the City of Bangkok were particulate matter (PM),

ozone gases, total suspended particles (TSP) and carbon monoxide. Compared to the previous year, these

problems became more degraded. Other pollutants were within limits, however. The main cause of PM has

always been vehicular traffic, which increases every year. Data obtained from Department of Land Transportation

indicate that the total number of registered vehicles until 2002 was 5.4 million. In 2003 alone, there were 514,530

new registrations. As a result, locations by major streets experienced worse air pollution problems than residential

areas.

1. General Areas

Bangkok-wide there were 10 air quality monitoring stations in total. Continuous monitoring showed

that particulate matter and ozone gases had increased compared to the previous years. Other pollutants, such

as TSP, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide, were within limits (see Table 1 in Index).

The 24-hour particulate matter averages, measured at 20.5 - 189.0 µg/m3, exceeded standards

36 times from a total 1,680 readings, or 2.14% (standard of 120 µg/m3. Locations with the most serious PM

problem were Bangkhuntien District and Singharaj Pittayakom School.

The 1-hour ozone averages, measured at 0 - 169.0 parts per billion (ppb), exceeded standards 155

times from a total 61,789 readings, or 0.25% (standard of 100 ppb). The highest levels found were near

Ramkamhaeng University, frequently exceeding the standard limits.

1 Ozone gas is the secondary pollutant that formed in the chemical reactions between hydrocarbon and nitrogen oxides sunlight as catalyst.



2. Roadside Locations

There were 7 monitoring stations, plus an additional 21 temporary stations, monitoring air quality

around Bangkok roadsides. Field measurements showed that major problems of roadside areas were PM and

TSP. Furthermore, carbon monoxide and ozone gases also exceeded standards at times around particular

streets. Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide, on the other hand, remained below standards (see Table 2 in Index).

2.1 Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Air quality near roadside locations sampled and measured continuously all year round at 7

stations found 24-hr particulate matter averages at 12.7 - 208.9 µg/m3, which exceeded standards 108 times from

2,152 readings in total, or 5.02%. The highest levels were detected on Rama IV Road next to the Ministry of

Science and Technology.

The 1-hr ozone averages were detected at 0 - 145.0 ppb, which exceeded standards

13 times from 24,905 total readings, or 0.05%. Most exceedances were near Indrapitak Road, Thonburi power

sub-station.

2.2 Temporary Air Quality Monitoring Stations

Field measurements of air quality by roadsides with heavy traffic using 21 temporary stations,

conducted 2-3 times a week on 3 parameters, namely PM, TSP and CO, found particulate matter to exceed

standards at several locations. TSP and CO exceeded standards on some streets (see Table 3 in Index).

The 24-hr PM averages was detected at 39.2 - 241.0 µg/m3. The highest levels measured

were by Sukhumvit Street close to Soi Onnuch. In addition, Rama III at Tok intersection had PM exceedances

daily. Furthermore, several other streets had PM problems, i.e., Lanluang at Man-sri Intersection, Rajavithi at

Victory Monument, Pitsanulok at Yommaraj Intersection, Samsen at Sri-yan Intersection, Yaowaraj at Rajawong

Intersection, Sathupradit at Sathupradit Post Office, Rama I at Mahboonkrong. All were due to heavy and

congested traffic (Figure 1).

The 24-hr TSP averages were detected at 0.06 - 0.48 mg/m3. The highest levels were found

at Sathupradit Road near the post office. In addition, exceedances were detected at times on some streets

(standard of 0.33 mg/m3), i.e., Sukhumvit at Soi Onnuch, Rama I at Mahboonkrong, Ratchaprarop at Pratunam,

Samsen at Sri-yan, Rama III at Tok Intersection, and Pitsanulok at Yommaraj Intersection (Figure 2).

The 1-hr CO averages were within limits. However, the 8-hr averages exceeded standards

at times on some roadsides due to heavy traffic resulting in a collection of this gas. Concentration readings

were 0.3 - 13.0 parts per million (ppm). Locations where exceedances were found (standard of 9 ppm)

were Prachatipok Road at Taksin Monument, Sukhumvit near Onnuch, Bangkok-Nonthaburi Road at

Wongsawang Intersection, Si-praya Road at Si-praya Intersection, Lanluang at Man-sri Intersection, and Rama I at

Mahboonkrong.



Considering the air pollution trend in Bangkok, it is evident that PM has continued to be a major problem

in roadside locations more than in other areas. Though data show that PM quantity has been clearly declining,

however in 2002-2003, the trend has started to rise once again (Figure 3). It is also expected to pose a serious

threat in the future if not seriously handled.

Pitsa

nu

lok R

d.

Ma

xim

um

24

-hr

PM

Ave

rag

e(

g/m

3)

Su

kh

um

vit R

d.

Art

-na

ron

g R

d.

Sa

mse

n R

d.

Ra

ma

IX

Rd

.

Ra

ma

IX

Rd

.

std = 120 g/m3

Su

kh

ap

iba

l 1

Rd

.

Sa

thu

pra

dit R

d.

Ra

jpra

rop

Rd

.

Ya

ow

ara

j R

d.

La

nlu

an

g R

d.

La

nlu

an

g R

d.

(Ma

nsri)

Pra

su

ma

in R

d.

Pra

ch

atip

ok R

d.

Bkk-N

on

tha

bu

ri R

d.

Ra

ma

III

Rd

.

Silo

m R

d.

Ra

ma

I R

d.

Ra

mkh

am

ha

en

g R

d.

Ph

ah

oly

oth

in R

d.

Ra

jvith

i R

d.

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

Figure 1. The highest 24-hr averages of PM10 detected by temporary monitoring stations in Bangkok, 2003

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0

Pitsa

nu

lok R

d.

Su

kh

um

vit R

d.

Art

-na

ron

g R

d.

Sa

mse

n R

d.

Ra

ma

IX

Rd

.

Ra

ma

IX

Rd

.

Su

kh

ap

iba

l 1

Rd

.

Sa

thu

pra

dit R

d.

Ra

jpra

rop

Rd

.

Ya

ow

ara

j R

d.

La

nlu

an

g R

d.

La

nlu

an

g R

d.

(Ma

nsri)

Pra

su

ma

in R

d.

Pra

ch

atip

ok R

d.

Bkk-N

on

tha

bu

ri R

d.

Ra

ma

III

Rd

.

Silo

m R

d.

Ra

ma

I R

d.

Ra

mkh

am

ha

en

g R

d.

Ph

ah

oly

oth

in R

d.

Ra

jvith

i R

d.

std = 0.33 g/m3

Maxim

um

24-h

r T

SP

Ave

rag

e(

g/m

3)

Figure 2. The highest 24-hr averages of TSP detected by temporary monitoring stations in Bangkok, 2003

R d idRoadside G l AGeneral Area

Std = 50 g/m3

1000

900

00

100

3)

1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Figure 3. Annual PM Concentrations in Bangkok, 1992-2003



200

188

166

144

122

100

88

66

44

00

R d idRoadside OthOthers

22

Annual O

zone (

pp

b)

19961996 19971997 19981998 19991999 20002000 20012001 20022002 20032003

Ozone gases posed another significant air pollution problem since they exceeded standards several times

in the various areas of Bangkok, and were also increasing continuously (Figure 4). Thus, protective and control

measures are needed to keep within standards.

Solutions to air pollution from vehicles, another major source for Bangkok, are more stringent emission

standards for new and old motor vehicles, petrol improvement by means of reducing sulfur content, inspection

and law enforcement of violations, and enhanced emission control on public buses, etc.

Air Quality in Surrounding ProvincesContinuous monitoring in the Bangkokûs 4 surrounding provinces - Samutprakarn, Samutsakorn, Patumthani

and Nonthaburi - at 10 stations found that PM and ozone gases posed significant problems, and that they were

more serious than the previous years. Other pollutants remained within standards, however (see Table 4 in Index).

The 24-hr PM averages were measured at 11.6 - 331.4 µg/m3. The most problematic location was

Samutprakarn with exceedances of 458 times from a total of 1,533 readings, or 29.9%. This figure is higher than

the previous year of 18.4% exceedance rate (Figure 5). In addition, comparing the annual averages indicates

that there is also an increasing trend (Figure 6).

Figure 4. Annual ozone concentrations in Bangkok, 1996-2003

50

40

30

20

10

0

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

35.9

15.1

27.3

19.3

16.7

18.4

29.9

Exce

ed

an

ce

Ra

te (

%)

Figure 5. Percentage of PM exceedances in Samutprakarn, 1997-2003



The 1-hr ozone averages were higher than standards several times at all monitoring stations with readings

at 0 - 187.0 ppb. Maximum readings were at Samutsakorn Highway Department Office, Kratumban District,

Samutsakorn.

Air Quality in other ProvincesOuter provinces of Thailand had PM as the main problem.

Compared to the previous years, most locations did not change very

considerably, except Chalerm Prakeat District, Saraburi, whose PM

problem became slightly more severe. Secondary pollutant was ozone,

with all others remaining within standards (see Table 5 in Index).

The 24-hr averages of PM were measured at 10.9 - 388.5

µg/m3. The highest readings were recorded at Chalerm Prakeat

District, Saraburi with 46 exceedances of all 307 readings, or 15.0%.

This was because the area features a lot of stone crushing and

grinding facilities, and cement plants, which may have been the

main PM contributors. In light of the situation, responsible agencies

have proposed action plans to alleviate the problem. Other locations

with less severe PM problems included Sriracha District, Chonburi,

Lampang, Nakorn Ratchasima, and Chiang Mai, etc.

The 1-hr averages of ozone gases were measured at

0 - 134.8 ppb. Most exceedances were found in the eastern region

of Chonburi and Rayong provinces. The provinces of Ratchaburi,

Saraburi, Chiang Mai and Nakon Sawan, however, had exceedances

at a few intervals only.

1200

1000

800

600

400

00

200

Annual P

M-1

0 C

oncentr

ations (

g/m

3)

1997 1998 1999

Std = 50 g/m3

2000 2001 2002 2003

Figure 6. PM Concentrations in Samutprakarn, 1997-2003



Figure 1. Inspection and ban of black-smoke emittingvehicles

Figure 2. Numbers of vehicles inspected and banned for emitting black smoke on Taksin Road accordingto requirements under Enhancement and Conservation of National Environmental Quality Act,B.E. 2535 (1992)

18-30 September 2003 Oct-03 Nov-30 1-17 December 2003 Total

104

63

223

106

203

117101

35

631

321

288

Nuber of Vehicles (Unit)

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

Inspecterd Vehicles

Banned Vehicles

Bans Removed

Inspection and Ban ofBlack-Smoke EmittingVehicles

The Traffic Police Department in cooperation with BangkokMetropolitan Administration and Pollution Control Departmentconducted inspections and issued bans on vehicles emitting blacksmoke in accordance with the Enhancement and Conservation ofNational Environmental Quality Act B.E. 2535 (1992). Only vehiclescovered by the Law on Motor Vehicles, i.e., pickup trucks and passenger vans, were tested. Inspections werelaunched on Taksin Road for 3 months from September 18 - December 17, 2003 in order to prepare relatedagencies and publicize measures to the general public. In conclusion, from all 631 vehicles inspected, 321 were

temporarily banned from use. These vehicles would have to be re-tuned and brought in for re-inspections within

30 days. Should they be caught again without removing temporary bans, permanent use prohibited orders will

take effect. Records obtained from the re-inspection checkpoints at the Elevated Highway Police Station, Barom

Ratchachonani Road, during the period of September 18 - December 31, 2003, show that a total of 288 vehicles,

or 90%, came back in for re-inspection and successfully removed the temporary bans. Thus, there are 33 vehicles,

or 10%, remaining to be followed up. Pollution Control Department has issued warrants to the owners of those

remaining vehicles for prompt re-inspection. So far there have been no permanent bans issued as no vehicles

have been found in use with temporary violations.



In addition, Land Transportation Department and Bangkok Metropolitan Administration along with Pollution

Control Department conducted inspections and issued bans in accordance with the Land Transportation Act B.E.

2522 (1979) on large vehicles, particularly public buses, 3 times a week on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays.

çUse Prohibitedé marks were sprayed onto the vehicles with black smoke emissions exceeding standards. During

the period of Sep. 18 - Dec. 17, 2003, of all 953 vehicles inspected, a total of 120, or 12.6, were spray-painted

with çUse Prohibitedé. In all, there were 111 public buses, 2 trans-province buses, and 7 others. Follow-up did not

find second-time violations.

In 2004, to comply with the Enhancement and Conservation

of National Environmental Quality Act B.E. 2535 (1992), related agencies

set up plans to expand the scope of inspections to cover the entire

city of Bangkok at approximately 30 traffic police inspection points.

Re-inspection points were also added to as many as seven at Pollution

Control Department, Elevated Highway Police Station, and all 5

Mechanical Department offices of Bangkok Metropolitan Administration.

With regard to compliance with the Land Transportation Act B.E. 2522

(1979), Pollution Control Department solicited additional cooperation

from Bangkok Mass Transit Authority (BMTA). With Land Transport

Department orders to prohibit use, public buses commissioned by

private parties who are contracted by BMTA would have to re-tune the

engines, or otherwise risk getting operation contracts revoked.

Figure 2. Spraying çUse Prohibitedé mark onlarge vehicles emitting black smoke



Figure 3. PM compositions emitted from diesel vehicles

Sulfur Reductionin Diesel Fuel

Bangkok and its outlying provinces still experienced air pollution problems, specifically PM matter,with vehicles being the main sources responsible for as much as 54% of total PM emission (Figure 1). Dieselvehicles, in particular, emit PM as much as 83% of all vehicular emissions (Figure 2).

53.9%

9.8%

36.3%

Non-point Source Vehicles Point Source

3%

83%

14%

Diesel Benzene Vehicles Motorcycles

Figure 2. Vehicular PM emissions from vehicles

Õπÿ¿“§§“√å∫Õπ¢π“¥ 0.01-0.0 ¡‘≈≈‘‡¡µ

‰Œ‚¥√§“√å∫Õπ®–√«¡µ—«°—∫ ‰Œ‚¥√§“√å∫Õπ∑’Ë∂Ÿ°¥Ÿ¥´—∫‡¢â“¡“‡ªìπ Õπÿ¿“§¢π“¥¢Õß‡À≈«

‰Œ‚¥√§“√å∫Õπ ∑’ËÕ¬Ÿà„π√Ÿª ‰Õ√–‡À¬

Õπÿ¿“§§“√å∫Õπ ∑’Ë‡ªìπ¢Õß·¢Áß

‰Œ‚¥√§“√å∫Õπ∑’Ë°≈—Ëπµ—« ‡ªìπÕπÿ¿“§¢Õß‡À≈«

´—≈‡øµ∑’Ë¡’‚¡‡≈°ÿ≈¢ÕßπÈ” ‡ªÁπÕß§åª√–°Õ∫

Figure1. PM emissions from various sources

Vehicular particulate matter is produced

by incomplete combustion of carbon and

hydrocarbon atoms, components in diesel fuel.

These atoms form larger molecules, agglomerate

and become sulfate compounds, a result of

sulfur in the fuel and liquid hydrocarbon, turning

into small soot particles (Figure 3).

Studies on the effects of sulfur content

in diesel fuel as manufactured according to

EURO II and EURO III standards (the latter of

which is more stringent and will be in effect in

mid-2004) on pollution from diesel vehicles found

that levels of all pollutants tend to decline when

sulfur content is reduced (Figure 4).

Volatile

Cabon particles,0.01-0.08 mm.

Carbon particlescombine with sorbedhydrocarbons, 0.05-1.0mm. in size.

Liquefied hydrocarbonmolecules

Sulfates with watercomposition



0.08

0.07

0.06

0.05

0.04

0.03

0.02

0.01

0

S 500 ppmS 350 ppmS 50 ppm

CO/10CO/10

-30.5%-29.1%

-47.4% -25.3%-4.6%

-12.7%%-24.8%-4.2%

-48.4%

-22.7%

-38.3%

-1.8% -4.5%

-15.6%

%-27.9%

-52%

HCHC NONOx PMPM CO/10CO/10 HCHC NONOx PMPM

G /KilGrams/KilometerGrams/KilometerGrams/Kilometer

EURO II EURO III0.008

0.007

0.006

0.005

0.004

0.003

0.002

0.001

0

Nonetheless, the aforementioned study had procedural limitations as it was not able to find test vehicles

with the same engine system. EURO II vehicles employ direct injection engines with higher compression ratios,

which result in very high level of heat in combustion, producing a large quantity of NOx and very low CO.

Hence, CO from EURO II test vehicles was much lower than indirect injection EURO III engines.

In light of enforcing EURO III standards on diesel vehicles, the National Environment Board at its 6/2546

convention on October 30, 2003, agreed to raising emission standards for new vehicles. Small-size, level-6

diesel and level-7 gasoline vehicles would have to comply with EURO III standards later to be promulgated by

Thai Industrial Standards Institute (TISI). In order to comply with new EURO III standards, small-size, level-6 diesel

vehicles would require fuel to have sulfur content reduced from 500 ppm to 350 ppm. Therefore, the Department

of Energy Business must require sulfur content in commercial diesel fuel to be below 350 ppm and to take

effect on January 1, 2004.

Reducing sulfur content in diesel fuel from 500 ppm to 350 ppm will have the following benefits on

the environment and human health:

1. Environment: Particulate Matter Reduction

1.1 It is estimated that vehicular emissions of particulate matter in Bangkok and its surrounding

provinces are 13,985 tons in 2003. However, because 83% of particulate matter was produced by diesel vehicles,

they generated 11,608 tons of particulate matter a year. A decrease in sulfur content in diesel fuel will help

reduce particulate matter emitted by diesel cars, most of which comply with EURO II standards, by 15.6%, or

1,741.3 tons per year.

1.2 From 1997 baseline data, emissions of particulate matter from various sources in Bangkok

and surrounding provinces were 38,192 tons, and the 24-hr average concentrations along roadside in Bangkok

was 89.32 µg/m3. Therefore, if PM emissions are reduced by 1,741.3 tons a year from limiting 500 ppm of sulfur

content in diesel fuel to 350 ppm, atmospheric concentrations of PM will reduce to 85.29 µg/m3. (This equals to

a reduction of 4.07 µg/m3).

Figure 4. Effects of sulfur in diesel on pollutant emission from EURO II and EURO III



2. Human Health: Decreasing the human health impacts

The 1998 study on effects of PM to the health of population living in Bangkok and surrounding

provinces found that every 10 µg/m3 reduction of PM would significantly lower health problems. Nonetheless,

decreasing sulfur content in diesel fuel from 500 ppm to 350 ppm and having 4.07 µg/m3 less PM would also

lower health problems of the population. Table 1 compares health benefits received from PM reduction.

Table 1 Comparison of Health Benefits from Particulate Matter Reduction

Health Benefits PM Reduction PM Reduction

by 10 µg/m3 by 4.07 µg/m3

- Reduced premature death rate 700-2,000 cases per year 285-814 cases per year

- Reduced chronic 3,000-9,300 cases per year 1,221-3,785 cases per year

respiratory patients

- Reduced admission rate 560-1,570 cases per year 228-638 cases per year

in respiratory and

coronary problems

- Fewer days with severe An average of 0.52-16.29 days per An average of 0.21-0.66 days per

respiratory problems that person per year, or 2,900,000- person per year, or 1,180,300-3,703,700

hinder daily activities 9,100,000 days/year days/year

- Fewer days with mild An average of 3.9-13.25 days per person per An average of 1.6-5.39 days per person per

respiratory problems year, or 22,000,000-74,000,000 days/year year, or 8,954,000-30,118,000 days/year

Monetary costs of health 56,000-140,000 million baht/year 22,792-56,980 million baht/year



NOISE POLLUTION

Levels of noise in 2003 along roadsides in Bangkok andsurrounding provinces mostly exceeded standards as a result oftraffic. Other areas in general did not have exceedances. Nonetheless,the average noise levels in 2003 did not differ from the previous year,except areas with new activities, which caused more noise. Noisemeasurements along roadsides and canals in Bangkok, surroundingprovinces and 9 provincial centers were as follows:

Noise Levels in Bangkok and Surrounding ProvincesThe 24-hr average roadside noise levels were 66 - 86 decibel A (dBA) with a mean value of 73 dBA. It

also had an exceedances rate of 88% (70 dBA standard). Locations most seriously affected are Chokchai Police

Station, Ladprao Rd. with the 24-hr average measuring 86 dBA, and temporary checkpoints on Mahaisawan,

Rama IX, Arunamarin-Prannok, Sukhumvit, and Bamrungmaung having a 24-hr average exceeding 80 dBA daily

(Figure 1 and Table 6). Compared to data collected in 2003, the 24-hr noise level average differed slightly (Figure

2). On the other hand, areas located 50 meters away from main roads had a 24-hr average of 54 - 71 dBA and

a mean value of 60 dBA. Exceedances were less than 1% at Ramkhamhaeng University and Singharaj

Pittayakom School (Table 7). Comparing data collected in 2003 to the previous years found that the 24-hr

average was slightly lower (Figure 3).

Communities along Saensab Canal had a 24-hr average of 57 - 63 dBA, which met the standard. The

mean 24-hr average was at 61 dBA with Eakamai Soi 30 having the highest noise level.

Noise Levels in other provincesThe 24-hr roadside average measured 54 - 90 dBA with a mean of 64 dBA and an exceedances rate

of 11%. Location most seriously affected was Na Pralan School, Saraburi with 93% exceedances rate. The highest

24-hr reading of 90 dBA was found at Had Yai Municipality Office, Songkhla Province, which had a combination

of traffic and construction noises of nearby sites (Figure 4 and Table 9). Comparing 2003 data to the previous

year, it was found that 24-hr averages were similar (Figure 5). Other locations, on the other hand, had a 24-hr

average of 52 - 72 dBA, and a mean of 59 dBA. The exceedances rate was less than 1% (Figure 4 and Table

10). Comparing 2003 data to the previous year, the 24-hr averages were not different (Figure 6).



√–¥—∫

‡ ’¬ß

24™—Ë«

‚¡ß

(dBA

)

´‘‡∫≈‡Õ´‘‡∫≈‡Õ

æ◊Èπ∑’Ë∑—Ë«‰ªæ◊Èπ∑’Ë∑—Ë«‰ªŸ ÿŸ ÿ

’Ë’Ë

µ”à ÿ¥µ”à ÿ¥

Ë

∫‡ ’¬ß

∂“π

π’µ”√

√‘¡√—È«

°

¡À“«

‘∑¬“≈

90

80

70

60

5

24-h

r A

vera

ge N

ois

e L

evel

√–¥∫

‡ ¬ß

24

-hrA

ve

24ra

ge™«

‚¡ß

Nois

e(dBA

)e

Leve

(dB

A)

Other AreasMaximum Ÿß ÿ¥ Ÿß ÿ¥Maximu

Average‡©≈¬‡©≈¬Avera

Minimumµ” ÿ¥µ” ÿ¥Minim

ng Sites∑’Ëµ√«®«—¥ng Site

24

-hr

No

ise

Le

ve

ls (

dB

A)

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Max

Ave

Min

Year

90

79.7

71

60.4

79.3

71

64

78.4

72

64.7

80.5

73

65.2

88.7

72

61.4

83.7

72

62.7

86.3

73

66.1

80

70

60

65

75

85

50

55

90

73.4

61

49.5

76.4

62

52.1

80.9

62

48.2

87.8

62

53

74.6

61

53.2

85.6

61

54.2

70.6

60

54.3

70

60

50

80

40

24

-hr

No

ise

Le

ve

ls (

dB

A)

1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Standard = 70 dBAMax

Ave

MinMi

Year

Figure 2. Roadside 24 hour average Noise level in Bangkok Metropolitan area 1997-2003

Figure 1. Noise Level in Bangkok Metropolitan area 2003

Figure 3. General area 24 hour average Noise level in Bangkok Metropolitan area 1997-2003

[46]

THAILA

ND STA

TE OF

POLLU

TION REPO

RT 2003

POLLU

TION CONTR

OL

DEP

ARTM

ENT

‚√ß‡√’

√–¥—∫‡ ’¬ß‡©≈’Ë¬ 24 ™—Ë«‚¡ß (dBA)

∫â“

»Ÿπ¬å‡¬“

”π—°ß“π‡∑»∫“≈µ”∫≈·À≈¡©∫—ß ™≈∫ÿ√

∂“πÕπ“¡¬¡“∫µ“æÿ¥ √–¬Õß

¡“µ√∞“π√¥—∫‡ ’¬ß

70‡¥´‘‡∫≈‡Õ

æ◊Èπ∑’Ë√‘¡∂ππæ◊Èπ∑’Ë∑—Ë«‰ª

ÿ ÿ¥

‘’Ë

—

√–¥—∫‡ ’¬ß

‚√ß‡√’¬π¬ÿæ√“™«‘∑¬“≈—¬ ‡™’¬ß„À¡à

»Ÿπ¬å∫√‘°“√ “∏“√≥ ÿ¢®—ßÀ«—¥¿Ÿ‡°Áµ

„π‡¢µæ◊Èπ∑’Ë‡∑»∫“≈‡¡◊ÕßÀ“¥„À≠à ß¢≈“

™ÿ¡ “¬‚∑√»—æ∑å®—ßÀ«—¥√–¬Õß

»“≈“°≈“ß®—ßÀ«—¥‡™’¬ß„À¡à

¡À“«‘∑¬“≈—¬∏√√¡»“ µ√å«∑¬“‡¢µ≈”ª“ß

10080 9070604 50

24-hr Average Noise Level –¥∫‡ ¬ß‡©≈¬24-hr Averag24ge N™«‚¡ßoise L (dBALevel

(dBA)

Distr

Laem Chabang Municipality, Chonburi”π—°ß“π‡∑»∫“≈µ”∫≈·À≈¡©∫—ßLaem Chabang Municipality, C ™≈∫√’honbu

Mabtapud Health Center, Rayong ∂“π’Õπ“¡—¬¡“∫µ“æ¥abtapud Health Center √–¬ÕßRayon

Yupparatch Wittayalai, Chiang Mai‚√ß‡√’¬π¬æ√“™«‘∑¬“≈—¬Yupparatch Wittayalai, C‡™’¬ß„À¡àhiang Ma

erå∫√‘°“√ “∏“√≥ ¢®—ßÀ«—¥¿‡°ÁµPhuket Provincial Health Cente

y, Songkla∑»∫“≈‡¡◊ÕßÀ“¥„À≠àHad Yai Municipality ß¢≈“Songkl

Rayong Telephone Office“¬‚∑√»æ∑®ßÀ«¥√–¬ÕßRayong Telephone Offic

Governor's Quarters, Chiang Mai»“≈“°≈“ß®—ßÀ«—¥‡™’¬ß„À¡àrnor's Quarters, Chiang Ma

Dhammasat Univ. Lampang Branch¡À“«∑¬“≈¬∏√√¡»“ µ√

t U i L B«‘∑¬“‡¢µ≈”ª“ßLampang Branc

Ro

ad

sid

es

π∑√¡∂ππR

oa

dsid

Nois

e s

tandard

= 7

0 d

BA

¡“µ√∞“π√–¥∫‡ ¬ße

sta

ndard

=70 70dB

‡¥AO

the

r Are

as

æπ∑∑«‰ªh

erA

re

Maxim

um

ß ¥M

axim

um

¥mu

Mo

nito

ring

Site

s∫√‘‡«≥

∑’µ√«®«—¥o

nito

ring

Site

100

82.3

6554.9

81.4

6555.5

77.3

6353.9

73.8

6456.3

86.8

6453.2

81.7

6554.9

90.5

6454

8060 70 9040 50

19971998

19992000

20012002

2003

Sta

nda

rd =

70

dB

AM

ax

Ave

MinY

ea

r

24-hr Noise Levels (dBA)

90

75.9

6049.7

72.2

6049.8

72.5

5951

74.8

6148

84.3

6151.8

68.8

5751.7

71.3

5951.6

8060 7040 50

19971998

19992000

20012002

2003

Sta

nda

rd =

70

dB

AM

ax

Ave

MinY

ea

r

24-hr Noise Levels (dBA)

Figure 4.Noise Level in outer provinces 2003

Figure 5.Roadside 24 hour average noise level in the outer provinces 1997-2003

Figure 6.General area 24 hour average noise level in the outer provinces 1997-2003

State of Air Quality and Noise Pollution -...

Documents

Transcript of State of Air Quality and Noise Pollution -...