I think its time we ban all industrial activity.

@Israel Cohen

I think you are being ironic here. But if you really have this felling, there is a solution. Move to Lancaster County in Pennsylvania.. You (as well as some other disillusioned “English” on this site) can reconnect with the land and nature this way. The Old Order Amish use horses for farming and transportation, dress in a traditional manner, and forbid electricity or telephones in the home. They do permit the use of solar panels, hydropower and wind mills. IMHO, the Pennsylvania Dutch country is one of the most beautiful areas on the east coast because the land hardens back to a simpler time. Its air is fresh and there is a spiritual purity about the land.

You will never see a fat Amish. They work hard, walk everywhere and have a simple diet of home grown organic food. They are friendly to the English, but it is hard to buy land since it is handed down through the generations. They speak Enlish to the outsider but Pennsylvania Dutch among themselves. If you visit, plan to drive at the rate of a horse drawn buggy. Passing them is impossible on the narrow winding county roads.

You folks, stop complaining and do something about it.

Once the full medical studies appear reinforcing the preliminary heart, stroke & lung(other body parts?) damage studies of fine & nano particles, we will really know the NECESSITY of renewable energy sources. As for the Amish allowing solar, hydro & wind power sources...hey, that's just the power mix in my Northwest! We've got lots of Dutch farmers here too!

Paracelsus said it best in the 14th cenury "Everything is a poison, the secret is the dosage".

If evidence turns up that indicts PM 2.5 as a hazard, then we should establish revised limits for this toxicity, regualte and and monitor to reduce those emissions.

But there is a law of diminishing returns at work. As the dosages get smaller and smaller, the effects become indistiguishable from the background.

There is also an iron law of bureacracy, never admit progress, and if in danger of declaring victory, hence eliminating jobs, redefine a new problem as a raison d'etre.

I look forward to further research into a toxicity previously unmeasured, because it was unmeasureable.

Anon....You don't get it. PM 2.5 is dangerous. This study says its even more dangerous than we thought. But it is smaller particles than PM 2.5, namely fine & nano particles that are preliminarily more dangerous than PM 2.5. Further studies need to come out, but it looks like fine & nano particles are much worse, & may be the causitive factors to the terrible lung, heart & stroke disease numbers that plague modern people.

Also, people have talked about 'diminishing returns' for decades as an excuse to stop improvements of internal combustion engine (ICE) emissions. That is why this study & those preliminary & full fine & nano particle studies will land like a ton of bricks, inditing our modes of internal combustion engine(ICE) travel with the death of millions. Yes, will land like a ton of bricks except on those that just don't want to care about our sick citizens.

@ litesong,

What terrible heart and lung diseases are you speaking of?

I certainly agree that more people die of these diseases than before. But that is simply because many of the other former killers have been cured. Much of the heart disease measured, is degenerative, simply wearing out passed the programmed plan, and many lung diseases are self-induced.

Actions have already been taken, to limit or to eliminate respiring tobacco, asbestos, and silica and other toxics. Prior damage has been done, that has not yet been reflected in the statistics. These injured people have not died off yet.

Unless you didn't look lately, the average life expectancy in the Western world is as high as it has ever been. Some would say almost three times the "normal" life expectancy.

Our caveman ancestors, those Noble Savages, so beloved of Gaian nouveaux religionists, never breathed toxic industrial emissions, nor auto exhaust, ate only organic food, got plenty of exercise, and ...

were dead before the age thirty.

When and if we ascertain that PM 2.5 and finer particularites, is truly a killer, I agree that we need to regulate such enmissions, monitor, and remove as much as is practical from the environment. We certainly know how to do that; having succeeded with even more toxic substances, and we shall.

But based on the evidence of observed life expectancy, approaching 80, that such toxicity will prove to be a relatively minor killer in the big scheme of things.

The life expectancy comments are much to the point. All of the increases of population are due to the use of improved energy resources either agriculture or fossil fuels. Starving is a quick death caused by lack of income and infants and children are highly succeptible to it and the coexisting lack of medical care and clean water. Polluted air has not caused enough deaths to keep the population low. There are many risks in life, but to be most efficient those that cause the most loss of human hours should be dealt with first. In the US, many children and adults go hungry when there is a loss of employment or less income or higher prices. Doctors are not even visited when people are hungry. Cheap energy is necessary for a functioning economy, but if pollution controls increase the cost too much jobs are lost and move to China. How many poor peoples' babies are you willing to have die so that your child can have your version of clean air. The price of your bottle of clean water will feed a child for a week or more. Every bit of money in peoples pockets is eventually derived from minerals, foods and energy taken from the earth. If it is not done in the US it will have to be done somewhere else and their babies will die instead of yours, and then yours will too from starvation...HG...