Google Straps Aclima Sensors to Street View Cars to Map Air Pollution
techcrunch.com
techcrunch.com
The Partido Popular government fixed the pollution problem by moving the sensors out of busy streets and into big parks that happen to be within the city limits[1,2].
The historical continuity of measurements has been lost, but Google will now provide data with more continuity. Or at least I hope it is provided.
[1] http://elpais.com/diario/2009/05/18/madrid/1242645857_850215... [2] http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/022cf59c-3091-11e0-9de3-00144feabd...
I would love it if Google could produce something more accurate!
http://aqicn.org/city/beijing/
Also, if I needed it, I'd probably build one of these:
http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/dan-doctoroff-and-go...
"In the first pilot, three Street View cars collected 150 million air quality data points over a month of driving around Denver, Colorado. They measured for chemicals that are hazardous to breathe, like nitrogen dioxide, nitric oxide, ozone, carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, methane, black carbon, particulate matter, and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs)."
I don't know how much Google takes season into account when routing street view cars but areas with a tourism industry would be cleaner in the off season and colder areas will be dirtier in the winter (more fuel used for heating, less trees). Also something that could be accounted for...
Also I hope they expand measurements to other parameters like particle pollution.
Monitoring pollution is a taboo topic in our city because it would show that the port pollutes a lot and of course money is more important than public health.
1. Installing a permanent sensor means ensuring some power source
2. Any kind of planning / permissions needed to sort it out
3. They're fixed
The first two simply aren't problems if you whack them on a car. No approval needed, no lengthy agreements about the look & impact of placing them around.
Three is really important. While the same money spent on fixed sensors gives greater time resolution, it'll give worse spatial resolution. Is it worth sticking a permanent sensor down to find out that actually the pollution levels never get high enough to be a problem? How many side-roads will get covered?
> This doesn't seem very useful
A huge amount of spatially dense readings across cities? That doesn't seem like it might be useful to you?
Plus, you have no idea what time of day the car will be passing through a location.
So you can't compare the data points over time - they're not taken the same time of day. And I'm not sure if you can even compare different regions - your data may tell you that one part of the city has cleaner air than another, but it's only because one part of the city was measured in the morning and another part of the city in the afternoon.
... which might be very clever of Google, since they have a self-driving car program right around the corner that would promise to put O(10,000) of their cars on the road, driving continuously in densely-populated cities. Don't mistake the short game for the long game. ;)
I don't, but I assume google does.
> So you can't compare the data points over time - they're not taken the same time of day
Not in a simple way, no. But to say it doesn't provide useful information seems odd when the article says
> Independent scientific analysis confirmed that the mobile sensor system worked for collecting street-by-street data, and could improve upon the regional network of sensors operated by the Environmental Protection Agency.
I've worked on projects in the past where we collected a ton of data like this, gave it to some poor graduate student or post-doc to do a bunch of data wanking with it, only to produce throw-away papers in bad journals because even. Though it was a huge amount of data it wasn't good data.