ksab

As someone who once did lab-based cooking studies (with a mass spectrometer), you would be surprised what is emitted from frying with oil.

I suggest frying some bacon and report back.

We’re using an iPad. It’s theoretically aimed at older children (5+) but my son was able to pick it up no problem.

I sat down with mine about 6 months ago (he was 3.75 at the time) and we learned what each of the blocks did and how to combine them.

Now he asks to make a program and can do it independently.

He experiments with the backgrounds, sound effects, loops and motion.

My son can read but knowing how to count/recognize numbers is more important in this interface. Everything is graphical. Loops require a number input.

Another toy aimed at older children that younger ones can play with is snap circuits. We introduced the toy at 3. He can copy the project schematic and build the project. He built the AM radio project independently.

My 4 year old made his first program using Scratch Jr.

What was this program?

He made a story where cats jump up and down 25 times and then walk away. He recorded sound effects for the cats that repeated as the cats jump.

It’s simple but offers so much more of a creative outlet than games/educational apps aimed at his age group.

Outdoors: Particles less than 50nm often arise from sulphuric acid. Nucleation occurs with sulphur dioxide and water in vehicle exhaust and these particles undergo growth via condensation of organic compounds as the exhaust plume cools.

Larger particles (50-100nm) are typically soot.

Indoor Sources: cooking (frying especially), burning candles/incense, heating elements on stove tops and toasters, chemical reactions between lemon/pine scented cleaners with ozone.

Source: PhD in exposure to ultrafine particles.

This playground was an annual end of the school year field trip starting in grade 1.

It had a diverse range of activities and catered to children of different ages, abilities and confidence.

The playground had staff (so it wasn’t complete chaos at the most popular spots) but they definitely had a laissez-faire attitude and let the kids do pretty much anything.

Our teachers would ‘supervise’ but it was so large without clear sight lines that I can remember them staying mostly by the front entrance to prevent us from leaving and helping us find our shoes as we were leaving.

Minor injuries were expected (there was a first aid tent). I definitely fell down, scraped my knees and got soaking wet. Over the years, my classmates had some more serious injuries (including a broken arm, lost tooth and stitches). Despite the injuries my school still let us go back the following year...

Getting a place like this built again would be impossible given liability.

Also, schools are allergic to anything involving minor injuries, water and places where all kids can’t be seen.

Thanks for your interest in our work! (Lead author on the ultrafine particle mapping paper).

The SOCAAR facility has operated at this roadside location since 2006 and is one of the largest air quality research lab in Canada.

Over the years, we have routinely seen peaks in CO2 as vehicles pass our monitoring station. However, when some vehicles pass, we also see NOx, black carbon or ultrafine particle peak(s).

While we have video footage of the road, it can be extremely difficult to link the measurements to a single passing vehicle. Identifying these vehicles and why their emissions are different from the rest of the vehicle fleet is where the research our heading.

There is no "safe" threshold for particulate matter (PM) exposure. Our nose, mouth and throat are very inefficient at filtering particles less than 2.5 microns. As a consequence, a large proportion of these particles simply enter the respiratory tract (tracheobronchial and alveolar regions) relatively unimpeded.

Assessing indoor exposure to PM is challenging because it is highly dependent on location, the physical properties of the home, and human behaviour. Consequently, it can be difficult to clearly identify/quantify health benefits.

Even though you live in a reasonably clean city, you can still further reduce your exposure to indoor PM by changing your behaviour, filtering your air and using existing equipment in your home properly.

1) In non-smoking homes, the biggest indoor source of PM is cooking (especially frying and broiling). You can reduce your exposure by a) keeping your range hood in good working order (change filters), b) using the range hood every time your cook, c) opening a window while cooking and d)stepping away from the stove whenever possible.

2) There are multiple other sources products that can produce shocking amounts of PM through direct emission and secondary reactions involving ozone. I would describe these exposures as completely unnecessary and can be eliminated by simply not using the products in the first place: a) candles, b) incense, and c)air fresheners and cleaning products with lemon & pine scents.