Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Pollution free part of the world?

  1. Sep 15, 2014 #1
    Is there a place in the world that is habitable that is free of pollution?
    I have this idea that there is some part of the world that is perfect to live in, free from pollution.

    If not what is the least area of the world/healthiest spot to live?
     
    Last edited: Sep 15, 2014
  2. jcsd
  3. Sep 15, 2014 #2

    billy_joule

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    Air borne pollution and wind makes me think the answer is definitely a no.
     
  4. Sep 15, 2014 #3

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Many pollutants occur naturally - they are problematic in their amount. Because of that, the answer is going to be no.
     
  5. Sep 16, 2014 #4
    But it is there a healthiest/cleanest country/place that has less pollutants than other places on earth?
     
  6. Sep 18, 2014 #5
    There are two ways to answer your questions:

    1) The entire global atmosphere is polluted to one degree or another, as pollution is normally understood. Therefore, there are no unpolluted places with air to breathe.

    2) Population pressures are such that: If it is habitable, it is inhabited right now. People cause pollution, therefore all inhabited places are polluted. If it is not inhabited, it is not fit to live in and you probably cannot live there.

    You are searching for Eden. It does not exist. Better that you should make the most of the real world. It's actually not a bad place to live!
     
  7. Sep 18, 2014 #6

    Vanadium 50

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Education Advisor

    Antarctica
     
  8. Sep 19, 2014 #7
    Good try, Vanadium! On the other hand, I seem to recall reading (Alas, no citation conveniently at hand) that infectious diseases are more common in Antarctic stations than in many other places. Also that the isolation tends to exacerbate certain psychological problems. Moreover, living conditions are certainly rigorous. It is hardly an idyllic life.

    Eden is still lost.
     
  9. Sep 19, 2014 #8

    CWatters

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    Living in a totally clean environment isn't necessarily healthy. Quite a bit of research exists to suggest that some bugs that colonise our gut are beneficial and we may create problems if we kill them of with antibiotics targeted at the harmful ones. I suppose it's possible that some pollutants also provide a similar protective effect even if it's only in very specific cases.
     
  10. Sep 25, 2014 #9
    . You are right. I heard the colon cancer rate in Seattle and Portland Oregon in the USA is high because the water is too pure.
     
  11. Sep 25, 2014 #10
    In the sixties my Chemistry prof suggested we should ride Toronto's subway for the good of our health. She claimed, wisely so IMHO, that it would build up our immune system.

    Jim
     
  12. Sep 26, 2014 #11

    Baluncore

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor

    The least polluted and most liveable site will almost certainly be in the Southern Hemisphere.

    Baseline air sampling is done from towers on Cape Grim in Tasmania. That air is from the westerly Roaring Forties over the Southern Ocean. It travels south of Africa, from the southern tip of South America. Apart from an occasional diesel powered vessel producing exhaust, that coast is going to be one of the cleanest sites on Earth. New Zealand is down wind from Australia. Chile has significantly more shipping off the west coast than does Tasmania.
     
  13. Oct 7, 2014 #12

    Kerrie

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member

  14. Nov 21, 2014 #13
    try the Himalayan mountain rage some of the valleys will be especially well isolated from most external air flows reducing the likelihood of airborne pollutants. living there may be less polluted by some percentage but the life would be rugged at best. the next area would be the amazon forest if you can find a large enough stretch of it left to benefit from the amount of plants cleaning the air. guess the same is true of any large forested area.
     
  15. Nov 24, 2014 #14
    Avoiding the 'superlative two-step' Maybe some _relatively clean_ places could be noted:

    Here in the USA one interesting location is Flagstaff, AZ as place spoken highly of by stargazers. Comparatively little light polution, and generally fairly clear air.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagstaff,_Arizona#Climate

    diogenesNY
     
  16. Nov 24, 2014 #15

    SteamKing

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    It's called Eden (or Atlantis or Dilmun or Paradise or the Isle of Mag Mell or the Elysian Fields), but it disappeared long ago.

    It's a strong desire to find a place where one can live at peace without the vicissitudes of daily life.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradise
     
  17. Dec 9, 2014 #16
    This reminds of a story of a guy who searched the world in the 1960's for the least likely
    place to have a war, and moved his Family to the Falkland islands.
     
  18. Jan 22, 2015 #17

    DEvens

    User Avatar
    Education Advisor
    Gold Member

    "Healthiest" by what definition? For example, by the definition of life expectancy? Because you won't find that leads you to wilderness. Neither will such things as low child mortality, available anti-biotic drugs, reliable safe food supply, an understanding and availability of vitamins, a safe and reliable water supply, effective and efficient sewage treatment, etc.

    Be careful not to romanticize the "noble savage." There is a reason that pre-technological folk have much shorter life expectancy.

    That is not to say we should be happy when the air is brown over a city. We should not. Nor should we be pleased when we find various noxious chemicals in milk, nor any of a variety of other things that have been found in various other products. But we should be having discussions based on a careful understanding of what we are getting and what we are giving up to achieve any particular thing. Very little in life is free.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook




Similar Discussions: Pollution free part of the world?
  1. Pollutant of Ozone? (Replies: 6)

  2. Air pollution (Replies: 1)

Loading...