Tuesday, 19 May 2009

“Happiness is having a scratch for every itch.”

Alternative title:  air pollution, or do academics like fart jokes?

Almost two years ago I wrote a post about the Château d'Ussé which I had at the time recently visited, and was very disappointed to find how shabby it was.  I have been intending to revise the post and that led me to thinking about the problems of maintaining historical sites such as this.

One thing led to another, and I found something called the Noah's Ark project which is hoping to produce guidelines and strategies to minimise the impact of changing climate on cultural heritage sites.  As part of this project, University College London is investigating the likely effects of climate change on wood, brick and stone buildings, to predict changes that are significant for conversation.

So, a good academic project.  Because there was little information - at first glance - on the site, I looked at the image gallery.  This is the picture chosen to illustrate the effect of air pollution on the Tower of London.

You may need to click the picture to enlarge it.  Just what sort of air pollution are we talking about here?
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]


  1. Isn't it to do with the amount of fuel burnt in London over the centuries (wood, coal etc from household fires/steam trains etc) and the exhaust fumes from the transport systems in the days of leaded petrol.

    Just a guess on my part because I have no real idea though I have seen the pictures of the smog in days gone by which was attributed to the fuel used.

  2. Good point A.! And I would say the same as Sage.

  3. Sage and Renny, I'm fairly sure that was the intention, to consider the pollution from transport systems, but if you enlarge the picture, you may see why I think it was an unfortunate choice. Or maybe it's just my warped sense of humour. :)


Forethoughts, afterthoughts, any thoughts. Tell me.


Blog Widget by LinkWithin