advertisement
With several states imposing a ban on firecrackers this Diwali, several social media users shared a post which falsely suggests that the air pollution caused by a candle is more than that of firecrackers.
The post compares the carbon dioxide (CO2) produced by a candle and a firecracker to state that candles should be banned during Christmas celebrations, since they cause much more pollution.
However, The Quint spoke to experts in chemical engineering who stated that the comparison is unfair, and firecrackers are more harmful to our health and the environment than candles due to the other hazardous chemicals present in them.
CLAIM
The image has been shared by several users on social media.
The image being shared carries the logo of Post Card News, which is notorious for peddling fake news. However, we couldn’t find the original post on their social media handles. We also came across several posts from November and December 2019.
The Quint also received a query regarding the image on its WhatsApp helpline.
ARE CANDLES AS HARMFUL AS FIRECRACKERS?
We spoke to experts who rubbished the claims and said that the comparison wasn’t the right one.
Speaking to The Quint, Abhijit Mazumdar, Assistant Professor of Chemical Engineering at IIT Bombay, stated that comparing the carbon dioxide production of a candle and a firecracker, and then saying the candle is more harmful, is wrong.
“It’s like comparing oranges with eggs and saying that oranges are worse because they have less protein,” he said.
We also spoke to Guruswamy Kumaraswamy, Professor of Chemical Engineering at IIT Bombay, who explained that if you burn anything which has carbon in it, like a candle, petrol or oil used in diya, there is bound to be production of carbon dioxide as the carbon combines with the oxygen in the air during the process of burning.
In 2018, the Supreme Court had banned the use of barium, a metal which is quite harmful for our health. However, a report by the LiveMint states that despite the ban, firecracker manufacturers continue to use barium nitrate to “maintain quality.”
STUDIES SHOW FIRECRACKERS PRODUCE MORE PARTICULATE MATTER
Both the experts stated that particulate matter, that is, solid or liquid particles suspended in air, released by the firecrackers causes a lot of pollution.
In a 2016 study, researchers at the Indian Chest Society measured the particulate matter released by six popular firecrackers namely anar (flower pot), chakri (ground spinner), naag goli (snake tablets), pulpul (string), fuljhadi (sparkler) and laad (1000 crackers string).
In order to have a standard form of comparison, let’s look at the median value, that is, the middle value between the highest and lowest values of the particulate matter released in the course of burning.
The snake tablet’s median value was at 39,630 microgram per meter cube (mcg/m3) of particulate matter while it was 1,866 mcg/m3 for the flower pot.
DOES THE TIME FOR WHICH CANDLES BURN AFFECT POLLUTION?
Since candles burn for a longer time than a firecracker, the time period of burning is an oft-quoted argument against candle.
“The firecrackers cause a sudden spike in the air, it's not distributed evenly throughout the year. Some level of hazardous gas is always present in the air, which we can survive, but that does not mean you can put someone in a gas chamber for five seconds and that would not impact their health. If this spike goes beyond our tolerance limits, it will cause some damage,” he said.
Professor Kumaraswamy also stated that we must look at how much pollution is caused by the firecracker or candle in terms of the amount of pollutants generated. While the candle would also produce soot on burning, the firecrackers release a larger volume of aerosols and hazardous materials.
“How much you burn makes a difference. It’s a question of volume not time. For example, when you use petrol for your transportation or power plants use fuels, the volume of pollution is much more,” he added.
Evidently, studies and experts state that candles do not cause more pollution than a firecracker, and a comparison based on carbon dioxide production is unfair.
(Not convinced of a post or information you came across online and want it verified? Send us the details on WhatsApp at 9643651818, or e-mail it to us at webqoof@thequint.com and we'll fact-check it for you. You can also read all our fact-checked stories here.)
(At The Quint, we question everything. Play an active role in shaping our journalism by becoming a member today.)