Pollutant Emissions. Is that name right?


Hello all!
especially @tlacoyodefrijol @Mor @arielkogan

I was thinking about the name of the dataset “pollutant emissions”.

When you look at its description, it looks more like Air Quality data. The survey seems to be more interested in checking if government provides data on the state of the air in that moment, with a dataset that contains the amount of some substances in the air. So, it is more like a snapshot and not a flow. When I first read “emissions” I thought we were looking for data on how much greenhouse gases were emitted by deforestation, industries, etc, but that’s not the case.

So, my idea is, why pollutant emissions and not air quality?



Hi @Wagner_Faria_de_Oliv

this is a good point and can even be underlined by another fact: the data we are capturing is not emission per se but air pollutant concentration. The difference is as follows: emission values are directly measured at the source, where a pollutant is emitted. Concentration values are captured by sensors distributed in a field. They are measuring a sample of air pollution (this value can obviously be contested, depending on the half life of a pollutant and the distance between pollution sensor and emission source). To our best knowledge, air quality monitoring uses pollutant concentration levels.

We decided to name the category “pollutant emission” because we assumed that this is a more common language and will guide submitters to the pollutant concentration levels we are looking at (at the risk of being misleading for some submitters). If you and others feel that the phrasing is confusing, please do let us know, because we obviously want to be as clear as possible!



@Wagner_Faria_de_Oliv I prefer also Air Quality.


Thanks for you answer, Danny.

Maybe Air Quality is not also the best name, considering a clearer and more common language. Maybe Pollutant Concentration, or something like this? I think my problem is with the word “emissions”.



Hi @arielkogan, hi @Wagner_Faria_de_Oliv

thank you again for the helpful feedback. We will discuss with the team whether “Air Pollutant Concentration” or “Air Quality” are better words and will let you know. One argument for “Air Quality” is that it’s the language governments speak, and gives a better hint for submitters what to look for (a quick search with “Qualité de l’air”, “air quality ireland”, and “Luftqualität Deutschland” led me more or less directly to the data).