10-12-2017, 01:31 PM
Here in SF the past few days have had heavy smoke scented air each morning, clearing up each afternoon, evening.
Fires; not so off topic. Game Impact
Here in SF the past few days have had heavy smoke scented air each morning, clearing up each afternoon, evening.
10-12-2017, 01:39 PM
(10-12-2017, 01:31 PM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:Here in SF the past few days have had heavy smoke scented air each morning, clearing up each afternoon, evening.
For San Jose, yesterday was the worst day by far, and seemed to get worse throughout the afternoon. Today is a bit better, in that I can actually see the mountains.
(10-12-2017, 01:31 PM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:Here in SF the past few days have had heavy smoke scented air each morning, clearing up each afternoon, evening.
For San Jose, yesterday was the worst day by far, and seemed to get worse throughout the afternoon. Today is a bit better, in that I can actually see the mountains.
10-12-2017, 01:41 PM
(10-12-2017, 11:37 AM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:Here is the full NCAA guidance to member schools on air quality
http://www.ncaa.org/sport-science-institute/air-quality
Interesting; thanks. Noted that "sensitive" athletes should be monitored over AQI 100. "Sensitive" is a pretty tough call to make for kids that likely haven't exercised maximally under similar conditions. Also loved the swap of "concerns" being exasperated in lieu of exacerbated - a Kardboard misdemeanor, saved from felony charges by the pure whimsy of imagining an exasperated concern. I think my mom had many of those.
(10-12-2017, 11:37 AM)Spiny_Norman link Wrote:Here is the full NCAA guidance to member schools on air quality
http://www.ncaa.org/sport-science-institute/air-quality
Interesting; thanks. Noted that "sensitive" athletes should be monitored over AQI 100. "Sensitive" is a pretty tough call to make for kids that likely haven't exercised maximally under similar conditions. Also loved the swap of "concerns" being exasperated in lieu of exacerbated - a Kardboard misdemeanor, saved from felony charges by the pure whimsy of imagining an exasperated concern. I think my mom had many of those.
10-12-2017, 01:47 PM
(10-12-2017, 06:49 AM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:Bay Area airports are having issues, including cancelled flights. Would Oregon normally fly in today, Thursday, for a Saturday night game ?
UO presser says walk through on Thursday and fly down on Friday. Likely due to late KO time. From GoDucks.com:
Looking to bounce back from a 1-2 start in Pac-12 play, the Ducks continued to hone their offense sans starting quarterback Justin Herbert, while the UO defense focused on preparing to stop Stanford's run game during the team's last traditional practice session of the week. The Ducks will walk through tomorrow and run through their game plan before departing for the Bay Area on Friday, but Wednesday practices are the final opportunity to simulate actual game speed and action.
(10-12-2017, 06:49 AM)SF_Cardinal_Fan link Wrote:Bay Area airports are having issues, including cancelled flights. Would Oregon normally fly in today, Thursday, for a Saturday night game ?
UO presser says walk through on Thursday and fly down on Friday. Likely due to late KO time. From GoDucks.com:
Looking to bounce back from a 1-2 start in Pac-12 play, the Ducks continued to hone their offense sans starting quarterback Justin Herbert, while the UO defense focused on preparing to stop Stanford's run game during the team's last traditional practice session of the week. The Ducks will walk through tomorrow and run through their game plan before departing for the Bay Area on Friday, but Wednesday practices are the final opportunity to simulate actual game speed and action.
10-12-2017, 01:52 PM
(10-12-2017, 01:41 PM)unclechuck link Wrote:[quote author=Spiny_Norman link=topic=17667.msg205924#msg205924 date=1507833424]
Here is the full NCAA guidance to member schools on air quality
http://www.ncaa.org/sport-science-institute/air-quality
Interesting; thanks. Noted that "sensitive" athletes should be monitored over AQI 100. "Sensitive" is a pretty tough call to make for kids that likely haven't exercised maximally under similar conditions. Also loved the swap of "concerns" being exasperated in lieu of exacerbated - a Kardboard misdemeanor, saved from felony charges by the pure whimsy of imagining an exasperated concern. I think my mom had many of those.
[/quote]
I am thinking that any and all SF Bay Area youth, high school, or collegiate games , if there is a likely chance of harmful air quality, will be cancelled.
I doubt the decision makers want to be held potentially liable and, or, provoke a possible protest by athletes, coaches, parents etc... It seems to me, all factors considered, that the path of least resistance is to cancel games.
(10-12-2017, 01:41 PM)unclechuck link Wrote:[quote author=Spiny_Norman link=topic=17667.msg205924#msg205924 date=1507833424]
Here is the full NCAA guidance to member schools on air quality
http://www.ncaa.org/sport-science-institute/air-quality
Interesting; thanks. Noted that "sensitive" athletes should be monitored over AQI 100. "Sensitive" is a pretty tough call to make for kids that likely haven't exercised maximally under similar conditions. Also loved the swap of "concerns" being exasperated in lieu of exacerbated - a Kardboard misdemeanor, saved from felony charges by the pure whimsy of imagining an exasperated concern. I think my mom had many of those.
[/quote]
I am thinking that any and all SF Bay Area youth, high school, or collegiate games , if there is a likely chance of harmful air quality, will be cancelled.
I doubt the decision makers want to be held potentially liable and, or, provoke a possible protest by athletes, coaches, parents etc... It seems to me, all factors considered, that the path of least resistance is to cancel games.
10-12-2017, 01:52 PM
Sensitive usually refers to patients with respiratory or cardiovascular diseases. For a cohort of healthy young 20-somethings, that most likely means the kids with asthma.
BC
BC
Sensitive usually refers to patients with respiratory or cardiovascular diseases. For a cohort of healthy young 20-somethings, that most likely means the kids with asthma.
BC
BC
10-12-2017, 02:00 PM
(10-12-2017, 12:51 AM)82 Card link Wrote:[quote author=unclechuck link=topic=17667.msg205881#msg205881 date=1507787802]
[quote author=81alum link=topic=17667.msg205862#msg205862 date=1507777122]
AQI for Palo Alto today was 108. Forecast for tomorrow is 165.
I think you may be getting your AQI numbers from one of the government sites (or clones) that provide 5 day forecasts or similar. They are are guesses. I checked multiple real-time sites today for 94301 and most of the afternoon the EPA based AQI was in the 180-5 range. Happily, as I write (10:50 PM), the level is down to 59, so clearly your Diablo breezes are effecting a significant and rapid change. How curious it would be if Late Night Larry's miserable kick off time might be a blessing.
See link below for real time numbers.
https://weather.weatherbug.com/life/air-...o-ca-94301
[/quote]
As far as I can tell, the weather bug data is from the EPA site. The EPA site gives more detail. At the EPA site, you can tell the time of the reading and the zip code that it is from. For my town, weather bug just presents the Oakland hills data without any way of knowing that is what they are doing. The EPA site also has time lapse maps for the Bay Area, including archives.
The link for EPA data for zip code 94305 is:
https://airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airn...&submit=Go
It currently says AQI at midnight was 99 but they expect it to go up to 165 during the day. We'll see. It seems that the daily prediction is for a daily high. It does not mean that the air quality will be that bad all day. They leave the daily prediction up all day so you can compare the prediction to the actual measurements, kind of like looking at the morning Wunderground forecast while looking at current temperatures.
[/quote]
Good site; lots more info. Thanks for link.
(10-12-2017, 12:51 AM)82 Card link Wrote:[quote author=unclechuck link=topic=17667.msg205881#msg205881 date=1507787802]
[quote author=81alum link=topic=17667.msg205862#msg205862 date=1507777122]
AQI for Palo Alto today was 108. Forecast for tomorrow is 165.
I think you may be getting your AQI numbers from one of the government sites (or clones) that provide 5 day forecasts or similar. They are are guesses. I checked multiple real-time sites today for 94301 and most of the afternoon the EPA based AQI was in the 180-5 range. Happily, as I write (10:50 PM), the level is down to 59, so clearly your Diablo breezes are effecting a significant and rapid change. How curious it would be if Late Night Larry's miserable kick off time might be a blessing.
See link below for real time numbers.
https://weather.weatherbug.com/life/air-...o-ca-94301
[/quote]
As far as I can tell, the weather bug data is from the EPA site. The EPA site gives more detail. At the EPA site, you can tell the time of the reading and the zip code that it is from. For my town, weather bug just presents the Oakland hills data without any way of knowing that is what they are doing. The EPA site also has time lapse maps for the Bay Area, including archives.
The link for EPA data for zip code 94305 is:
https://airnow.gov/index.cfm?action=airn...&submit=Go
It currently says AQI at midnight was 99 but they expect it to go up to 165 during the day. We'll see. It seems that the daily prediction is for a daily high. It does not mean that the air quality will be that bad all day. They leave the daily prediction up all day so you can compare the prediction to the actual measurements, kind of like looking at the morning Wunderground forecast while looking at current temperatures.
[/quote]
Good site; lots more info. Thanks for link.
10-12-2017, 02:37 PM
Some more air quality data from Mountain View: https://twitter.com/terrymorse/status/91...6364883968
Some more air quality data from Mountain View: https://twitter.com/terrymorse/status/91...6364883968
10-12-2017, 02:42 PM
(10-12-2017, 01:52 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Sensitive usually refers to patients with respiratory or cardiovascular diseases. For a cohort of healthy young 20-somethings, that most likely means the kids with asthma.
BC
Yes BC, that is a clinical definition. However, in toxic tort litigation one might be asked something along the lines of "So you're saying there is/was a zero risk for all members of the cohort other than those with a confirmed, previous, diagnosis of cardiovascular or respiratory disease?". See where that would be going? That's what the institutions will likely need to be considering.
I'm still hopeful that the winds will make all this moot.
(10-12-2017, 01:52 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Sensitive usually refers to patients with respiratory or cardiovascular diseases. For a cohort of healthy young 20-somethings, that most likely means the kids with asthma.
BC
Yes BC, that is a clinical definition. However, in toxic tort litigation one might be asked something along the lines of "So you're saying there is/was a zero risk for all members of the cohort other than those with a confirmed, previous, diagnosis of cardiovascular or respiratory disease?". See where that would be going? That's what the institutions will likely need to be considering.
I'm still hopeful that the winds will make all this moot.
10-12-2017, 03:32 PM
What would a lawsuit be about? If a kid has asthma, they could have an asthma attack. Healthy kids might cough, sneeze etc. Hard to envision long lasting health effects from playing one game in marginal air quality, particularly given all the other inherent risks of the game.
What would a lawsuit be about? If a kid has asthma, they could have an asthma attack. Healthy kids might cough, sneeze etc. Hard to envision long lasting health effects from playing one game in marginal air quality, particularly given all the other inherent risks of the game.
10-12-2017, 06:55 PM
(10-12-2017, 02:42 PM)unclechuck link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17667.msg205946#msg205946 date=1507841531]
Sensitive usually refers to patients with respiratory or cardiovascular diseases. For a cohort of healthy young 20-somethings, that most likely means the kids with asthma.
BC
Yes BC, that is a clinical definition. However, in toxic tort litigation one might be asked something along the lines of "So you're saying there is/was a zero risk for all members of the cohort other than those with a confirmed, previous, diagnosis of cardiovascular or respiratory disease?". See where that would be going? That's what the institutions will likely need to be considering.
I'm still hopeful that the winds will make all this moot.
[/quote]
There is no such thing as "zero risk for all members of the cohort". Having done some research in the field of air pollution, there is no "safe" dose (or at least we haven't found it yet) below which you don't observe any effect. Even within EPA or WHO defined "acceptable" levels, subjects exposed to lower levels of air pollution have fewer adverse events than those exposed to more. The best you can do is contextualize the risk in terms people regularly assume. You might argue, for example, that the risk of playing football at those levels of pollution is no greater than the risk of playing football. For example, is the risk from the pollution comparable to the risk of injury from playing football in both severity and likelihood?
It is a pet peeve of mine that people talk about "eliminating risk". We should be talking about mitigating risk.
BC
(10-12-2017, 02:42 PM)unclechuck link Wrote:[quote author=Boston Card link=topic=17667.msg205946#msg205946 date=1507841531]
Sensitive usually refers to patients with respiratory or cardiovascular diseases. For a cohort of healthy young 20-somethings, that most likely means the kids with asthma.
BC
Yes BC, that is a clinical definition. However, in toxic tort litigation one might be asked something along the lines of "So you're saying there is/was a zero risk for all members of the cohort other than those with a confirmed, previous, diagnosis of cardiovascular or respiratory disease?". See where that would be going? That's what the institutions will likely need to be considering.
I'm still hopeful that the winds will make all this moot.
[/quote]
There is no such thing as "zero risk for all members of the cohort". Having done some research in the field of air pollution, there is no "safe" dose (or at least we haven't found it yet) below which you don't observe any effect. Even within EPA or WHO defined "acceptable" levels, subjects exposed to lower levels of air pollution have fewer adverse events than those exposed to more. The best you can do is contextualize the risk in terms people regularly assume. You might argue, for example, that the risk of playing football at those levels of pollution is no greater than the risk of playing football. For example, is the risk from the pollution comparable to the risk of injury from playing football in both severity and likelihood?
It is a pet peeve of mine that people talk about "eliminating risk". We should be talking about mitigating risk.
BC
10-12-2017, 07:01 PM
10-12-2017, 07:24 PM
Here are a couple of links with information updated every so often.
http://emergency.stanford.edu/
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2017/10/1...otice.aspx
http://emergency.stanford.edu/
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2017/10/1...otice.aspx
Here are a couple of links with information updated every so often.
http://emergency.stanford.edu/
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2017/10/1...otice.aspx
http://emergency.stanford.edu/
http://www.gostanford.com/news/2017/10/1...otice.aspx
10-12-2017, 07:32 PM
My son's high school football league (West Coast Athletic League-WCAL) , has rescheduled all of this week's October 13-14 games to November 10-11.
Prior to today, November 3-4 was the conclusion of the WCAL football season. Due to the air quality issue, Nov 10-11 is now the final week of League play.
Post season play remains as previously scheduled, beginning Nov 17-18.
WCAL football is comprised of 8 teams.........
Sacred Heart Cathedral Prep (SF)
Saint Ignatius(SF)
Archbishop Riordan(SF)
Junipero Serra (San Mateo)
St. Francis (Mtn. View)
Bellarmine (San Jose)
Archbishop Mitty(San Jose)
Valley Christian (San Jose)
Prior to today, November 3-4 was the conclusion of the WCAL football season. Due to the air quality issue, Nov 10-11 is now the final week of League play.
Post season play remains as previously scheduled, beginning Nov 17-18.
WCAL football is comprised of 8 teams.........
Sacred Heart Cathedral Prep (SF)
Saint Ignatius(SF)
Archbishop Riordan(SF)
Junipero Serra (San Mateo)
St. Francis (Mtn. View)
Bellarmine (San Jose)
Archbishop Mitty(San Jose)
Valley Christian (San Jose)
My son's high school football league (West Coast Athletic League-WCAL) , has rescheduled all of this week's October 13-14 games to November 10-11.
Prior to today, November 3-4 was the conclusion of the WCAL football season. Due to the air quality issue, Nov 10-11 is now the final week of League play.
Post season play remains as previously scheduled, beginning Nov 17-18.
WCAL football is comprised of 8 teams.........
Sacred Heart Cathedral Prep (SF)
Saint Ignatius(SF)
Archbishop Riordan(SF)
Junipero Serra (San Mateo)
St. Francis (Mtn. View)
Bellarmine (San Jose)
Archbishop Mitty(San Jose)
Valley Christian (San Jose)
Prior to today, November 3-4 was the conclusion of the WCAL football season. Due to the air quality issue, Nov 10-11 is now the final week of League play.
Post season play remains as previously scheduled, beginning Nov 17-18.
WCAL football is comprised of 8 teams.........
Sacred Heart Cathedral Prep (SF)
Saint Ignatius(SF)
Archbishop Riordan(SF)
Junipero Serra (San Mateo)
St. Francis (Mtn. View)
Bellarmine (San Jose)
Archbishop Mitty(San Jose)
Valley Christian (San Jose)
10-12-2017, 08:15 PM
Men's soccer is in overtime after 1-1 in regulation. Most recent AQI is 158.
10-12-2017, 08:55 PM
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/12/ho...s-weekend/
Mercury News article about air quality and the Raiders, Cal and Stanford games this weekend.
Mercury News article about air quality and the Raiders, Cal and Stanford games this weekend.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/10/12/ho...s-weekend/
Mercury News article about air quality and the Raiders, Cal and Stanford games this weekend.
Mercury News article about air quality and the Raiders, Cal and Stanford games this weekend.
10-12-2017, 09:55 PM
Apparently this was sent around internally this morning at Stanford athletics:
- We continue to monitor the Air Quality Index, as outlined in our Athletic Training and NCAA policies and procedures documents.
- If the AQI indicates outdoor physical exertion is dangerous, we will take the appropriate steps to protect our student-athletes, including postponing, rescheduling, relocating or cancelling practices and competitions, if necessary.
- Yesterday afternoon, several of our sport programs either cancelled their practice, moved to a later time or relocated indoors.
- At this time, all of our competitions are scheduled to go on as originally planned.
- Thus far, the air quality has improved significantly in the evening and nighttime hours, when most of our competitions this week are scheduled to take place.
- Check GoStanford.com and @GoStanford for updates and announcements.
Apparently this was sent around internally this morning at Stanford athletics:
- We continue to monitor the Air Quality Index, as outlined in our Athletic Training and NCAA policies and procedures documents.
- If the AQI indicates outdoor physical exertion is dangerous, we will take the appropriate steps to protect our student-athletes, including postponing, rescheduling, relocating or cancelling practices and competitions, if necessary.
- Yesterday afternoon, several of our sport programs either cancelled their practice, moved to a later time or relocated indoors.
- At this time, all of our competitions are scheduled to go on as originally planned.
- Thus far, the air quality has improved significantly in the evening and nighttime hours, when most of our competitions this week are scheduled to take place.
- Check GoStanford.com and @GoStanford for updates and announcements.
10-12-2017, 11:45 PM
Thursday's 10PM news indicates that the wind will be quite strong from the North on Saturday morning early, possibly up to 35mph (I suspect that wind speed referred to North Bay speeds). IIRC, the strongest winds were predicted for 7AM. They also indicated the winds would fall off quickly during the day. Based on that, I think there will be smoky conditions in the morning hours, clearing during the day. I'd guess the game should be playable, if Stanford (et al) hold off on making a decision. But if the decision needs to be made by 9AM, I could see the game may be cancelled or delayed.
Cal's Friday game looked like it has a good chance to be played because the winds won't be strong until after it is over.
Of course, from a more global view, the bad part is not whether the game gets cancelled (or conceivably delayed a day), but the impact the wind will have on the fires. I hope there is minimal more loss of property, no loss of life, and that the firefighters can deal with the possibly deadly serious conditions in the wee hours of Saturday. [NOTE: I have not heard any indication that a day's delay might be considered; that is my own view of a possible outcome.]
Cal's Friday game looked like it has a good chance to be played because the winds won't be strong until after it is over.
Of course, from a more global view, the bad part is not whether the game gets cancelled (or conceivably delayed a day), but the impact the wind will have on the fires. I hope there is minimal more loss of property, no loss of life, and that the firefighters can deal with the possibly deadly serious conditions in the wee hours of Saturday. [NOTE: I have not heard any indication that a day's delay might be considered; that is my own view of a possible outcome.]
Thursday's 10PM news indicates that the wind will be quite strong from the North on Saturday morning early, possibly up to 35mph (I suspect that wind speed referred to North Bay speeds). IIRC, the strongest winds were predicted for 7AM. They also indicated the winds would fall off quickly during the day. Based on that, I think there will be smoky conditions in the morning hours, clearing during the day. I'd guess the game should be playable, if Stanford (et al) hold off on making a decision. But if the decision needs to be made by 9AM, I could see the game may be cancelled or delayed.
Cal's Friday game looked like it has a good chance to be played because the winds won't be strong until after it is over.
Of course, from a more global view, the bad part is not whether the game gets cancelled (or conceivably delayed a day), but the impact the wind will have on the fires. I hope there is minimal more loss of property, no loss of life, and that the firefighters can deal with the possibly deadly serious conditions in the wee hours of Saturday. [NOTE: I have not heard any indication that a day's delay might be considered; that is my own view of a possible outcome.]
Cal's Friday game looked like it has a good chance to be played because the winds won't be strong until after it is over.
Of course, from a more global view, the bad part is not whether the game gets cancelled (or conceivably delayed a day), but the impact the wind will have on the fires. I hope there is minimal more loss of property, no loss of life, and that the firefighters can deal with the possibly deadly serious conditions in the wee hours of Saturday. [NOTE: I have not heard any indication that a day's delay might be considered; that is my own view of a possible outcome.]
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »