Does straw burning cause heavy smog? If that were really true, it would be much easier to endure.

People often attach the word "golden" to "autumn," which gives people the hope of a bountiful harvest. But in the eyes of many ancient literati, there seemed to be little of this joy; there was only the bleakness of the autumn wind, the withering of plants, a scene of desolation, so when they needed to express a sorrowful mood, they often turned to the image of "autumn," which carries a chill. In fact, it is not only men of letters; the relevant departments, suffocated by smog, also used this melancholy season to vent their frustration over the smog that has "long defied cure."

China's Ministry of Environmental Protection reported in Beijing on the 18th that suspected straw-burning fire points had been monitored in 20 provinces over the past two weeks, and the situation for pollution prevention and control was severe. Just from the 15th to the 17th, North China, East China and Central China had just experienced the first large-scale smog since the start of autumn. (China News Service, October 18)

Is straw burning really the chief culprit causing smog? Judging from the scene of straw burning, it is certainly one that blots out the sky and darkens the earth. If this kind of smoke is the smog that is so hard to control, then that might not be a bad thing. Because, first, the straw will always burn out eventually; throughout the four seasons, people do not only harvest without planting; second, controlling straw burning is, relatively speaking, not an extremely difficult matter. Haven't we heard that many places have signed "military orders" pledging that "a single fire" can burn away the official caps of the officials involved?

However, after barbecue, smoked meat and the like became sources of smog, straw burning has now been blamed for causing large-scale heavy smog across China in early autumn. Leaving aside the question of whether these ways of life and production that existed before smog ever became a major problem are the key to its formation, the author is simply worried that after the straw has all been burned and the farmland is a vast expanse of green, if the smog still has not dispersed, what will the relevant departments come up with then to talk about?

This is not to deny the significance of banning straw burning for smog control, but rather a fear that doing so may grasp the wrong priority in smog control and neglect the monitoring and control of the main pollution sources. According to reports, the issues of straw utilization and banning burning have always been an important focus of smog control. Public opinion, however, has always been somewhat unconvinced. Perhaps ordinary people judge based on life experience; the smoke produced by burning straw was once also used to repel mosquitoes, but its effect was very limited. If one household lights straw in front of its door, the neighbors will still be bitten by mosquitoes. So then, can straw burning in rural areas really keep smoke hanging over cities far away? People have also seen that smog and ordinary smoke are not the same thing; it may produce short-term smoke, but it will not linger for a long time without dispersing.

The author is not pretending to be an expert discussing smog, but is simply worried about whether the current smog-control campaign has actually found the real target. One moment barbecue is banned, the next smoked meat is banned; it feels a bit like hitting here and there at random, while the smog still comes whenever it pleases. If the relevant departments are content to find a "target" at the right time and make a great show of it, although that may be enough to demonstrate their action, how much effect does it really have?

The harm brought by smog is already known to everyone, and controlling it is imperative, so one cannot be satisfied with mere momentum and activity. Indeed, regarding straw burning, the Ministry of Environmental Protection will further intensify satellite remote-sensing patrol and monitoring, publish daily satellite monitoring results on government websites, and use methods such as unannounced inspections to urge all localities to carry out prevention and control; provinces with ineffective prevention and control will be publicly named. This is quite a show of force. But autumn is about to pass, and the straw will also burn out. If by then the smog still has not dispersed, will the "battlefield" then be moved to barbecue and smoked meat?

Admittedly, in order to improve air quality, it is necessary to reduce or eliminate the relevant pollution sources. But as for a problem that no one involved is willing to state plainly, perhaps one can only use an analogy: it is like a family trying to improve its living environment by no longer heating oil in the wok when cooking and no longer lighting mosquito coils to repel mosquitoes, but the head of the household still has not quit smoking. Because the head of the household earns the most money for the family, and feels weak all over without a cigarette. What is to be done?