Recently, in order to reduce dust and control smog, Zhengzhou City consumes more than 35,000 tons of water every day. After this move was reported by the local media, it caused heated discussion and doubts from the public. The person in charge of relevant departments pointed out that at present, "South Water" has entered Zhengzhou. Although the situation of "crying thirst" in the whole city eased last year, with the increase of water consumption, it is estimated that by 2020, it will face the pressure of water shortage again. At the same time, some experts believe that sprinkling water to reduce dust, curing haze and nourishing soup will stop boiling. Sprinkling water can reduce dust, but it can't suppress smog. It needs to be explored in practice to achieve a balance between cost and effect. (August 23, China-Singapore. com)

"Since April, sprinkling water six times a day, once every two hours on average. A sprinkler can load 10 tons of water at a time, and it is basically finished after running. Sprinkle 60 tons of water a day, all with tap water from fire hydrants. " According to relevant data, the daily sprinkling quantity in Zhengzhou is 35,000 tons. Calculated at 3.05 yuan per ton, it will cost about107,000 yuan per day. Judging from such investment, there is no doubt about Zhengzhou's determination and investment in smog control.

However, with the severe smog situation that the atmospheric environmental quality of Zhengzhou ranked the third from the bottom among 74 key cities in China from June to June this year, the per capita water resources in Zhengzhou is only110 of the national average, which is one of the cities with serious water shortage. When smog encounters water shortage, it is necessary to take limited water resources to control smog. Of course, such an arrangement must first face the question of rationality.

According to experts, the reason why large-scale sprinkling is used to eradicate smog is mainly to effectively curb the dust on roads and construction sites. Many interviews between special inspectors of North China Environmental Protection Supervision Center and environmental protection departments since May 20 15 show that there are obvious problems such as dust pollution in Zhengzhou. In this regard, vigorously reducing dust is indeed a pragmatic choice for Zhengzhou to cure haze. But the problem is that dusting by sprinkling water is not a long-term solution after all. It has at least two questions. First, have other means of dust suppression been exhausted except sprinkling water? 2. What is the impact of dust on Zhengzhou's environmental quality?

According to media reports, the on-site inspector of North China Environmental Protection Supervision Center found that the "six hundred percent" requirements such as 100% enclosure around the construction site, material stacking 100% coverage are mere formality. Obviously, the implementation of these requirements is the real source control, rather than unilateral water spraying at no cost.

If it is related to the overall situation of smog control, sprinkling water to reduce dust is more likely to show its limitations and effectiveness. In addition to dust, the environmental supervision department's diagnosis of the causes of smog in Zhengzhou also includes insufficient efforts to control coal pollution, widespread illegal sewage discharge in characteristic industries, and illegal sewage discharge by some large enterprises. It is not difficult to infer that these are actually the root causes of smog compared to dust. In governance, it is more complicated than sprinkling water and needs the wisdom and courage of governance. Dust only needs to increase the input of sprinkling water, which may be effective in a short time. But in the long run, not to mention the waste caused by sprinkling water, how much practical effect can sprinkling water have on the premise that other reasons cannot be effectively controlled? Such an approach can only make people feel that the relevant parties are short-sighted in dealing with the pressure of interview.

Undeniably, interviews with higher-level environmental protection departments will indeed bring real pressure to the rulers. However, if such pressure changes, it will only be a kind of utilitarian "stopgap treatment", which is obviously not what the higher authorities and the public want to see. In the final analysis, there are not many shortcuts to cure haze, so we must look at it in all directions and pay attention to wisdom and strategy. If you blindly choose the simplest way, it is the easiest way to achieve "political achievements", which will not only increase unnecessary costs, but also delay the best opportunity for smog control. Politicians are broad-minded, far-sighted and have a little more "I don't have to succeed" mentality.

Of course, the driving force of sprinkling water to cure haze needs to be seen, but in the final analysis, we should pay attention to science. The formation of smog is largely the product of extensive economic development in the past. Then, if we continue the "unscrupulous" extensive governance, it is very likely that the old problems will not be solved, and finally new problems will appear. In any case, for a city that is seriously short of water, giving priority to water to control smog is not the best way. It is very likely that the shorter the short board, the shorter the short board. And the governance of utilitarianism is also doomed to be difficult.