At Kew, seven miles west of London, the reduction of sunshine due to the London smoke has been placed at 37% for a whole year.

In the United States of America for the decennium, 1901-1910, the aggregate hours of sunshine, percentage of possible sunshine, number of cloudy days, number of partly cloudy days, and number of foggy days have been found by the Pittsburgh smoke investigators, from a study of the records gathered by the United States Weather Bureau in various cities throughout the country, to be as shown in [Table III].

TABLE III.

Statistics of Sunshine in 18 Cities of the United States

Station. 1.
Aggregate hrs. of sunshine.
2.
Percentage of possible sunshine.
3.
No. of cloudy days.
4.
No. of partly cloudy days.
5.
No. of foggy days.
6.
Total of 3. and 4.
Baltimore 26,466 58.7 1440 1018 142 2458
Boston 25,877 56.8 1398 1003 98 2401
Buffalo 23,200 49.7 1713 1324 157 3037
Chicago 26,442 57.9 1238 1282 116 2520
Cincinnati 26,758 58.6 1356 1202 81 2588
Cleveland 22,394 47.8 1584 1187 67 2771
Denver 29,355 65.9 645 1500 45 2145
Detroit 23,201 50.3 1477 1165 133 2642
Los Angeles 31,521 70.9 743 1404 258 2147
Louisville 25,715 56.8 1284 1094 233 2378
New Orleans 26,091 58.6 1045 1365 162 2410
New York 28,762 57.6 1279 1182 120 2461
Philadelphia 25,249 56.6 1369 1071 127 2440
Pittsburgh 22,573 49.0 1385 1294 185 2679
Portland, Me. 26,914 59.4 1321 1040 303 2361
San Francisco 25,453 56.3 900 1136 241 2036
St. Louis 24,957 58.7 1185 1019 42 2204
Washington D. C. 25,078 55.8 1088 1135 115 2223

It is observable that all the cities which have become notorious in the matter of smoke pollution show a very low percentage of sunshine, the worst conditions obtaining in the two cities having the most unsavory reputation for smoke, viz., Cleveland and Pittsburgh. These two cities consistently have the worst records for sunshine, for percentage of possible sunshine and for cloudy and partly cloudy days (combined totals). Unfortunately no meteorological data are available from stations situated in non-smoke-producing centers whose geographical conditions are similar to those obtaining in smoke-producing cities like Pittsburgh, Cleveland, Detroit, Cincinnati and St. Louis. The above data only enable us to compare the atmospheric conditions of one smoky city with another smoky city or with cities whose geographical surroundings are so different as to render the data useless for comparative purposes. However, the data recently collected by the Smoke Investigation of the University of Pittsburgh show, in complete accordance with similar English findings, that the lessened amount of sunshine in Pittsburgh is due to the smoke factor. Figures based on the number of tons of coal consumed in Pittsburgh from 1905 to 1911 show a fair degree of parallelism between the quantity of coal consumed and the number of smoky days. During the years in which an increasing amount of coal has been burned (owing to the heightened cost of gas) the hours of sunshine have fallen from about 2800 to 2200. Likewise the days on which the United States Weather Bureau has observed light or dark smoke in Pittsburgh, have increased as follows for the successive years from 1905-1911: 85, 87, 106, 124, 112, 100 and 156 days (O’Connor, [17]). With the increase of coal consumption has come an increase of smoky days. Dr. Benner tells me that the per cent. of daylight (as chemically determined) in Pittsburgh was reduced for last November about 32%, for December 23%, January 36% and February 44% as compared with the town of Sewickley which is only about 12 miles distant. There can then be no doubt that smoke lessens the amount of sunshine.

Smoke likewise is directly related to the production of moisture, mist, clouds, rain or fogs, because it supplies some of the solid particles which may serve to aid in the formation of suspended drops of water. Rain drops are often formed around a solid nucleus. Without solid particles of dust in the atmosphere there would probably be much less mist, rain and dew ([4]). We would, therefore, infer on merely a priori grounds that smoke contributes to the production of fogs. That this is so seems to be shown by actual investigation. An investigation conducted by the Meteorological Council in 1901-1903 indicated that 20% of the fogs in London were smoke-induced, ([4], [21])—artificially induced and therefore preventable fogs. Most suggestive, as showing that smoke is partly responsible for the existence of fogs, are the fog and smoke statistics gathered in London during the last 30 years, as shown in [Table IV] (applicable to the winter months only). The number of days of fog have been reduced nearly 300% and the hours of bright sunshine have increased nearly 100% during this 30-year period ([10]).

TABLE IV.

Date Days of Fog Hours of bright sunshine
1883-1892 29.9% 55.6%
1892-1901 20.7% 70.1%
1901-1910 10.6% 93.5%

Likewise in Westminster the number of days of fog averaged 27 per year for the lustrum 1902-1906, and 17 per year for the period 1907-1911. The improvement shown above is due, in large part, to the increased use of gas and electricity and to better stoking (Kershaw, Russell). On the other hand, if we turn to Pittsburgh where the amount of smoke has been on the increase in recent years, we find that the number of days of fog increased from an average of 22.6 per year for the first five year period to 50.2 for the second five year period, 1907-1911.