Thursday, September 09, 2010

Is the (unadulterated) composition of Earth's atmosphere ideal for life? Is "better" air possible?

The following figure represents the normally-accepted composition of the Earth's atmosphere.

Assuming that the above figure represents unadulterated and unpolluted composition of the air we breathe, I wonder, is this composition the best that can be (for humans)? Can an artificially-made gaseous mixture (with constituents and their proportions different from the constituents and proportions of natural air) beat natural air, in terms of health benefits, longevity, etc.? If yes, how can we conveniently and economically expose humans to "air 2.0", so they can experience its health benefits?


  1. In my opinion, if a person who throughout his life has got lucky to breathe even presently known standard of ideal unadulterated air will die not coz of any respiratory organ problem caused due to the air (ideal one)...And is totally safe, lives long,stays healthy as far as the air is responsible to achieve it.

    But if it's possible to prepare the better composition then:
    1.sort of big breathing halls (on the analogy of natural parks) which support/provide & even maintain (by some mechanism) this better air can be set up...(But yes unlike to present idea of parks, we'll have to pay for the fresh air we breathe in the halls)

    2. Or we can have air purifiers(which adopt the similar mechanism as above) at homes or work places (even in cars/planes etc.But then along with fuel price 'ultra fresh' air's cost will also be an issue (probably))...

    Any proposed ideas on this interesting topic, (if practical) should firstly be used to expose humans to presently established/known composition of unadulterated air, before we move for improving the standards.

    But artificial methods being artificial are more likely to be temporary & come up with drawbacks/side effects...So no doubt it needs critical study not only of 'how to do' but also about its 'consequences'.

  2. "But artificial methods being artificial are more likely to be temporary & come up with drawbacks/side effects..." is an apparently prejudiced assumption.

  3. Update (12-Sep-10): I think what I've posted applies to Sunlight too. Sunlight is beneficial, but can humans design an artificial ray-mixture that's healthier?