Secondhand Smoke
Secondhand smoke is a mixture of smoke, from both the burning of the tobacco and the smoke exhaled from the people smoking the cigarette or cigar. The EPA has categorized secondhand smoke as a known cancinogen that claims the lives of nearly 40,000 people each year. People that are exposed to secondhand smoke are 25% more likley to have cancer and/or heart disease. It is for these reasons as well as the fact the secondhand smoke is very irritating to non-smokers, that there has been so much public rage over allowing smoking in public places.
It seems like most urban areas have either implimented a non-smoking policy or will soon impliment one. Part of the blame has to be put on the shoulders of the bar and restaurant owners who did nothing for years to protect their employees and patrons from secondhand smoke. While no smoke eater, or any other method of air purification or exhaust, can completely rid an indoor area of smoke, smoke eaters can greatly reduce the exposure and the complaints.
It is proven that disallowing smoking in bars, greatly reduces business. Many bars have found loopholes, by declaring themselves private clubs. Bar owners in areas that have not yet outlawed smoking should take serious steps to show their customers and their city council members that secondhand smoking is a concern that is being addressed. I personally know of several bar owners who have presented their local government with information about the steps they have taken to reduce secondhand smoke exposure, some of them have stated that they felt it made a difference.
I urge any bar and restaurant owners who have not yet taken steps, to do so. For the good of your employees, your health, the health of your patrons and… for the good of your business, at least check into taking steps to reduce secondhand smoke. If you don’t do it now, you soon will be sorry.
Joel Said,
March 15, 2006 @ 10:36 am
I was doing a little searching to see who may be the best proponant of an idea that I have. Given the trends in recent years by individual states to ban smoking in bars and restaurants I believe there is a viable alternative. I have seen this idea work in a jazz bar in Wilmington, NC in 2000. I do not remember the name of the establishment but could find out if warranted.
This jazz bar boasted a smoke free environment and allowed smoking. The building was approx. 3000 sq. ft. They had six large ceiling smoke eating units, more than adequate ,that kept the air smoke free. Most of the patrons were smoking cigarettes and cigars. It was the only club in town my friend could go to without getting sick. He was allergic to smoke and never had a problem going there.
I believe this could be a viable alternative to banning smoking in restaurants and bars. It would create a win/win situation for everyone. If states required smoke eater systems adequate enough to clean the air it would make the patrons happy. The club owners would not have parking lots and sidewalks littered with cigarette butts. They would probably increase thier revenues too. The smoke eater companies would certainly be busier. And the state could include the smoke eaters in thier health inspections and perhaps a small tax.
This is a win/win situation for everyone. Has anyone in your industry considered approaching state legislatures with this kind of an option? Pennsylvania is considering banning smoking in bars and restaurants. I am an occassionaly cigar smoker and enjoy that when socializing with freinds or out on the town.
Rod Yarbrough Said,
March 15, 2006 @ 11:30 am
Many of us in the industry agree with you. I have heard that some bar and restaurant owners have presented information, specifications and scientific evidence to their city council or town meetings to show that they are willing to take steps to show that they can provide a clean air environment. The air outside in most cities is polluted with thousands of chemical fumes and carcinogens, with the proper air cleaners, we can obtain levels in a smoking bar or restaurant that are as good or better than the air quality outside at the street level.
Joel Said,
March 15, 2006 @ 11:32 am
I understand the state may not be as willing to listen to a for profit company that is trying to sell their products as they would a local proprietor who is trying to stimulate the economy. I live just 10 miles from Harrisburg, the state capital of PA. I would love to see a downtown club or restaurant put in an adequate system and advertise “Smoke free environment and bring your tobacco”. That would certainly get some attention. Perhaps the lawmakers would take note and want to investigate. I’m sure some of them are cigar aficionados. I think for a successful club it would be a great draw. There are many people that do not go out because of second hand smoke. I would like to think if a club in Harrisburg tried this then maybe a smokeater company would cut them a break.
Rod Yarbrough Said,
March 15, 2006 @ 12:01 pm
I would hate to see all bars and restaurants have smoking legally banned. I understand the concerns of non-smokers, and I understand the possible health effects. I would much rather see smoking and non-smoking sections available. Non-smokers will joke that there is nothing isolating them from the smoking section, but there are new smoke eater systems available that are effective for containing the smoke and cleaning the air of harmful byproducts.
The Smokeeter LS system is used in all of the Aplebees restaurants for keeping the smoking section in the bar isolated from the non-smoking section in the dining rooms, without having to completely enclose their bar area. The Smokeeter LS is a conceled system, which mounts above a drop ceiling. The system has intakes, also called returns, which should be placed above the smoking area. An equal number of outflow vents, also called supplies, should be placed beyond the perimeter of the smoking area with the directional vents blowing back toward the smoking section.
Two principles keep the smoke from entering the non-smoking area, air volocity and pressure difference. The air volocity of the clean air blowing back toward the smoking area helps keep the smoke contained, afterall smoke does not drift upwind. The smoking area which contains all of the returns would have lower pressure (all of the air is being sucked away) while the dining area would be having a constant supply of cleaned air, creating a higher pressue zone. These two principles in action together are very effective for the containment of the smoking area.
The Smokeeter LS system is very effecient for removing the particle in the smoke and an optional carbon plenum can be used for removing the chemical fumes and odors. While a typical system costs just over $4,000, it uses washable electronic cells, so there are no expensive particle filters to replace. This system does require a t-bar type drop ceiling with at least 2 feet of open cleanrance above, there are other options available.
I am surprised how many bars do not have smoke eater systems in place, I hope that owners see the potential threat to their business and decide to do something about their smoke problems before it’s too late and people like you and I have no place to enjoy a drink and a smoke.
Chandler McClean Said,
March 15, 2006 @ 12:33 pm
In lieu of the whole country trying to sterilize civililzation, I believe that providing a viable alternative to a total smoking ban will keep people content. Businesses like bars and restaurants are sure to suffer decreased patronage if the potential customers aren’t allowed the choice of having that “after dinner smoke.” If people can’t be comfortable where they are, they’re simply going to leave and find a place where they can be comfortable. I know people that only smoke while they’re drinking…How many bars do you think would still be in business if there was no smoking allowed? Better yet, how many VFW and American Legion clubs do you think would close up shop if there was no smoking? Come to think of it, I don’t think I’ve ever met a war veteran who DIDN’T smoke!
A wise man once said: “Smokers don’t die from emphysema…they die from hypothermia beacuse they all have to go outside to smoke!” Although this statement is rather campy, it is very true in a non-literal sense. I myself am a smoker, and can’t even count how many times I’ve been stuck out in the rain or snow, puffing away on a cigarette, freezing my tail off. Sure, the immediate solution would be to stop smoking altogether, but for someone who enjoys smoking, that’s not an option. I am a firm believer in compromise. Seeing how you can’t please everyone all the time, it’s important to reach a medium at which everyone can have at least some degree of contentment. Let’s face it…smokers are going to smoke, no matter what; why? because they’re addicted. Making attempts to sterilize the community isn’t going to curb smoking altogether, it just forces the smokers to congregate into one or more “designated areas.” Unfortunately, you see this all too often, and it has the potential of segregating society into social groups or classes, which sounds a little extreme, but it’s true if you really think about it. Is this just another face of holier-than-thou groups that are trying to control everyone’s actions? I certainly hope not, because I can already do without groups such as PETA, fervent christians, and other foolishness-based groups who are hell-bent on dominating their own little world. I have 3 words for those folks: Get a hobby.
By banning smoking indoors, it forces smokers to take their pollution outside, where EVERYBODY gets a whiff. What braniac thought that one up? Let’s make sure that the Russell family isn’t disturbed over at table #6…meanwhile, the Johnson family is forced go outdoors, blowing their smoke across the parking lot into the preschool playground. Hmmm…. This smoking ban issue doesn’t seem like it’s designed to help people in general, but simply to evacuate it into someone else’s area, as if to say: “Not my problem anymore!” Using equipment to effectively clear the smoke out of the air is definitely a more feasible option, as it keeps the harmful contaminants out of the environment. period.
Mike C. Said,
March 21, 2006 @ 5:43 pm
I am a non-smoker and I for one would prefer not to be breathe smoke from someone elses cigarette. My wife refuses to go out to clubs because she cannot stand the smoke. I have found a couple of local places, such as High Beams that have very good smoke filter systems, I go there often.
Too many places, especially places with good live music (which I enjoy), don’t have adaquate systems in place. If it takes the government stepping in and forcing the issue, I’ll be happy because my wife and I can go out and enjoy ourselves. Until that happens, we’ll just stick to the places that are showing that they care, by installing the equipment so that everyone can be comfortable.
I would agree that clubs that have very good air cleaning equipment should be able to at least offer a smoking section, so long as their air cleaners keep the smoke from enetering the rest of the establishment.