Milpitas, an affluent city nestled in California’s Silicon Valley, has grappled with an entrenched odour problem for decades. Residents near industrial sites, including a massive 342-acre landfill, have long endured heavy smells. The community is putting its hopes in technology, perhaps befitting Silicon Valley.
Chia-Ling Kong, a tech firm engineer living roughly half a mile from the dump, recalls not being able to open her window for over ten years after moving to the area. While conditions have improved, Kong notes that she and her neighbours still face around two or three hours of foul odours daily. According to when I first moved here, I could not open my window for over 10 years,”, Chia-Ling Kong, an engineer for a tech firm who lives around half a mile from the dump. Where Kong is part of a citizen’s campaign against the odours, communities around the world are raising a stink about bad smells making day-to-day life miserable, just like in Milpitas. Resolving them is not always simple, when the complaints start stacking up.
To combat the issue, local authorities ordered the operators of the Newby Island landfill to deploy drones, install chemical tracking monitors, and automate the collection of landfill gases. Kong remains optimistic that continuous data collection will help pinpoint problems as soon as they arise. Meanwhile, landfill operators state they remain committed to safe operations and air quality protection. It makes it easier to pinpoint problems at the moment it starts, kong is optimistic a data-driven approach will make a difference. “Hopefully with this continuous monitoring.
Similar frustrations echo globally as urban sprawl pushes residential areas closer to factories, sewage works, and rubbish dumps. Because many nations lack specific odour management regulations—and the US Environmental Protection Agency does not classify environmental odours as pollutants—enforcement falls heavily to state and local governments. Or it might be a sewage treatment works, or a reeking factory, sometimes a rubbish dump is to blame. Many countries have no regulations in place dictating how to manage smells. According to this leaves, And local governments to take charge of the issue.
Odour consultant Micheal Bull notes that rising land values and infilling bring housing developments increasingly close to odorous industrial processes. Fixing these issues remains exceptionally difficult, particularly for waste sites featuring large surface areas.
Industrial facilities typically tackle smells by absorbing compounds, triggering chemical reactions, or burning the emissions away. Experts indicate that top-tier technologies can eliminate over ninety per0ent of target compounds, though some operators opt for cheaper alternatives like spraying massive quantities of deodorisers. Odour specialists remain sceptical of such industrial air fresheners, comparing them to basic fabric softeners. This is creating more demand for technologies to monitor and prevent smells. The technologies used to tackle industrial pongs generally fall into three categories: they absorb odours; convert them into something less smelly through a chemical reaction; or burn them away. When used correctly, can remove 90% or more of the target compounds responsible for smells, experts on fixing industrial odours say that the best technologies.
In Des Moines, Iowa, authorities are taking a high-tech route to address the lingering Eastside Funk that affects parts of the city. A municipal study revealed that three industrial meat processors contributed to the emissions, placing roughly 100,000 residents in the odour plume depending on wind direction. A study commissioned by city authorities showed that a trio of industrial meat companies were among culprits.
City officials now invest approximately $240,000 annually into electronic noses and a weather station to establish a monitoring ring around suspect facilities. Dalton Jacobus of the Department of Neighborhood Services explains that real-time data matching wind patterns removes guesswork and allows authorities to question facility operators directly about specific odour events. According to the authorities are now paying around $240,000 (£182,000) a year on technology to track the stink, so they can take action. “What we wanted to do was build a ring of odour monitors around the facilities that we suspected of emitting odours,”, Jacobus.
Accused local sites have also upgraded their own systems. Smithfield Foods invested $2 million in a regenerative thermal oxidiser to destroy odour-causing chemicals, though the company disputes being the source of the complaints.
Prior to installing automated monitors partly funded by local businesses, city inspectors relied on driving out to sniff the air manually. Claudia Barrios Obregón of monitoring firm Kunak criticises human olfactometry panels as unrealistic, pointing to electronic noses as a more reliable detection method.
Despite technological advances, human perception of odours remains highly subjective. Johan Lundström, a professor in the science of smell at Stockholm’s Karolinska Institute, notes that people are naturally more sensitive to odours they perceive as particularly unpleasant.
