Clustered Outdoor Smokers Rival Auto Exhaust

Sidewalk smokers hanging out in front of bars and restaurants produced more carbon monoxide than auto traffic did.

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.



If you’re not a fan of cigarettes, you probably hold your breath as you hurry past the smokers that hang out in front of office buildings, stores, and restaurants. Smokers are banished outside because a growing number of cities concerned with the possible health effects of secondhand smoke have banned smoking in eateries, workplaces and other such establishments.  Turns out holding your breath might not be such a bad idea. Because scientists at the University of Georgia in Athens have found that sidewalk smokers can generate more pollution than passing cars. 

Athens, Georgia, is a major college town, and on the weekends, students are packed shoulder to shoulder outside bars and restaurants. And since smoking is banned inside such locations, plenty of those kids are puffing up a storm. That made the Georgia researchers wonder whether outdoor secondhand smoke could present a health hazard of its own.  So they measured the carbon monoxide levels outside a handful of bars and restaurants. Because this gas is also found in car exhaust, the researchers counted the number of cars and the number of smokers. And they found that the pollution was coming from the people, not the tailpipes.  So next time you stroll past a bunch of the banished, take a deep breath and feel free to run.

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe