air

A Renfe train was left without air conditioning at 40ºC. 1,056 days later, an affected person has just collected her money

by

How much would you fight for the refund of 31.90 euros? Macarena LE, a resident of a town in Teruel, is clear: three years, if necessary. And that is how long it has been behind Renfe for it to refund the price of a ticket between Zaragoza and Barcelona. The reason? The car’s air conditioning. Evident, due to the non-existent air conditioning of the car. What has happened? A Renfe user named Macarena LE, a member of Facua, has gotten the money back for a train ticket she took three years ago. The company had promised that it would do so with each and every one of the people who took that train, but the money never appeared in the user’s bank account. a little odyssey. Despite telling them that they would return the money to the passengers, the amount never arrived so after a few weeks, the affected person filed a claim, they explain in Facua. With no news about it after three months, he decided to put himself in the hands of the legal service of the consumer defense association. Once reaching this point, the association filed a new claim. To this complaint, Renfe responded that it gave the order to return the money but it still did not arrive. After another four months, Facua files a new complaint and Renfe assures him that it has tried to refund the money but that the procedure has been rejected on two occasions. At that moment, Renfe instructs Macarena LE to receive the money through a payment platform. This method also being impossible and the months accumulating, Facua sends a third claim to Renfe in which they simply ask it to deposit the money into the bank account of the affected person, attaching the document that proves its ownership. Three years after taking that train, the associate has ended up receiving her 31.90 euros. A trip… complicated. And, once seated, they assure in Facua that the conductor informed the passengers that the air conditioning was broken and that their travel money would be refunded in compensation for the inconvenience caused. But the journey between Zaragoza and Barcelona had an added problem: July 18 with departure at 3:52 p.m. and arrival at 5:20 p.m. That day maximum temperatures of 44 degrees were reported. Obviously, the heat must have been oppressive inside and the affected person claims that they had to drink water constantly to get through the trip in the best possible way. The expected quality. Due to the numerous claims filed by Facua, and beyond the fact that the money was not returned until three years later, Renfe never fought not to return the money. Instead they admitted that they would send the money back for “not having offered the service with the quality levels” expected. However, the fulfillment of the procedure itself does not seem to have had the expected quality either. And Facua pointed out to Renfe that they were failing to comply with article 21.3 of the Royal Legislative Decree 1/2007, of November 16according to which: “Employers must respond to the claims received in the shortest possible time and, in any case, within a maximum period of one month from the presentation of the claim.”. When Facua presented this second claim in which this regulatory text was recalled, Renfe had not given a response or paid the corresponding money for four months. What if it happens to me? That Renfe has returned the money to a passenger sets a precedent but does not automatically lead the company to return the money in the event of an air conditioning breakdown. In its rules, Renfe states that the traveler has the right to receive compensation for the cancellation of the trip, for its interruption, for a lack or deficiency in the service provided on board or for delay, but it makes it clear that such compensation will not be carried out if: The reason is an extraordinary circumstance unrelated to railway operation, such as extreme weather events (a storm that leaves a train without heating in winter, for example) or natural disasters. Nor if the breakdown or problem was caused by the behavior of the traveler. Nor if it is the damage caused by a third party outside the railway company that causes the incident (people on the track, copper theft, sabotage… etc.) That is to say, the mere absence of air conditioning does not automatically imply that the passenger’s money will be returned. What has happened will have to be taken into account to decide whether the company is obliged to act in this way. Photo | Nelson Silva In Xataka | The Madrid Cercanías have become a nest of problems and delays: their solution is new “megatrains”

why understanding these acronyms is the difference between buying an air purifier or an expensive fan

by

At first glance buy a purifier air can be a simple task, but as soon as we start reading the specifications… we can easily get involved, especially with some of them such as the type of filter. Here we must be especially careful because it is possible that we find HEPA filters or HEPA type filters, and they are not the same. In fact, with each of them we will have a totally different experience. How a HEPA filter works HEPA (High Efficiency Particulate Airor air with high efficiency particles) is a quality standard for filters, so if we see it in a purifier we can know that it meets rigorous tests to guarantee efficiency in retaining particles such as dust, pollen, mold and even bacteria or viruses. If we get a little more technical, bacteria measure between 0.5 and 5 microns while viruses measure between 0.02 and 0.3 microns. HEPA filters must be capable of retain at least 99.97% of particles having a size of 0.3 microns (particle size most difficult to physically filter). If it is not capable of this, it is not a HEPA filter. However, you have to be careful because this is where HEPA type filters come into play. What is a HEPA type filter If we see that a purifier has a HEPA type filter, we may think that it meets the standard we have discussed. But this is not the case, and they can be much less efficient. The expression “HEPA type filter” is usually used as a claim for some purifiers, generally inexpensive, although it is more normal to see them in other devices such as robot vacuum cleaner. These filters They are not as effective because they have not been tested with the tests that HEPA filters are subjected to, and it is possible that they do not even comply with the European standard that defines the different kinds of HEPA filters that we can find. Can they retain bacteria? Yes, but they do not have certified efficiency. How purifiers work The purifiers have a fairly simple structure: Inside there is a motor, a fan and a box where the filter is located.. Its operation is summarized in that the motor makes the fan move to attract particles and deposit them in the filter. However, it is worth mentioning that the filtering process is more complex. Inertial impact: affects large, heavy particles that travel at high speed. The particles cannot change direction quickly, so they continue straight until they collide with the fibers until they become stuck. Direct interception: some medium particles that follow the air flow pass very close to the fibers until they come into contact with them and remain adhered, which is known as direct interception. Brownian diffusion: on the contrary, small particles do not follow the air current in a straight line, so they continually collide with the gas molecules in the air. This movement increases the probability that the particle ends up hitting a fiber and becoming stuck. HEPA-type filters can retain certain particles, but they do not have certified efficiency. It’s not that they are useless, but they simply may not be as effective as HEPA filters. The good and the bad of both options, face to face hepa filters hepa type filters THE GOOD 🟢 They are capable of better filtering dust particles, bacteria or viruses. They are usually found in cheap purifiers, being interesting for devices whose purification function is secondary. THE BAD 🔴 They are found in more expensive purifiers, so they are aimed at devices whose purification function is the main one. They are less efficient than HEPA filters. Ideal for: People looking to improve the air quality in their home. Economical devices whose purification function is secondary. What purifier should I buy then? At this point you may have wondered whether or not it is worth buying a purifier with a HEPA type filter, and the truth is that it is, although it depends on what we are looking for. 👉 Choose a purifier with a HEPA filter if: You want to retain large and small particles for a cleaner home, from dust to viruses and bacteria. 👉 Choose a purifier with a HEPA type filter if: You only want to retain large particles such as pet hair, dust or lint. Recommended models Philips 2200 Series He Philips 2200 Series It is an air purifier with a HEPA filter that has a fairly small format. It incorporates a three-layer system composed of a prefilter, a HEPA NanoProtect and active carbon to capture 99.97% of particles up to 0.003 microns (3 nanometers) through NanoProtect technology, a technology that allows even smaller particles to be captured thanks to electrocharging. It can be controlled from your mobile phone to program routines and is capable of capturing odors, bacteria, viruses and larger particles. Philips 2200 Series Air Purifier The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Dyson Purifier Hot+Cool HP1 Dyson purifiers are quite well known for the format that many of their models have, such as the Dyson Purifier Hot+Cool HP1. This purifier with a HEPA filter is capable of capturing particles down to 0.1 microns thanks to its H13 filter and can also be controlled from a smartphone. In addition, it also has a function to heat the air in winter or cool it in summer. Dyson Purifier Hot+Cool HP1 The price could vary. We earn commission from these links If neither of these two models convinces you and you want to explore other options, you can take a look at our air purifier guide. Some of the links in this article are affiliated and may provide a benefit to Xataka. In case of non-availability, offers may vary. Images | Philips, Dyson In Xataka | The best way to heat the house: we analyze the expense and energy efficiency of heat pumps and heaters In Xataka | Which heater to buy: the best models based on power, use cases … Read more

The duel over the new glass air fryers is decided on size and power

by

Until recently, air fryers were dark, noisy drawers that were simply used to reheat chips frozen. Today, smart cooking requires versatility, speed and, above all, the ability to adapt. In this field, Ninja It has become a fetish brand for technological cooking enthusiasts. Ninja CRISPi Portable Air Fryer, 3.8 l, 4 in 1 The price could vary. We earn commission from these links XL Ninja CRISPi PRO Glass Air Fryer, 7 Functions – Blue (2 Containers) The price could vary. We earn commission from these links With the launch of its latest range, the firm has put on the table two heavyweights that share DNA but aim for different profiles: the Ninja Crispi Pro and the standard Ninja Crispi. At first glance, both promise to retire your traditional oven and reduce oil use by 75%. However, when we fully enter into your specificationswe see that the battle is decided in the technical details and what you are willing to pay. We put two of the best air fryers of the moment to discover which is the smart purchase. Technical data sheet for both Ninja air fryers feature Ninja Crispi (Standard) Ninja Crispi Pro power 1,700W 2,050W larger container capacity 3.8 liters 5.7 liters (XL size) small container capacity 1.4 liters 2.3 liters cooking modes 4 (Air Fry, Roast, Reheat, Dehydrate) 7 (Add: Bake, Grill and Ferment) temperature range Up to 185°C Up to 240°C price from 123 euros 249.99 euros Design and capacity: from individual format to family feast Both models share the same revolutionary idea that is changing kitchens: the CleanCrisp. Instead of the typical plastic and Teflon basket that gets scratched just by looking at it, Ninja opts for borosilicate glass containers in which you can prepare ingredients, cook them with the hot air head, serve them directly on the table (since they have a very aesthetic design) and put an airtight lid on them to store them in the refrigerator. However, size does matter here. The standard Crispi model includes a 3.8 liter main bowl and a 1.4 liter secondary bowl. It’s a very portable and compact formatideal for singles, couples or to take the airfryer even to a second home. On the other hand, the Crispi Pro makes the leap to family format. Its XL container reaches 5.7 liters of capacity, enough space to roast a whole chicken with vegetables for up to six people, and its small bowl goes up to 2.3 liters to make generous side dishes. Power and temperature: the Pro breaks the 185ºC barrier This is where the Pro version gains muscle and where the price difference is justified as well. The standard Ninja Crispi is somewhat limited in power (1,700 W) and has a thermal limit of 185ºC. This makes it a perfect ally for reheating leftovers and leaving them crispy (thanks to the function Recrisp) or make everyday dishes, but it may fall short or take longer if you are looking for extreme browning on thick meats. For its part, the Crispi Pro goes up to 2,050 W and set the thermostat to 240ºC. That extra heat allows the airflow to seal the food much faster. Additionally, the Pro expands the menu from four to seven functions, adding key modes for cooking lovers such as Bake (bake), Gratinate (Grill) and Ferment masses, something impossible to do in the base model. So…Which model to choose Seeing the differences between both models of Ninja Crispi air fryers, you may be wondering which one to choose. If you don’t know which one to choose, this is what we advise you: Buy the standard Ninja Crispi if: You are looking for an ultra-portable system, you cook small portions for one or two, and your main objective is to use it for side dishes, quick dinners or reheat food giving it a crunchy touch without using the microwave. Ninja CRISPi Portable Air Fryer, 3.8 l, 4 in 1 The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Buy the Ninja Crispi Pro if: You want to completely replace your home oven, you need the capacity to feed a family (5.7 liters) and you don’t want to give up baking recipes, powerful gratins at 240ºC or homemade dough thanks to its advanced functions. XL Ninja CRISPi PRO Glass Air Fryer, 7 Functions – Blue (2 Containers) The price could vary. We earn commission from these links Some of the links in this article are affiliated and may provide a benefit to Xataka. In case of non-availability, offers may vary. Images | Ninja In Xataka | Two years ago I bought my first air fryer. I wish someone had told me I needed these plugins too. In Xataka | Cosori vs Cecotec air fryer: differences and which one to buy

Liquid cooling or air cooler? What to choose so that your CPU doesn’t smoke without having to spend a fortune

by

How difficult it is to choose the parts of a desktop PC: what if the processor, what if RAM memory (well, if you find it at a good price), what if graphics card and other things. But it’s not all about your computer being as powerful as a NASA computer: you also have to design it so that it doesn’t smoke. And that’s where refrigeration comes in, a topic that has more to it than it seems and that we are going to explain in this article. Essentially, you have two ways to cool your processor: an air cooler and liquid cooling. You may read in many places that the latter is the best, but there are many nuances in that statement that must be clarified. So, let’s get down to business. Choosing an air cooler Let’s start with the air heatsink, which we can say is the ‘old-fashioned’ solution for cooling a processor. If you take a look at one of these heatsinks, you will see that it is almost all a fan, although it is a somewhat more complex component than that. Everything is placed on top of the processor and right there, depending on the model we choose, we must keep one thing in mind: may need a lot of space inside the PC case. Piecemeal. The air sink has a copper or aluminum base that rests just above the processor and, to facilitate heat transfer, the thermal pastea compound that makes it easier for this generated heat to pass from one place to another. That heat travels through heat pipes or heat pipes, which are sealed tubes with a small liquid inside that continuously evaporates and condenses to transport heat very efficiently, until it reaches the radiator. How does one of these heatsinks cool? There is no universal answer to this, since each model is different. But, yes, keep this: a quality air heatsink can cool better than small or medium liquid cooling. And that, in addition, with several very interesting advantages. The first thing is that these heatsinks are much easier to install: just apply thermal paste, screw and connect to the motherboard, nothing more. Besides, andThese heatsinks are much simpler and more durable. Basically, what can end up breaking is the fan and it is not difficult to replace at all. Now let’s get to the bad. Again, it will depend a lot on the model we choose, but there are air heatsinks that, when put at full capacity, They are real turbines and they make a lot of noise. They also take up a lot of space, as we said above, which has two implications. First, you need physical space to put it in the box. And second, if it fits just right, it will not have enough space to expel air and the cooling will not be correct. Choose liquid cooling The alternative is AIO liquid cooling (which comes from ‘All In One’). If you have read this far, you can already imagine that we are facing a more sophisticated refrigeration method. In fact, it is not only more sophisticated because of the way it extracts heat (which also, as we will see below), but it is a sophisticated system in sight. It’s an eye-catching system: the compact block above the processor and the case-mounted radiator offer a much cleaner look than the bulky air cooler. This system is based on the same thing as the air heatsink, that is, a metal block that comes into contact with the processor (with thermal paste, of course). What’s happening? What happens through that block? a liquid that absorbs heat and carries it through tubes to a radiatorwhich is actually quite large. This has fans nearby that cool the liquid and, in this way, the cycle begins again. Let’s go with its strong points. Remember what we mentioned above about the price, but, in essence, liquid dissipates heat better than air. In addition, the fans of this type of system are usually quieter than the one with the air cooler, which means less noise. Although be careful, because the pump can also make a little noise. There is also the issue of space, since the block that goes on top of the processor is much less bulky than the air heatsink. Bad turn. This cooling system, being more complex, is much more difficult to install. Besides, It also has a shorter useful life. (they usually have a useful life of between three and six years) and, if there is a coolant leak, it can cause serious damage to the PC (it is not common, but it can happen). They are also more expensive systems, as we say. The good and the bad of both options, face to face air heatsink liquid cooling THE GOOD 🟢 It is a cheaper system that works well and is more durable. It can be more efficient when cooling and aesthetically it is very cool. THE BAD 🔴 It takes up a lot of space inside the PC and can make a lot of noise. It is more expensive and, if it causes problems, it can be a headache. Ideal for: Have a long-lasting cooling system without many complications. Users who put a lot of effort into their processor and who want the interior of their PC to be more aesthetic. Neither of these two options is bad for your PC, but they have their advantages and disadvantages. Beyond what you want to spend, what you have to take into account when choosing is What needs do you have and what use are you going to give to your computer?. If what you are looking for is a system that will last for many years and you will hardly have to worry about it (beyond cleaning it and changing the thermal paste), then the ideal is to choose an air heatsink. Because? Because these systems are simpler and it is difficult for them to break. In addition, a good … Read more

While Ryanair cuts 1.2 million seats in Spain, the gap it is leaving has a name: Wizz Air

by

Ryanair continues in its thirteenth cutting seats at regional airports Spanish. The thing is that the rest of the low-cost airlines have not sat idly by and are taking advantage to have a greater presence. One of these airlines is Wizz Air, which is already thinking about grab a larger market share in Spain after the fight between Ryanair and Aena over airport taxes. Without its own bases, but with more routes and more seats. If some leave, others come. Ryanair has been in open war for months with the Government for Aena airport taxes. The Irish company considers that the rates at regional airports are unaffordable and has gone from threats to withdraw from several Spanish airports, closing its base in Santiago de Compostela, canceling flights in Vigo and Tenerife North, and will leave those in Valladolid and Jerez inactive. The total cut amounts to 1.2 million seats for the summer. In addition, next winter the airline also plans to reduce its capacity in Asturias, Santander, Zaragoza and several Canarian airports. Wizz Air has seen that gap. What Wizz Air is doing. The Budapest-based airline has decided to move in the opposite direction: it plans to increase its capacity in Spain by 39% throughout 2026. This is confirmed by Vera Jardan, the company’s corporate communications director, in statements collected by OkDiario. According to the media, the strategy does not involve opening its own bases, but rather expanding operations in the airports where it already has a presence and adding new routes. The company already operates in 16 Spanish airports, including Madrid, Barcelona, ​​Malaga, Alicante, Bilbao, Ibiza, Santander and Fuerteventura, and offers 144 routes to 15 different countries. Its latest novelty has been a direct connection between Menorca and Budapest. What they say from within. “Spain is definitely an increasingly important emerging market for us, on which we are increasingly focusing,” counted Jardan in the middle. “We see that they are more open to adventures and impromptu trips, and we would definitely like to satisfy that demand with more interesting flights and destinations to different countries,” the manager continued. Wizz Air has been betting for years on routes to central and eastern Europe, destinations that large airlines do not usually cover so frequently. He Ryanair withdrawal. Just like we counted For some time now, Ryanair has historically maintained some low-demand routes thanks to advertising contracts with local institutions. When those contracts are no longer profitable (or more attractive incentives have appeared in other markets, like morocco), the company has not hesitated to withdraw its flights. Added to this is the impact of AVE to Galiciawhich has reduced passengers from the plane in a region that has already accumulated a drop of 15.5% so far this year. What changes the travelers. In the short term, those traveling with Ryanair from affected regional airports will have fewer options or will have to travel to another departure point. Wizz Air can cover part of that demand, but its destination network and operating model are still not comparable to that of the Irish airline. What is clear is that the Hungarian company sees at this moment a real window of opportunity to gain share in a market that, until now, Ryanair had dominated with almost no direct competition in the low-cost segment. Cover image | Paréj Richárd In Xataka | If you thought that Ryanair was living outside the Hormuz crisis, its CEO has a message. And it doesn’t look good for Spain

The US believed it had crushed Iran’s missile city. They have counted the complexes again, and it is as if they had shot in the air

by

During the Gulf War, several American pilots returned convinced they had completely destroyed numerous Iraqi underground shelters. Days later, reconnaissance images revealed something disconcerting: Many of those complexes were still active because the explosions had barely blocked secondary entrances while the main infrastructure remained intact under tons of rock and concrete. The big surprise. For weeks, the White House presented the campaign against Iran as a crushing demonstration of modern military power: stealth bombers, precision missiles and coordinated attacks with Israel that had supposedly left the Iranian strategic network reduced to rubble. donald trump came to affirm that Tehran already “had nothing” in military terms and that its missiles had been dispersed and out of combat. However, the new secret evaluations US intelligence agencies describe a radically different and deeply uncomfortable scenario for Washington. After reanalyzing satellite images, underground access and logistical activity, American analysts discovered that Iran maintains operational 30 of its 33 complexes of missiles in the Strait of Hormuz and retains a good part of its mobile launchers and arsenals, in addition to having recovered the 90% access of its underground facilities. The feeling within some national security sectors is beginning to be disturbing: after spending thousands of missiles and selling the world the idea of ​​total destruction, the immense Iranian “missile city” remains practically where it was at the beginning. Architecture of a fortress. Here you have to remember something what do we count weeks ago. The real problem for the United States is not just how many missiles Iran retains, but how they were built and distributed their complexes for decades. Tehran turned entire mountains into underground defensive systemswith tunnels, protected warehouses, redundant access and mobile platforms capable of moving missiles from one point to another even after a bombing. Many installations were not designed to resist a specific attack, but to ensure that they always there will be something operational after any initial wave. That’s where the intelligence reports are causing real concern: Many of the entrances were temporarily sealed, but not completely destroyed, and the vast majority of the complexes they regained access operational in a matter of weeks. In some cases, the Iranians may even continue to launch missiles directly from the facilities themselves. The result is a very different image from the American public narrative: rather than eliminating the threat, Washington seems to have scratched the surface of an infrastructure conceived precisely to survive a war of technological attrition. The hidden price of the operation. The other great revelation of the conflict is not underground in Iran, but inside the own US arsenals. The campaign consumed gigantic amounts of advanced ammunition: more than a thousand stealth cruise missiles, around a thousand Tomahawks and more than 1,300 Patriot interceptors, figures that are equivalent to entire years of industrial production. The Pentagon attempted to balance two incompatible priorities: destroying extremely hardened Iranian complexes and, at the same time, do not empty completely its strategic reserves in the face of possible future crises with China or North Korea. This limitation explains part of the most controversial tactical decisions of the war. Rather spray completely many underground complexes, planners opted to seal access and entrances using fewer bunker buster bombs than necessary to destroy the entire facility. Now the consequences are beginning to appear starkly: it spent enormous amounts of high-end weapons, but the Iranian network continues to retain significant operational capacity. Hormuz as center of gravity. All of this takes on an even more delicate dimension due to where most of Iran’s surviving capacity is concentrated: the Strait of Hormuz. Approximately a fifth of the world’s oil circulates through that maritime strip, and US intelligence believes that Iran maintains enough missiles and launchers there to to continue threatening warships, oil tankers and critical infrastructure. The US Navy maintains a practically continuous presence in the area with more than twenty ships patrolling and holding the blockade, but the strategic reality is beginning to become uncomfortable: even after a gigantic military campaign, Washington has not been able to eliminate Iran’s ability to turn Hormuz into a nightmare for global trade. There is no doubt, this persistence completely alters the initial perception of the war. What seemed like a demonstration of technological supremacy is also beginning to look like a warning about the real limits of modern air power against deeply dispersed underground networks. The political contradiction. Ultimately, the conclusions of the intelligence “count” They are also opening an increasingly visible political rift in Washington. While the White House publicly insists that the operation was a historic success and accuses those who question that story of “virtual betrayal,” internal reports describe a enemy far away of being neutralized. And the contradiction threatens to become both a strategic and political problem. If the ceasefire collapses, Trump would have to decide between accepting that Iran retains a relevant military capability or relaunching an even more costly campaign using ammunition reserves that will most likely take years to recover. The dilemma is especially delicate because European allies They already fear delays in arms deliveries destined for Ukraine due to American industrial wear. The war against Iran was designed to demonstrate strength and restore deterrence, but what is beginning to emerge, however, is another, much more uncomfortable reading: that even the most powerful military machine on the planet may discover too late that destroying a “missile city” buried under mountains is much more difficult than announcing its destruction on television. Image | Iranian Media In Xataka | Suddenly, a military outpost sprouted up in the Iraq desert: it was Israel in its bombing campaign of Iran In Xataka | While everyone was looking at Hormuz, Russia has found a much more important route to supply drones to Iran

There are people who buy plants to purify the air in their home. The reality is that you are wasting your time

by

When we want to give a little life to our homes, the first thing we think about is putting in several plants with the idea that, in addition to giving it a more natural touch, they will also clean the air we breathe. And it’s no wonder, because all you have to do is take a look around the internet or through the hallways of any nursery to find us. with the promise that pothos, mother-in-law’s tongue or ribbon are “natural purifiers” that eliminate toxins. But It’s not like that. The origin of the idea. To understand why we blindly believe in the purifying power of the plants that we can have in our home, the responsibility lies with NASA and its classic studies published in the 80s. Here, in their quest to find ways to clean the air on space stations, researchers placed different plants in hermetically sealed chambers and injected volatile organic compounds that were partly removed by the plants. This was very relevant, but the extrapolation to the general population, not so much. And these investigations were carried out in an airtight chamber in a laboratory, and at the moment a home or an office is not hermetically closed, but there is the possibility of air constantly entering and leaving through windows, doors or cracks. But this detail has not resonated so much with the population. A bath of reality. This arrived in 2019, where a study from Drexel University analyzed a dozen previous studies to evaluate actual plant performance using a standard metric: the clean air delivery rate, or CADR. Here the conclusion reached is that potted plants do not improve indoor air quality in a relevant way. And the explanation is purely mechanical, since the normal ventilation of any building eliminates volatile organic compounds at a rate faster than the absorption capacity of an indoor plant. Size matters. With this premise, for the plants to match the purification achieved by the ventilation system of a standard building or the simple act of opening windows, you would need between 10 and 1,000 plants per square meter. I mean, you would have to literally turn your living room into a dense, impassable rainforest to notice the difference. Very controlled exceptions. This does not mean that all pro-plant studies lie, but rather that context is everything, since some studies point to a decrease in CO₂ levels. A notable example is a study conducted in a school in Portugal, where flower pots were introduced into classrooms and an improvement in the air was measured. However, the scientists themselves warn that these are highly specific and controlled environments and their results cannot be mathematically extrapolated to what happens in the living room of a normal apartment or in a standard office. There is no evidence. Given all this that we already know, the authorities are sharp noting that there is no evidence that a reasonable number of indoor plants remove significant amounts of pollutants in homes and offices. What do we have to do? In order to improve air quality inside the home, the important thing here is to reduce the use of chemicals and avoid smoking indoors. In addition, opening the windows every day to renew the air is the key measure, as well as the installation of air purifiers, which are almost mandatory in many cases for people who have significant allergies. Images | freepik In Xataka | The countries that pollute the most in the world, gathered in a detailed graph

The United Kingdom has just activated an unprecedented air mission over a lost island in the Atlantic. There is a hantavirus suspect

by

In 1961, a nurse had to be urgently evacuated from Tristan da Cunha after a volcanic eruption forced completely vacate to the entire population of the remote island. For weeks, that small territory lost in the middle of the Atlantic remembered something that remains true today: when an emergency occurs there, arriving on time can become an extremely complicated operation even for a country like the United Kingdom. The forgotten island of the Atlantic. While dozens of passengers from the MV Hondius cruise They began to disembark in Tenerife between health checks and repatriation flights for a hantavirus outbreakmuch further south and far from the cameras, the United Kingdom has started an operation completely different on an island that almost no one would know how to locate on a map. Tristan da Cunha, considered the most remote inhabited island on the planet, has suddenly become the scene of a unprecedented air mission for British forces after a british citizen showed symptoms compatible with hantavirus after leaving MV Hondius. With just 221 inhabitants, no airport and almost a week by boat from the nearest major port in South Africa, the island was caught in an extremely delicate situation when oxygen reserves began to run out and the small local medical system found itself unable to face the risk of contagion and isolation alone. An unprecedented military mission. The British response was as extraordinary as the place where he was to be executed. The Royal Air Force mobilized an Airbus A400M Atlas from RAF Brize Norton accompanied by a Voyager tanker plane to carry paratroopers, doctors and tons of medical supplies to the middle of the Atlantic. There was no possible landing strip, so the United Kingdom took a unprecedented decision: drop military doctors by parachute over the island. Six members of the 16 Air Assault Brigade They jumped alongside a doctor and an intensive care nurse in an extremely complex operation marked by strong winds and a minimal margin for error. The jump was made practically over the ocean before to correct the trajectory towards the island, with the real risk of ending up falling directly into the Atlantic if something went wrong. Never before have British forces deployed medical personnel by parachute drop on a humanitarian mission of this type. Medical supplies were dropped on the remote island, which has no landing strip and has a population of just 221. The cruise ship that took the problem to the middle of the ocean. It all began weeks before aboard the MV Hondius, the expedition cruise ship that was sailing through the South Atlantic when it appeared a hantavirus outbreak which would end up leaving several dead and multiple confirmed cases. The case has been of particular concern because the identified variant belonged to the Andean strain, one of the few capable of be transmitted between people. Apparently, the British citizen who ended up isolated in Tristan da Cunha had abandoned ship mid April and began to develop symptoms days later on an island that, as we said, does not have advanced hospital capacity and is normally cared for by just two medical professionals. While some passengers were treated in the Netherlands or South Africa and others were isolated in the United Kingdom After returning from Tenerife, the British health authorities quickly understood that the real problem was no longer on the cruise ship, but in that small isolated community in the middle of the ocean where any worsening could turn into a emergency impossible to manage with conventional means. Geography as a threat. Plus: the operation revealed the extent to which geography continues to condition even to countries with enormous military capabilities. Tristan da Cunha has no airport, no regular air routes and its sea connections are extremely slow and limited. Simply evacuating paratroopers and medics after the mission will require a complex maritime operation carefully planned due to health risk. I was counting a few hours ago BBC that the jump was not made over a large open space either, but rather over a small island buffeted by winds that usually exceed 40 kilometers per hour. The soldiers, in fact, ended up landing at the local golf course while the island’s inhabitants improvised receiving medical equipment and unloading more than three tons of supplies for the hospital. All this to contain a possible contagion in a territory where any logistical failure can take days to correct. The unknown Atlantic. If you will, history also reveals an uncomfortable reality about major modern health and geopolitical crises: almost all the attention tends to be focused on in visible places and connected while huge peripheral spaces remain out of focus until an emergency breaks out. Thus, while the media focus has followed the arrival of the cruise ship to the Canary Islands minute by minute, the hantavirus has ended up activating parachute dropsmilitary doctors and extreme logistical operations on Tristan da Cunha, a place so remote that even a relatively small health emergency forced resources to be mobilized normally associated with war scenarios or major catastrophes. Image | Ministry of Defense In Xataka | It is not so contagious, but it is very lethal: in Argentina the hantavirus went from 17% to 33% in the blink of an eye In Xataka | We believed that hantavirus did not jump between humans. Until someone went to a birthday party in Argentina

Fitbit Air, features, price and technical sheet

by

Fitbit seemed to have remained in the background within the Google ecosystem, almost like a brand that remained there by inertia while the prominence fell to the PixelWatch. Now come back with Fitbit Aira simple and light bracelet, which points just in the opposite direction to that of many smart watches: fewer visible functions, less complications and a more contained price. The paradox is that this return of hardware also comes with a less obvious reading: the brand, loved by many users, is beginning to become increasingly diluted within the search giant. It is not just any release within the Google catalog. The Fitbit Air is Fitbit’s first hardware device in almost four years, so its arrival could be read as a small resurrection for the brand. But the entire movement points in another direction. Google bought Fitbit a few years ago for $2.1 billion and, since then, it has been bringing this technology increasingly closer to its own ecosystem. Now the step is even more visible: Google is already presenting the old Fitbit app under the name Google Health, a step that reveals part of its strategy. Fitbit Air technical sheet Fitbit Air dimensions and weight Length: 34.9mm Width: 17mm height: 8.3mm 5.2g without strap 12g with strap Memory Saves 7 days of detailed minute-by-minute motion data. Save 1 day of training data Save daily totals for the last 30 days Stores heart rate data in 2 second intervals battery and charging Up to 7 days of autonomy Lithium polymer battery Charge from 0 to 100% in 90 minutes connectivity Bluetooth 5.0 sensors Optical heart rate monitor Three-axis accelerometer Red and infrared sensors to monitor oxygen saturation (SpO2) On-device temperature sensor (skin temperature variation available in the Google Health app) vibration motor Endurance Water resistant up to 50 meters. colors Obsidian, mist gray, raspberry, lavender price From 99.99 euros A simple bracelet for a much more ambitious strategy Fitbit Air is quick to understand because it doesn’t try to do everything. It has no screen, it has no buttons and you don’t want to become another device to look at every few minutes. The idea is simpler: you put it on, wear it during the day or at night and let it record activity, sleep and some health metrics without asking you too much attention. We are looking at a product that weighs 12 grams with the strap and 5.2 grams without it, so Google’s promise seems to go in the direction of having more functions in sight as well as wearing something comfortable that almost disappears on the wrist. That simplicity doesn’t mean that the Fitbit Air arrives empty inside. It incorporates an optical heart rate sensor, gyroscope, accelerometer, blood oxygen sensor and skin temperature sensor for sleep monitoring. It also withstands immersion up to 50 meters and promises seven days of battery life on a charge, plus one day of use with five minutes plugged in. Another important detail is that it can work simultaneously with a Pixel Watch. So it doesn’t seem designed for you if you just want to respond to messages, receive notifications, or have a screen full of data on your wrist. That’s what smart watches are already for. But if you are looking for a simple way to measure your activity, your rest and some health signals without getting too complicated, Fitbit Air may be an option to consider. It also fits if you already have a Pixel Watch and prefer to leave the watch for the day, but wear something lighter to sleep or train. The other big change you will not notice on your wrist, but on your mobile. If you used Fitbit as a reference application, as we pointed out above, that space is renamed Google Health. Google’s idea is to bring together health monitoring, wellness data and personalized coaching, all in one place. The change also involves integrating Health Connect, the Android layer designed to organize health data between applications. On paper, it may seem like just a name change, but it says a lot about what’s happening: Fitbit continues to appear on the band, while the daily experience begins to move more and more towards Google. The subscription layer also changes location. Google explains that Fitbit Premium becomes Google Health Premium. This is where the most ambitious features come in, such as the personal health coach integrated with Gemini, plans that adapt to progress, rest and recovery, or the possibility of receiving more personalized information on well-being. Price and availability of Google Fitbit Air in Spain Google Fitbit Air can now be reserved in Spain from 99.99 euros. The device also includes a three-month trial of Google Health Premium for new members, with subsequent automatic renewal for 8.99 euros per month if not canceled. The colors and finishes available are the following: Obsidianwith matte black stainless steel buckle Fog graywith polished silver stainless steel buckle Raspberrywith polished champagne gold stainless steel buckle Lavenderwith polished silver stainless steel buckle Images | Google In Xataka | A Chinese company has created AI glasses without a camera. Their message is very simple: they are not spying on you.

Now we know that the Iranian Air Force did to the US what Ukraine could not do to Russia with drones: an abysmal hole

by

During the Vietnam War, American commanders discovered that some of their most protected bases they could be hit unexpectedly due to coordinated attacks low costforcing to reinforce defenses that until then were considered sufficient and making it clear that, in war, the feeling of security is usually more fragile than it seems. The blow that no one expected. For decades, the US military architecture in the Middle East relied on in a network of bases designed to surround and contain Iran, a direct heir to the Cold War doctrine and designed to project power quickly. However, a report that came to light this weekend on NBC News has revealed a radical inversion of that logic in the war of 2026: what was supposed to be a shield has become a set of exposed objectives, hit in a coordinated manner by Iranian attacks that hit more than a hundred targets in several countries. We are talking about critical infrastructures such as runways, radars, hangars, command centers or defense systems were damaged or destroyed, and the impact was neither marginal nor symbolic, but structuralaffecting the very functioning of the US deployment in the region. The fence that ended up surrounded. The system of bases in Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, the Emirates or Saudi Arabia was designed to suffocate Iran, but its ability to attack key logistics nodes turned the equation around. How much? It appears that critical facilities were left disabled or evacuatedincluding the headquarters of the Fifth Fleet in Bahrainwhile multiple bases in Iraq and Kuwait had to be abandoned or rendered inoperative. The pressure was such that even the resupply became problematicleaving the American forces themselves in a position close to the siege they intended to impose. The encirclement strategy, which seemed unquestionable for decades, suddenly showed its fragility in the face of an adversary with saturation capacity through missiles, drones and aviation. The hole that changes war. What is most revealing is not only the extent of the damage, but what they represent for Washington: for the first time in years, a rival has managed to systematically drill US military infrastructure at multiple points at once. Iran not only hit bases, but achieved something that until now seemed beyond the reach of other recent conflicts: opening a deep and sustained hole in the defensive framework of the United States, affecting radarsair defenses and strategic assets. That ability to simultaneously degrade multiple layers of the system is reminiscent of what other actors have tried unsuccessfully in wars like the one in Ukraine, but here it translated in real effects on the ground, altering the operational balance and forcing us to rethink the assumed superiority. From control to operational chaos. The middle counted American that the intensity of the attacks and the speed with which they occurred generated a scenario of disorganization that overwhelmed the usual command and control mechanisms. Bases evacuatedemergency relocated personnel and even improvised situations what do we countsuch as the use of civil infrastructure, reflect the extent to which operational pressure broke the planned patterns. Plus: the inability to anticipate and managing the real scope of the attacks, added to the lack of clear communication about the damage, fueled the perception of an overwhelmed response to a type of more distributed warfaster and harder to contain. A cost beyond money. Although initial estimates speak of billions dollars in repairs (not counting advanced systems or unrecoverable equipment), the true impact possibly transcends the economic. What has been affected is the military deployment model itself: the idea that a network of advanced bases guarantees regional control. In other words, the war has shown that, faced with an adversary capable of to attack in depth with means relatively accessiblethis hitherto untouchable network may become a rather critical vulnerability. The result in the pavement American is not only a balance sheet of damages, but a strategic warning that forces us to give more than one turn to its scheme of how military power is projected in a world where distance is already does not protect the same. Image | x In Xataka | If the war resumes again, the US runs a risk unprecedented in the history of war: that the only one with missiles will be Iran. In Xataka | If the question is why the US attacked an Iranian ship with a weapon unprecedented in 40 years, we already know the answer: a “gift from China”

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.