CA's tougher emission standards valid and have scientific basis

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by Ugg, Mar 24, 2006.

  1. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #1
    Link

    bushco was attempting to limit California's ability to force automakers to meet more stringent air pollution standards. This is a big win for air quality in California and also for gas mileage standards across the nation. It's also a big win for states' rights.
     
  2. Kingsly macrumors 68040

    Kingsly

    #2
    Lord knows we need it.
     
  3. WildCowboy Administrator/Editor

    WildCowboy

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2005
    #3
    In spite of our great emission standards, we still have the second dirtiest air in the country. And given that we're on the West Coast, we can't blame other states for blowing their smoke our way.
     
  4. Ugg thread starter macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #4
    Desertrat posted something the other day that up to a third of California's air pollution might be coming from China.
     
  5. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #5
    Science? Well that's fine for blue states, but where's the faith-based report for the red states?
     
  6. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #6
    Yeah, "up to" or "as much as" one-third of air pollutants are traced back to China, per an article on energy use, Chinese development and such.

    To me, a scary thing about the California air quality is that I know from observation how much worse it was back forty years ago. Visual pollution as to particulate matter, anyway. I once saw--1967, IIRC--from 30,000 feet, the entire LA Basin was invisible due to an inverted bowl of yellow brown smog. Houston was about the same, in those days.

    You think back to 100 years ago, when those "far-sighted" LA folks were using the Congress to rip off the water rights of Arizona and Colorado to create the All-American Canal, and using the Cal legislature (through the years) to rip off the folks in the Owens Valley and in Northern Cal. The name "Mulholland" comes to mind; several others but I'm blanked for the moment.

    My point is that without all that stolen water, the LA Basin would not have grown like cancer to the mess that it is today..."California's colon cancer"?

    'Rat
     
  7. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #7
    Upon first visiting L.A., I was taken aback with how close the air quality in western Los Angeles was (even during afternoon rush hour) to the air quality in my neck of the woods, here in rural southeastern Pennsylvania. (The valley is much worse than either. Pea soup.)

    I guess we can thank Michigan, Illinois, Indiana and Ohio and the superstacks that hold the junk aloft just long enough to land on us.
     
  8. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #8
    pseudobrit, air-mass movement is from west to east.

    Air movement from east to west is a localized phenomenon and is short-term, as low-pressure centers pull air in--but the movement of the centers also is from west to east.

    'Rat
     
  9. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #9
    Well, all the weather in the L.A. basin is highly localized.
     
  10. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #10
    Most of the time, in the northern hemisphere. But retrogrades aren't at all uncommon and can happen on a pretty large scale. Every year, nearly, coastal Southern California gets monsoonal systems that back in from New Mexico and Arizona, and of course we are also frequently treated to our infamous Santa Ana winds, which originate from high pressure centers in the Great Basin of Utah, and can produce 50+ knot surface winds all the way the coast and beyond.

    Anyway, your observations about the LA Basin's air 30 or more years ago are right on. Air quality in this region is measurably and visually much better than it was. When I moved here during the mid-70s, the air was often so filthy during the summer, I often didn't even want to go outdoors.
     
  11. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #11
    It's been hard to stay ahead of the game. We come up with far more fuel-efficent cars, and we have more people who drive more and commute farther. We put scrubbers on coal-fired power plants, and an expanding population and growing economy demand more electricity.

    But we've reclaimed Lake Erie from "dead" status, and the Cuyahoga River won't again catch fire.

    I look at where we were vs. where we are on environmental protection, and it's hard to get as emotional about the problems of today as I was about "the way it wuz" in the mid-1960s.

    Interesting side-effect of NEPA '69: The Trinity River Authority issed bonds in the mid-1960s to finance Lake Livingston, intending to sell water to industries on the Houston Ship Channel. However, the mandated cleanup of effluents meant that a lot of re-cycling occurred. TRA darned near went broke, in large part because the inflow from Dallas on downstream was not as clean as the re-cycled water.
     
  12. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #12
    Yeah, as long as you cant SEE the pollution, who cares, right? Mercury, lead, PCBs, VOCs, MTBE, all that stuff in our waterways and our air? But hey, as long as it's not creating an awful smoggy airmass over a city -- everything's hunky dory! No reason to get all 'emotional' over something you can't see...
     
  13. Desertrat macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2003
    Location:
    Terlingua, Texas
    #13
    mac, there is less now than there was then. Nobody's said that all's well and rosy wonderful. What's more important than your huffing and puffing is that the cleanup process is ongoing.

    'Rat
     
  14. Ugg thread starter macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #14
    You're right on both points but the whole point of this thread is to point out the fact that the bush administration attempted to limit California's ability to clean up the air through higher CAFE standards. The pendulum always swings back and forth but when it gets stuck at one end or the other it's bad for all involved.
     
  15. StarbucksSam macrumors 65816

    StarbucksSam

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    #15
    I want to see a federal tax of $0.15/mile every year for people who buy new cars starting in 2008 that get mileage of less than 20 per gallon (EPA estimate) and have the threshold raised to 25 mpg by 2012. I'm dead serious.

    Someone who drives their Hummer 15k miles per year might think twice if they had to spend an extra $2,250 for doing severe damage to the environment.

    I'M NOT SAYING:

    "Do this on all cars and make it retroactive."
    "Apply it to used cars purchased after 2008."
     
  16. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #16
    i still think the solution is to increase gas taxes a little bit every year. when i first proposed this, i wanted the target to be $5 gallon, but that was when gas was cheaper.

    i say let's make it $7 within 3 years. that should:
    1. incent manufacturers to make more efficient cars
    2. change driving habits
    3. increase demand for better public transportation
     
  17. tristan macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2003
    Location:
    high-rise in beautiful bethesda
    #17
    What do you do with all of that tax money though? Hopefully it would go to build some decent public transportation. I don't want to drive 20mi to work every day, but I can do it in 35 mins each way (I go off hours), while public transportation would probably take 75-90 mins.
     
  18. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #18
    1. fund research into and implementation of alternative energies
    2. build / maintain public transportation
     
  19. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #19
    Is "incent" a word?
     
  20. StarbucksSam macrumors 65816

    StarbucksSam

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Location:
    Washington, D.C.
    #20
    Why would you want to punish EVERYONE for some people's bad behavior? My cars gets 30/40 to the gallon - and I picked THAT car because of THAT reason among others. The people you SHOULD be targeting with taxes are the ones who are driving 5000 pound Yukon Denalis that get 11 miles to a gallon! I know someone who has one of those, lives alone, has no kids, and nothing to transport - that seems reprehensible to me.
     
  21. skunk macrumors G4

    skunk

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2002
    Location:
    Republic of Ukistan
    #21
    Well obviously if you're getting 30/40 to the gallon and he's getting 11, he's the one paying the greater penalty already.
     
  22. zimv20 macrumors 601

    zimv20

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    toronto
    #22
    barely
     
  23. Ugg thread starter macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #23
    Maybe he has a supersized-ego that is too fragile to be transported in low mileage cars :D One thing he obviously has is no concern for the environment nor the future of this country.
     
  24. IJ Reilly macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #24
    True, but we all have to pay the wasteful use price.
     
  25. pseudobrit macrumors 68040

    pseudobrit

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    Jobs' Spare Liver Jar
    #25
    Because the undesirable condition here is dependence on oil, not some arbitrary bad mileage figure.

    There is of course a solution that does not involve punishing the consumer at all and it's simple: raise the CAFE standards significantly and apply them equally across the fleet of trucks and cars collectively.
     

Share This Page