Reader comments
Support California's emissions efforts

Don't just blame Ford, Chrysler and GM ( not that the author did)but the Japanese automakers lobbied very aggressively against these increased standards.
I'm all for clean air but I'd rather not have the Government make the decision for me about what kind of car I should drive. If we don't have free markets then we as well be living in Communist Cuba or China. When you start overregulating businesses then you start lowering your citizens standards of living - not to mention taking away freedom of choice in what is supposed to be a free country.
I respect Mr French's views but I think that like a lot of environmentalists (e.g. Al Gore) they aren't very realistic. Not everyone can ride a bike to work - some people need larger vehicles for work and some people just like to have a little more steel around them when they drive ( I think I'd rather take a chance of dying from air pollution than die of massive head injuries because I was struck by a vehicle while biking to work)
Maybe California should just secede from the rest of the country - I won't lose any sleep over it

Mr. French has made some valid points about CO2 polution and about one way to reduce CO2 polution. Will driving cars with lower emmissions work? In my opinion, they will, but only to a very small extent. When a company is ordered by the government to change the way that it manufactures a product, the normal and natural costs that are part of a product's natural evolutionary improvement are shelved, and extensive costs are incurred by the manufacturer. Those costs are passed on to the consumer. When a product costs too much, the consumer refuses to buy. When a consumer decides to NOT buy a new, more efficient automobile, he will continue to drive his old less efficent automobile until it falls apart, then he will replace it with another used inefficient automobile.

Instead of reducing CO2 emmisions, government meddling could just as easily keep more old and inefficient automobiles on the road and actually increase CO2 emmisions.

I'm waiting for the usual, "there is no problem, this is just another commie, liberal tree-hugger lie that Al Gore is making up - Vote Republican!"

Californias emmisions reduction the way Arnold wanted is worthless. Al Gore says we will all be dead by then. And the EPA chief just knows he's right, so what does it matter if we die a month later because CA reduced their greenhouse gasses a small fraction? Or is it because the vast majority of Americans know this is a crock?

Maybe the auto industry knows about the parent in the UK who sued the government there for showing an inconvenient truth to his kids. He said propaganda is against UK law, so he sued and won. The judge showed it contained 9 blatant lies. Take your lies, and go somewhere safe. If you believe global warming is caused by man, I have some iceberg front property in Antarctica I'd like to sell you!

Let's ban automobiles and bring back the horse.

Mahershalalhashbaz-
I am not challenging the truth of what you say, but could you providea reference or a searchable key word. I can't seem to find this.

Mahershalalhashbaz-
Nice that you referenced that suit. Except that the court sided with the school district and the truth came out that he was fully funded by coal and oil industry sources. Hmmmmm. Thats a bit different than you represented it. Use the search words "inconvenient truth" "lawsuit" "UK" and CBS (or any major news group if you hate CBS). This is a typical way that the Global-Warming-Is-
A-Fraud people use evidence. They take something that proves the exact opposite of what they believe and represent it as supporting their possition.

Since Mr.French is so concerned about CO2 emissions, I propose he get the UN to sponsor a "No Breath Day", as every mammal on the earth emmits CO2, 24/7/365 for 80+ years, if your the average US human. Maybe we can have Al Gore be the leader and set the example and be the first to stop breathing for the day. We can repeat again next year if necessary.

I see by some of the far-right postings above, Rush Limbaugh has been working his magic on people once again.

Hey Maherblahblah!
Why not step outside and take a whiff of that beautiful yellow-brown air?
Head-clearing, isn't it?

To "Carbon Footprint". There's a long way to go from sensible regulation to Communist China. Perhaps you ought to turn off the radio. The fact of the matter is that your stinkpot SUV is putting crap into the air I have to breathe. I don't give a hoot if you poison yourself. It's the rest of us I care about.

QUOTE FROM ARTICLE: "Many of us have been held hostage when an inversion moves in and starts trapping poisons from auto tailpipes and coal-fired power plants for us to breathe......The consequences of air pollution are something that we should not have to live with or die from. I fear that we can't even imagine the consequences of out-of-control global warming."

This type of hyperbole is typical from the global warming zealots who purposely and sometimes ignorantly confuse pollution with so called "greenhouse gases". Many of the doom sayers have no idea that greenhouse gases consist of primarily water vapor and carbon dioxide with much smaller amounts of ozone and methane. These "poisons" are quite essential for our survival on the earth.

It seems apparent from some of the comments in this thread that change is okay as long as it doesn't cost anyone anything and the government is not involved.

Having automakers manufacture more fuel-efficient cars is desirable. Having the costs included in the price of the cars is reasonable business practice. Like seat belts, there will always be some who decry the change, but these people are in that very small community who are afraid of change.

As for government mandating these changes, it seems there continues to be those same few who fear change and try to blame government for making us change. If there was a town meeting and a majority of attendees voted to change something to make the community better and that affected everyone in the community, it is clear that a few disgruntled residents would complain about the "mandated" change.

I see the liberal do-gooders are out in full force this morning. They can't address the points made by us "Far Right"(I prefer eductated) people, even if our comments are a bit crude. So they resort to name calling and and attacking a persons logical thought process.

The global climate change zealots don't have a good near term record, missed the next ice age that was supposed to occur in the 70's, and since NASA corrected their data on global temperatures, currently its not quite so hot as was once thought when compared to historical records. Prove that CO2 is a cause of global warming, and I'll take your crys of doom and gloom seriously. In god we trust, everyone else has to prove it with data. A good theory is not data!

Let's thank the Publicans for their point of view and their lemming like rush to pollute the nest.

Darwin came up with the "survival of the fittest" theory, and unfortunately, we cannot direct the results. The good news though, is that if Publicans keep insisting on soiling the nest, they too will die off. Just not enough of them, or soon enough.

Do Publicans have some sort of "crazy/greed gene" that makes them want to get more all the time, and destroy themselves (and us) in the process?

To Anonymous 8:51 am. Go to wikipedia and do a search for dimmock v secretary of state for education and skills. It will give you more info about the case and links than you can stand.

To AlpacaFamilia: Who cares who paid for it. Of course you have two opposing sides with opposing views and opposing money in opposition. Thats why you go to an impartial judge to settle a disagreement. And who won? Thats right. The parent.

RE: Dick Willardson - I believe Mr. French correctly referred to source of the pollutants in inversion trapped air; his last sentence makes an analogous comparison to global warming consequences. The article is largely about improving emission standards, not global warming. Who's getting hyperbolic, Dick?

I don't see any yellow-brown air. I see Way cleaner air than back in the 60's before the catalitic converter. It's the pot smoking your doing in your house that is causing the yellow brown air!

to "Dick", yea and water is essential for life as well, but if you drink enough, it can kill you. It upsets me that the inane comments of you and others stand in the way of improving our air quality. The air that my young children breathe. Anyone paying attention knows that CO2 is the greenhouse gas we're talking about.