Deseret News | Reader comments: Air standards violated

Reader comments
Air standards violated

Thomas Paine | 3:08 a.m. March 13, 2008

It's very difficult to believe the measurements cited in this story. Box Elder County is mostly empty. At the very least, add more sensors in the outlying reaches and take a full sampling of the entire county... not just the 10 acres around Nucor and the industrial park in Tremonton.

Bob G | 5:58 a.m. March 13, 2008

Here comes the people driving their car accusations again. The truth be known its the local busineses driving air poluting vehicles that do not go through any state emission inspections. The state law exempts all vehicles of 1 ton and higher from emission inspections. The only emission requirement for business vehicles is an emissitivity test, it can't be visible. Which means as long as it can't be seen by the naked eye it is not a polluter, but we all know this is the wrong answer. And if anyone ever notices that during the daytime use of the roads and freeways there are more emissions exempt trucks than cars on the road. The automobile industry has cleaned up the family cars but nothing has been done about the businesses causing the major part of air polution in Utah. Utah should tax these vehicles on a mileage basis as well as a value basis. Businesses should not be allowed to ignore their major part of the problem in air polution. On a non tax deductible mileage tax they would drive less often and combine deliveries and reduce the number of vehicles they put on the roads. Fewer deliveries equals less pollution.

LOL | 6:24 a.m. March 13, 2008

We should deport them for being illegal!

Comments continue below

Free Market | 7:32 a.m. March 13, 2008

Let the free market solve this problem -- how about a tax cut?

Mahonri | 7:40 a.m. March 13, 2008

Wow, they violated the air standards. First thing to do is find every Federal Employee and shut off their power, lock away their car keys and help stop the pollution. Leadership starts from the Top so hit these leeches first.

Ah Hem | 8:08 a.m. March 13, 2008

Ever followed a school bus? The smoke and fumes GAG you....lucky them, they don't have to follow standards......

Anonymous | 8:10 a.m. March 13, 2008

It's good to see a practical and informative reporting on this subject. Normally, a story will show only the negative and not how air quality is getting better. We all care about the environment and need to settle down, collect our thoughts, and come up with reasonable and achievable solutions. There's no need to point fingers and scream. Instead, we need to first, all pitch in, and second, add more focus to the problem areas.

We have geographical challenges to air pollution that other states don't have. I appreaciate the go-getter attitude of our leadership in attacking the problem. It would be much easier for them to get negative and complain that EPA keeps raising the standard to much harder to achieve levels. You don't get any of that from them, only positive.

Anonymous | 8:35 a.m. March 13, 2008

Meanwhile I think I'll just step outside and take a deep breath and enjoy the sweet-smelling brownish-orange air that fills my lungs.

Last Breath | 8:56 a.m. March 13, 2008

Who cares about air quality anyway? Money in our pockets is the most important thing. I think everyone can agree to that. I am with the other comments...except let's go further. I think we should place all of the air monitoring sensors on mountain tops in the most remote portion of each county. Then we can all agree that our air quality is great. Yeah we will lose more children and elderly folks because of our deceptive air quality results, but we can justify that with the extra money that we save. You gotta go somehow, right? The key is to not be responsible for our actions. I think we all know that the more responsible we are for our actions the less satisfaction we get out of life. Who could argue with that? I think President Bush would back me up on that point. Bottom line, if we love our country, we must take corrective action now to diminish the air quality in Utah. Once we succeed, if we have enough oxygen content in our air left we should move onto destroying other natural resources. It's the right thing to do.

Yes, a tax cut would work | 9:01 a.m. March 13, 2008

Since ozone pollution is caused primarily by automobiles/trucks, and since older models emit more pollutants than newer ones, simply removing the sales tax on new vehicles would help cut pollution by making it more affordable to buy a new car.

More new cars equals less pollution.

The new ozone standard is only a little lower than the current standard; I don't think this will be as hard for us to meet as the new standards for particulate matter will be.

RE: Last Breath | 9:19 a.m. March 13, 2008

I couldn't have said it better myself. Sadly it seems as though money takes a far greater precedence over environmental quality because money is readily available to spend right now. Unfortunately, people don't seem to care about the state of the environment because it's not a "fix right now" and move on kind of thing. The benefits are a little more abstract, and very few will seem to care until it's too late. We need to move away from an instant gratification way of life and look at the long term benefits or drawbacks. It reminds me of diets and exercising. People can't stick with it because it's a LIFESTYLE, and the benefits will be reaped subtly over time. This same principle may be applied to improving the quality of our environment.

Timj | 9:30 a.m. March 13, 2008

No sales tax on new vehicles?
Sorry, but some older vehicles get great gas mileage and don't pollute all that much.
People with older vehicles are already taxed more on a yearly basis.
I know gas is real expensive right now, but if you're going to adjust taxes, how about increasing gas tax? You don't pollute a lot, you don't pay a lot of extra tax. You drive an SUV 60 miles every day, pollute a ton, and you pay a lot of extra tax.

Thank you Utah Legislature | 9:55 a.m. March 13, 2008

The Utah Legislature deserves credit for being serious about this issue. They appropriated money this session for better monitoring and implementation and also appropriated money to help retrofit school buses.

The media and Democrats love to complain about the Legislature but this illustrates how serious and competent they are.

Thank you.

Spanky | 10:05 a.m. March 13, 2008

Absolutely, a tax cut is what we need to pay for cleaning up the air and meeting the new standards. Especially a tax cut for the wealthy. That way they could buy, oh say a couple of new suvs, maybe a new pickup, 2 new 4 wheelers, possibly even a new boat. Then they could sell their old suvs, pickup, 4 wheelers, and boat to us poor little people and we could go out into the wilderness and foul the air a little more. That would necessitate a new tax cut for the wealthy, who could buy new cars, etc, and on, and on, and on. Yeah, a tax cut solves everthing.

We can do better | 10:12 a.m. March 13, 2008

I agree that the tax on gas should be increased. It only hurts the wallet until you switch to cheaper alternatives (Trax, bus, carpool, bike, walking).

How about a significant tax credit for purchasing a car (new or used) that gets good gas mileage? Every time I drive I am shocked to see individuals (as opposed to more than one person) driving around in SUVs. Talk about dumb.

I live in an area where many parents drop their kids off at school and then pick them up later. Parents should not idle their cars in the drop-off and pick-up zone. I wish there were signs.

UTA needs to have an incentive to switch to better cleaner buses as do school districts. The air is so important.

A pretty great place? | 10:13 a.m. March 13, 2008

We think we live in a beautiful state. We are proud of the natural amenities here. Clean air should be one of them.

Yuck! | 10:15 a.m. March 13, 2008

Ozone pollution causes respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, throat inflammation, chest pain, and congestion.

KM | 10:32 a.m. March 13, 2008

Yes, socialism, in the name of environmentalism.

NEW CAR | 11:22 a.m. March 13, 2008

I'd buy a new honda civic except for the fact that I don't want to give another 1400.00 to the state in sales tax (I've already bought one new car this year)

How about raising the standards so that we can pollute more?

John | 11:19 a.m. March 13, 2008

we should stop taxing people all together.

To Thank You | 11:28 a.m. March 13, 2008

Are you serious? The Legislature saw this coming. They had no choice but to act. The only smart thing they did was "try to act" before getting busted. Get a life and get your head out of the sand. The republicans here are the worse and if they could avoid it, they wouldn't have bothered with this.

Democrats complain because they are in the minority and cannot get anything done with the republican majority. Give them credit where credit is deserved.

leroy | 11:43 a.m. March 13, 2008

So Zion is polluted? Who did it? Pogo says: we have met the enemy and it is us...

Yah want clean air, land, and water? You have to enact laws and enforce them. Anything else leads to failure. Don't believe me?

Look outside: there is your answer. Freedom comes with societal responsibilities.

Good ol' Morning News | 12:07 p.m. March 13, 2008

The new standard was announced yesterday. The violations could only have been for Wednesday. Were there violations yesterday? Do you think the reporter was trying to be dramatic?

Anonymous | 12:05 p.m. March 13, 2008

How about finally doing emissions on the diesel pickups that people get chipped for "more power" yet dont bother to get the valves tuned to adjust for the after market fuel mixture. Everytime they stomp on it when the light goes green it billows out a huge plume of black smoke. They can get their engine adjusted to have the power and be cleaner but will they? Not till they are forced to do it or not get tags the next year on their truck. Or how about those ghetto vehicles that are pouring out blue smoke everywhere they go, time for smog police.

I drive my personal vehicle for a living, its tuned and maintained for better emissions than it came from the factory with. People can complain about big business pollution all they want, they should still DO something about their own vehicle, start small and do something where you CAN make a difference right off. Government is slow, you can fix up your vehicle over a weekend.

Member | 12:19 p.m. March 13, 2008

It is going to cost way too much to meet the requirement of the Clean Air Act and why should we waste Utahï¿½s tax dollars when Mitt Romney is going to be elected vice president and will save the constitution and Jesus will come back and fix it anyhow?

MK | 12:33 p.m. March 13, 2008

Yes, fascism, in the name of conservatism.

Thinkin' Man | 12:44 p.m. March 13, 2008

Why are all cities subject to the same standards when they are all in different geographic locations? Coastal cities, for example, could get away with emitting a much greater amount of air pollution than SLC but it would simply blow away because of where they are. Wind doesn't always clear out the valleys of western Utah. So in effect, Salt Lake area is being held to a higher standard.

It's not fair.

All is okay | 1:30 p.m. March 13, 2008

There are no problems with our environment
There is no harm in breathing car exhaust fumes
The #1 polluter in the US is Magnesium Corporation of Salt Lake City. This too, is okay.
That orange/brown haze you are breathing is fine.
Nothing at all has to be done about anything.
What should conservatives do?
Nothing.
It is already being done for them by the progressives.

Josh R | 1:59 p.m. March 13, 2008

Everyone knows that we right thinking people in the great state of Utah are the only righteous people in the world and that God has made us his chosen people because we have the one true religion. So therefore, we, as the only righteous people on the planet, have the right to do whatever we want. We can drive as many gas guzzling suvs, have as many kids, build wherever we want. And the good thing about it is that God says we can because we're his chosen people, so we don't have to take any responsibility at all! It makes life so easy.

KM | 3:00 p.m. March 13, 2008

Fasicism is socialism MK, cute, can you come up with anything on your own?

Provo too | 3:08 p.m. March 13, 2008

Let see if I measure the Utah County Air based upon a sensor located at University & Main, I would get bad readings when the trucks are at the stop light almost everytime. Not very indicative of the air in Eagle Mountain or in Payson. Isn't the science wonderful.

Unpleasant truth | 3:25 p.m. March 13, 2008

Regarding those who refuse to buy a new car by saying their old one gets better mileage, the truth is a new SUV produces fewer pounds of pollutants per mile than a 20 year-old Subaru.

(Remember, we're talking about ozone standards here, and CO2 emissions have nothing to do with ozone production)

If you car is more than 10 years old, then it's a polluter, unless you have installed new emissions control systems recently.

Doesn't matter if it gets 35 mpg; because it burns fuel less efficiently than a new car, it ends up producing more pollutants per mile than a 2008 Ford Expedition.

Think | 3:33 p.m. March 13, 2008

There are laws in the Clean Air Act to address transboundary pollution. There is a regional haze program etc. We need to stop complaining about inequity and start cleaning up our air. Can anyone really say that Utahns don't drive too much?

It is not that one day is out of compliance, the compliance determination is based on long term data. Those areas indicated are not in compliance with the new standard.

Are people really trying to suggest that air quality is not a problem along the Wasatch Front where most of the population of the state resides???

Where are the Saints? | 3:33 p.m. March 13, 2008

Mormons have been taught that they have stewardship over the environment. Are they taking that responsibility seriously? Does that principle allow buiding and developing anywhere and everywhere? Does it allow dumping significant quantities of pollutants into water bodies and the atmosphere?

Anonymous | 3:36 p.m. March 13, 2008

Sure KM. Just as soon as you learn to spell Fascism correctly.

Anonymous | 3:52 p.m. March 13, 2008

Mind you the feds don't tell us how to fix the problem. It's not their role. They simply step in when they discover that our pollution is killing our children and the weakest among us. Actually, the politicos in the administration are giving industry and motorists a break at the expense of peoples lives by not making the standard lower. Their own advisors say this 75 ppm stardard is not low enough. So all you belivers in the market, break out the 'market' and bring the pollution down to the proper level with out the government stepping it.

Clean Air is For Sissies | 4:14 p.m. March 13, 2008

Utah pollution is a natural environmental disaster.

Lasorda | 4:45 p.m. March 13, 2008

Better start electing some Democrats while we can still breathe.

Sunspots | 5:12 p.m. March 13, 2008

that's what it is. Sunspots. And carbon dioxide isn't a pollutant. You've all fell for Al Gore. Our air here in Spanish Fark smells great (except for the thawing cow pies).

service aspect | 5:20 p.m. March 13, 2008

Don't worry your little heads about a thing conservatives.
We Progressives are taking charge and will be making life a little better for you.

Desert Dweller | 9:26 p.m. March 13, 2008

I agree--SL county and northern UT co air quality is terrible, and something needs to be done. I don't know if the residents and legislators along the heavily populated Wasatch Front realize this, but just like down in Payson, and up north a ways from Tremonton, I am out in the desert in Tooele county. I can watch the haze blow in FROM SALT LAKE. It doesn't originate out here, or even, from what I can see when I go into Tooele on a clear day, does it originate in Tooele. It comes around the mountain from the north and flows into the valley. Gross! I have even seen it flow over into Utah valley at point of the mountain. It is disgusting.

Two prong solution? | 10:08 p.m. March 13, 2008

1. How about putting that bypass freeway in to move people around the Wasatch Front snarl--and I don't mean just around SL county to dump into Lehi! That is no solution, and would just make it even worse in Utah County. I mean the idea that was proposed over 10 years ago about taking the freeway around the western side of SL and UT valleys to move traffic through and help stop the current gridlock traffic emission problem. That would help traffic move through and get to where they need to be and not just sit and crawl and pump out so much exhaust. I know there were many against it because no one lived out there (no longer true) and it would take business away from the i-15/Hwy89-state street corridor (businesses have followed the people west, too), so those arguments are no longer valid.
2. Public transportation is fine if it goes where you need to go, when you need to go, and gets you there on time--not always possible. So, maybe work on the western freeway while expanding the train system, and serve more people, and reduce the smog! Win-win.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.