@marxist: I've paid attention to climate science for over two decades, and
I must say that the alarmists have a marvelous propaganda machine. There is NO
CORRELATION between changes in atmospheric CO2 and global temperatures. The lack
of correlation means either that there is no effect, or that any effect is
swamped by other factors. Human emissions of CO2 simply aren't a
problem.Al Gore made $100 million by selling his network to Big Oil
interests. Nobody on the skeptical side has received even the tiniest fraction
of that much funding from Big Oil. If you look at the sponsors of the recent
pro-warming AGU conference, you will find active sponsorship by Big Oil
(Chevron, Exxon Mobil, BP). The alarmists clearly have it backwards, and
it's intentionally backwards. It's propaganda.
@Marxist:You folks have had to revamp, update, reword, and spin your
bogus predictions, time and time again. First it was “global
warming”, but when things didn’t pan out, you had to cover all of
your bases and call it “climate change.” Even the UN’s IPCC
models have shown NO WARMING in 16 YEARS! Who would’ve thunk it? In 2008
you folks said the arctic ice sheets would be nearly gone. Darn! You folks who push this idea that AGW is an “established science”
are the ones who’ve had a proven track record of being WRONG! Funny, but
most of your so called “scientists” never seem to factor in the sun,
and sun spot activity. Funny you folks never seemed to be concerned that while
the Kyoto Protocol would’ve placed massive compliance mandates on the USA,
that would’ve crippled us economically, it gave a pass to India and China
(world’s biggest polluters. You also ignore the IPCC’s own reports
showing NO WARMING in 16 years. We also came to find out the University of East
Anglia in England was cooking their data to provide the result they wanted.And you folks call us deniers? Pfft.
Re: Sven "...flawed "science" of Anthropological Globull Warming?
" Climatologists predict the year everything goes upside down to be about
2050. After that the theory goes, even the coolest years will be hotter than
the years before. Unfortunately global warming is no myth. Bangladesh is
ground zero for climate warming, facing both a rising sea level and glacial
melt. It's happening. It is irresponsible to deny it and inhumane.So what to do? One option is to do nothing. Tacit in the criticism of
climate models is the assumption that Christ returns in the next fifty years -
so why worry? Maybe some of you guys need to make a prediction as to just when
this is going to happen so the rest of us can quit worrying. In fifty years I
will be safely in the grave. But what about my kids and your kids? Do you
worry about the world they will be living in? We need to be upfront about our
Take an industry...any industry; the Left will make it their mission to destroy
it. Obama has already made his disdain for the coal industry, and the electric
power plants who use this coal to fire their plants, well known (Hmmm, how will
they get the power for these CLEAN electric cars?). Ever wonder why our Dear
Leader and the Left insult our intelligence with the bogus argument and flawed
"science" of Anthropological Globull Warming? Once the
Environuts get their hooks in this, businesses who've been flocking to
Utah, will make a mass exodus, just like they did in California. Salt Lake Valley is a bowl folks. Inversions have always been here, and
always will. Maybe if we could somehow get rid of the Wasatch Mountains...hmmm?
"It's ridiculous to expect the same air quality in Salt Lake City as
Lincoln, Neb., or Washington, D.C. Quit complaining."I would
flip that and say, because Utahns live in a "bath tub" we should not
expect to drive as much, or support polluting industry as much as Lincoln,
Nebraska. Our decisions affect each other. Perhaps nowhere is that more
magnified than with the Utah air. I don't know how we as Latter-day Saints
became so anti-environmentalist when being good stewards of the earth's
resources is such a clear part of our theology.
There are certain standards of air quality that we should expect everywhere.
Will there be areas with air significantly better than the standard? Yes. Should
some areas be allowed to go below that reasonable standard? No!
It's unfortunate that there is so much emotion but no ideas for actually
improving air quality. Dr. Moench and his buddies would like to pick and choose
a few businesses to shut down, but it isn't obvious that doing so would
make any measurable difference in our air quality during inversions. (One of the
companies he would like to shut down - Stericycle - apparently provides services
to health care providers - conflict of interest, Dr. Moench?) Randomly shutting
down businesses that look like they sometimes emit pollution isn't a
rational approach to the problem.We need to understand what's
in the air and where it's coming from before we can act to reduce the
problem. We need to understand the costs of making changes to improve air
quality, and we need to understand how much difference the changes will make. We
need to figure out how to share the burden of the costs.In the
meantime, a surgical mask will filter out the fine particulates. It's cheap
and it works if you're bothered by the air.
I grew up in the Salt Lake Valley. I remember the summer days when, from
Murray, you couldn't see the mountains on either side of the valley due to
Geneva Steel and Kennecott. The usual winter temperature inversions were also
worse back then. I remember many times coming back from Alta or Brighton and
seeing the brown smudge layer on the valley floor.My personal
opinion is the air quality was worse back then than it is now. The air was so
thick in the 60's and 70's during the winter, you could cut it with a
knife. The last bout of really bad inversions I remember was in the late
80's. Since then, they've been inconvenient but nowhere near as bad.
BTW, I'll bet most Utah citizens could care less about the
Holly Refinery or would be in favor of expansion because they think gas prices
would go down. Not true but that would be the perception.
Do the people of Utah have any say in this matter? Or do only industry and their
bought off politicians?the majority of Utahns DON'T support the
Holly refinery expansion and the majority WANT higher restrictions and penalties
on industries that do not comply with the EPA. I feel like my
Democracy here in Utah is taken away. We live under an Oligarchy of crony
politicians and big industry. We the People be darned. I want my state back.
Yes!I agree with this letter writer, several of the posters, and the
Koch Brothers in that industry, which pollutes the most, should never ever ever
be held accountable. They must be allowed to produce more pollution than the EPA
allows in order to remain functional. If we don't allow them to pollute we
will all run out of gas!
A catholic convertor?????I'm sure the LDS church would love to
talk with you about loaning that some of their missionaries, george of the
" It's ridiculous to expect the same air quality in Salt Lake City as
Lincoln, Neb., or Washington, D.C. Quit complaining." But what are the
health consequences of our dirty air. If they are as bad as some say, then the
air must be cleaned up regardless of cost. That may mean slowing or stopping
growth along the Wasatch Front.
Re: ". . . i'm a 'liberal' who for some reason wants to
breath."I think you meant to say "breathe." But
that's not what you really mean.You can breathe. I can breathe.
Maybe even a little better today than when Utah really had an air quality
problem, though we got by pretty well, even then. If liberals, tree-huggers, and
parents of asthmatic children had actual evidence that productive Utah
activities affect breathing, they'd own those companies.Since
that don't, we know the real agenda here has little to do with breathing.
We'll have to look elsewhere for hidden motivations.We know
parents love their children, and would like us to try anything to make their
lives better. Whether it's wasteful and unlikely to work for them, or not.
There's an agenda.We know tree-huggers consider humans --
excepting themselves -- an undesirable infestation. There's a likely
agenda.We know socialists want government control of production.
There's another agenda.And, we know liberals crave, above all,
control of others.That's the most likely agenda.But
breathing? It's clearly not a real agenda.
@Noodlekaboodle-This can't be the typical Utah attitude - I'll
bet there were soooo many times when the pioneers wanted to give up, to pack up
there handcarts and just head back. But they didn't. They made the desert
bloom and now it is for us to figure out a way to work together to make the air
safe every single day - despite the odds!
So after removing the useless and childish name calling from proc's
comments, there really isn't much said. He mistakenly believes that Utah is
a agricultural/mining community and as such we should allow these two groups do
do as they please with little, actually No concern, for the environment because
mining communities in Utah have a history of good stewardship? The tax payers
have never been left with super-site clean-ups.Proc said:
"It'll never catch on with real people, however, so most current
liberal schemes center about, either forcing real people out, or forcing us to
submit.""Real People" don't abuse their environment
for short term financial gain, or consider living in a cleaner world a curse on
Anyone who says or thinks our air is safe is naive and uninformed, and also not
in tune with their body. Being able to breathe has become a burden during our
winter months, and effects the health and well-being of everyone who breathes
the foul, poisonous air. I've lived in Utah most of my life, and my
personal beliefs have nothing to do with the fact that I'm unable to live a
healthy life style. I think about moving away from this hell every
winter....and believe the time I do move away from my home, because it has
become too poisonous to thrive in, is just a matter of time.
So what i've learned is that you can't be from Utah and a liberal,
which is weird, because I grew up in Bountiful Utah, and i've lived her my
whole life, and i'm a "liberal" who for some reason wants to
breath. Also that because Utah has geographic challenges we should just give up,
and not try to improve air quality. I really hope that isn't the typical
"Utah" attitude, giving up when things get too hard is a cowardly way to
live you life.
This isn't about tree hugging liberals at all, and your notions about doing
a job that is "traditional Utah" are ludicrous. My husband is a native
Utahn and this state is our children's heritage. Why shouldn't we want
to protect their heritage? AND my husband is a doctor. But I guess in your eyes,
that isn't a traditional Utah profession, not productive, so all doctors
should just leave. Good luck with that the next time you are in the hospital, I
guess maybe a miner can give you a shot of whiskey and you can grin and bear it.
"Of course it's not. But that's not what tree-hugging liberals are
really asking for."Again, your lumping everyone who wants clean
air into a single sociopolitical box. All I want is to not need a horse cart of
Albuterol every winter to allow my son to breath. I say this not as an outsider
wishing to impose my beliefs on you. I was born here, I was raised here, I love
it here. You are not the victim of a liberal conspiracy. It must be truly
terrifying to see enemies everywhere.
@george of the jungle"I have a catholic converter on my wood stove.
"Probably works quite well now that there's the new Pope.
Re: ". . . to ask for SAFE air quality does not seem unreasonable."Of course it's not. But that's not what tree-hugging liberals
are really asking for.Why would they? We already have safe air.To Utah's tiny cabal of leftist, tree-hugging
"environmentalists," our State's highest and best use is as an
entertainment and alcohol-sotted petting zoo for their back-East and Left-Coast
cronies. So, if your chosen profession involves traditional Utah activities --
mining, ranching, transportation, building, or anything else actually productive
-- you should lose your job and, ultimately, be forced out.Long-term
goals involve forcing submission to rule by a new aristocracy, composed entirely
of rich, tree-hugging liberals. Curiously, they seem to expect their deranged
mantra -- "we know what you need better than you do" -- somehow to catch
on with real people.And, sadly, it does seems to be catching on with
too many politicians, academics, even some wealthy businessmen hungrier for
liberal acclaim, than success.It'll never catch on with real
people, however, so most current liberal schemes center about, either forcing
real people out, or forcing us to submit.
What an enormously selfish letter. This is an issue with real problems. The
fact that you are willing to lump everyone who find discord with air quality
into your tight sociopolitical boxes only reveals how unwilling you are to have
a meaningful discussion on the topic. These “tree huggers” you
refer to are parents who are desperately trying to get their infants and
toddlers to breathe when they wake up in the night asthmatic and gasping for
air. These “Federal Bureaucrats” are the infirm who are stuck in
bed because they no longer get sufficient oxygen to support any kind of physical
activity. These “anchors who have short memories” are speaking for
the enormous economic toll that disease, whose severity and longevity is
compounded by bad air, has on our community every winter. Again, these problems
are real. I and many others experience them on a daily basis. So excuse me if
you are tired of the dialog that takes place every winter. But your delicate
political sensibilities have no bearing in clean air discussion. Write back
when you are willing to give the issue the attention it deserves. Until then,
quit complaining about those that do.
I have a catholic converter on my wood stove. my car has one. How much will it
cost for a house to? That's all we need more costs to add to a homeowner.
One more bill.
I know of no one saying we want "the same air quality..."But, to
ask for SAFE air quality does not seem unreasonable. To ask the State to
prioritize and protect the health and well being of its citizens does not seem
unreasonable. To ask the State to stop giving permits to corporations to
INCREASE the pollutants going into our already unsafe air does not seem
unreasonable. To ask the State to require better controls on what currently
goes into the air is not unreasonable given the unsafe air quality that now
exists here. I would hope that all people would want to strive to make this a
better place instead of allowing the continual degradation of quality of life.