I'm consistently mocked by the "It's industry's fault"
crowd, because I suggest each and every one of us doing whatever we can to drive
less (presumably because it's not enough). But Barack Obama comes out with
HIS plan (get a tuneup and inflate our tires correctly) and they fall down
overwhelmed with how sufficient HIS plan is.I guess I just
don't use the correct talking points for these people.
No worries, our Glorious Dear Leader has already told us his intentions:"You know, when I was asked earlier about the issue of coal, uh, you
know — Under my plan of a cap and trade system, electricity rates would
NECESSARILY SKYROCKET. Even regardless of what I say about whether coal is good
or bad. Because I’m capping greenhouse gases, coal power plants, you know,
natural gas, you name it — whatever the plants were, whatever the industry
was, uh, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money.
They will pass that money on to consumers (emphasis mine)." -Barack
ObamaJust a few alternative energy companies supported by Dear
Leader's stimulus that have gone bye bye (bankrupt):Solyndra
(received $535 million)Beacon Power (received $43 million)AES’
subsidiary Eastern EnergyNevada Geothermal (received $98.5 million)SunPower (received $1.5 billion)First Solar (received $1.46 billion)Utopia...Pfft!
procuradorfiscal,I'm sure there are some natural components. I
don't know how much. But it helps explain something I've been
wondering about... why LA has such bad air, especially in the AM. They call it the "marine layer". It burns off most days, but they
still have pretty bad air. They don't have mountains and temp-inversions
holding the air in. It's wide open to the Pacific Ocean to the West, and
still the smog just sits there in the city. Looking down on it from Griffith
Park is always so depressing. I always wondered why it doesn't just blow
out to sea (prevailing winds?). But the water vapor theory helps explain some
of it.CA doesn't have a ton of dirty industry in down town LA
(Compared to it's population) and they aren't surrounded by mountains.
And yet they have serious air pollution. They do have a LOT of cars and
drivers though. I wonder if over there they just blame it on "industry"
and just keep on driving? It's very convenient to be able to
blame it on someone everybody hates, and someone you can't control
Re: "The EPA measures air quality in general. But they can't tell
specifically where any of the components in their samples came from . . .
."They measure the number of particles per cubic meter and
particle size. That's it. That's the unfortunate state of the art.What no radical "environmentalist" really wants to us to know is
the composition and source of aerosolized particulate matter. In coastal areas,
they've known for years that their airborne particulates are primarily
harmless water droplets and sea-salt aerosols.Utah's air
quality is different only in the sense that our sea-salt aerosols come from the
Lake. OK, maybe some come from the salt we put on roads and aerosolize by
driving on them. But, even that salt comes from the Lake.Don't
tell the radicals, though. It infuriates them when someone rats them out on
their dirty little secret -- no matter how much money, power, and control we
hand over to them, Mother Nature has decreed that Utah's air will always be
harmlessly hazy on 20 or so days out of the year.And, you can't
fool Mother Nature.
Irony Guy,Can you name the companies you are talking about in our valley
that are "continually violate standards"? And name what
standards they are continually violating. Or did you just hear
that talking point somewhere ("industry is allowed to volunteer to cut
emissions someday while they continually violate standards")?The
EPA measures air quality in general. But they can't tell specifically
where any of the components in their samples came from (from a car or a
fireplace, or a factory, or WHICH factory it came from).But if YOU
know the companies that are "continually" violating EPA standards... you
can shut them down, and the EPA should shut them down. That's what EPA
standards and government regulations are for.
Oh, please. We do know where the pollution is coming from. Half of it is auto
emission, and the other half is industrial. A lot is being done to cut auto
emission--hybrids, e-vehicles, and 3rd tier gas are all coming on strong.
Meanwhile, industry is allowed to "volunteer" to cut emissions
"someday" while they continually violate standards. And yes, that is the
Most studies indicate that air pollution has decreased in Utah over the past
decade. The bowl-like geography and weather fronts will continue to make
inversions problematic. Industry contributes about 15% of the pollution. We
should continue efforts on public transportation and more efficient cars, but
the solution requires sacrifice by all Utahns.
This letter skims over the most important aspect of the issue. It is leadership.
We must have a clearly defined plan to attempt to address these issues. If we
continue down the procuradorfiscal path then it will continually worsen as
people continue to move into the region and the "natural" contributors
are ignored. What if, just what if we keep it from getting worse. That in itself
would be worth the effort. I choose to believe there's a lot that can we
done with determined leadership, active citizens, civic business and innovative
minds. One thing is for sure, nothing begets nothing and that's worse.
Re: "What troubles me . . . is the number of letters this winter virtually
defending and dismissing the filthy air this year. I absolutely don't
understand that."No doubt.But it's actually
quite simple -- the dirty little secret of environmental activism is that Utah
air you can see is not hazardous to your health.It is a nice foil
for cynical, disingenuous socialists who want to destroy the economy, for real
estate developers who want money, and for dishonest politicians [OK, OK, that
term is redundant] who want power. But it's not dangerous.And,
BTW, it originates, almost entirely, from natural sources.
OR... we could just sit back and blame it on "Big oil and dirty gas"...
and just continue driving alone to work, and doing what we do every other day
when it's not an inversion. Smug in our feeling that we're doing our
job (Blaming it on "Big oil and dirty gas").
What Maverick writes is true but doesn't preclude the truth of the letter
writer also. We each play a part. Some parts are bigger than others but all
count.What troubles me (I'd use another word but I'd
probably get bounced) is the number of letters this winter virtually defending
and dismissing the filthy air this year. I absolutely don't understand
Re: "Pollution comes from our homes, our cars and from industry."And, don't forget the Lake.Most visible pollution in
Utah is composed of water droplets, chlorides, and nitrates -- primarily from
the Lake. So, any solution that makes the harmless, but visible air go away must
include elimination of its major source -- the Lake.And, BTW, that
large flushing sound you hear is the sound of any of a number of equally
deranged liberal projects to "clean" our already clean air, flushing our
tax revenues into ineffective oblivion and into the pockets of cynical
crony-capitalists, with zero effect on air quality.
This letter would ring true if Los Angeles and Mexico City hadn't been able
to cut down on their own air pollution inversions.It amazes me that
the people who scream the loudest about how we cannot do anything to clean our
air simply ignore what other cities have done to actually clean up their air.
Sorry, but it has been done. Cleaning our air despite our bowl like geography
can be done. It has been done several times before in other states and
countries. I guess it just depends on whether utahns want to.Who do
you support? Big oil and dirty gas? Or our health and the health of our children