Utah's air quality important for economics

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Feb. 21, 2014 9:36 a.m.

    To "blossom" prove it. I have provided an article from the LA Times, showing that the childhood autism rates for Utah are lower. Rather than listen to a Senator who's trustworthiness is questionable like all politicians, get me some actual data. THe LA Times article mimics the finding in StatMaster's category titled "Number of Children with Autism (most recent) by state". Tgere it shows Utah being ranked #29.

    The only place where Utah is shown to have a high rate of autism is some studies that are looking at only 14 states, or else have a small and limited sample size that even the researchers admit is very small.

    So again, where is your proof. So far you have second hand information.

  • blossom sl, UT
    Feb. 20, 2014 8:07 p.m.

    Dear Redshirt1701 - You are wrong. Utah's autism rates are double the national average. I recommend you contact Senator Shiozawa for the correct numbers. He is running a bill this session and is hoping to have health insurance pay for treatments to help the more than 18,000 kids in Utah get the help they desperately need.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Feb. 20, 2014 4:32 p.m.

    To "blossom" please don't lie. According to the LA Times article "Autism rates by state", Utah is in the middle. The highest rates are along the West coast, Great Lakes area, and New England. There are 17 states with higher childhood autism rates, and 7 with similar rates.

  • blossom sl, UT
    Feb. 20, 2014 2:21 p.m.

    Birth defects are health conditions present at birth and autism is related to air pollution with our numbers the highest in the nation.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Feb. 20, 2014 1:46 p.m.

    Does ANYBODY have a birth defect they can prove was caused by air pollution?

    If so... let us know about it.

    I know it can cause or increase breathing problems, but birth defects?


    Birth defects asside... it's a problem. We all know that. Nobody LIKES air pollution. We all just have different solutions we think will work.

    For instance... I don't think the Legislature can fix it. I think WE... the people driving, heating our homes, using electricity (generated by burning coal), etc, need to change in order for pollution to change. Changing the Legislature won't do it (unless we change too).

    But nobody thinks air pollution is a GOOD thing.

    IF we can get more people to realize that everybody wants a solution we can live with... we can start talking solutions (instead of just blame). If we can talk about solutions (without the blame)... we can get past the rhetoric and blame and start talking about real solutions (not just dogma).

    What solution do the people who think only the legislature can solve the problem have?

    They can put more regulations on us... but that still requires US to change... doesn't it?

  • blossom sl, UT
    Feb. 20, 2014 7:34 a.m.

    “If we fail to protect our children against air pollution, we accept the cost of living with and treating preventable birth defects, chronic diseases, and disability among our nation’s infants and children. If we fail to protect children against air pollution, we also accept the cost of permanently reduced lung capacity and productivity in adults.”

    - American Academy of Pediatrics

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Feb. 19, 2014 4:49 p.m.

    To "Open Minded Mormon" I am not sure what I said that has set you off, but lets assume for a moment that you are a typical liberal, and I am a typical conservative.

    Lets start with your statement about science. According to the reports by Politico and other news agencies, a Yale Professor found that "Tea Party" members know more about science than non-Tea Party members. See "Eureka! Tea partiers know science" in Politico.

    I most likely understand you better than you understand me. See "The Moral Stereotypes of Liberals and Conservatives: Exaggeration of Differences across the Political Divide" by UCLA and UVA researchers.

    I am probably better informed than you too. See "Surveys: Republicans more open-minded, better informed than Democrats" in the Daily Caller where they report on a Pew research poll.

    Other studies out there show that as a conservative I am more open minded than you are as a liberal.

    It seems that science proves that I am probably more pro-science than you, and understand it better than you do too. Or do you deny the science?

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Feb. 19, 2014 1:51 p.m.

    Open Minded Mormon,
    Your constant effort to blame it all on one side.. and none on the other... is not productive.

    Nothing is all one side's fault. And placing the blame is not important (when looking for solutions). Just finding a group or person to point at as the scape goat is not important.

    Neither side has an "anti-Health" ideology. Or an "Anti-Science" ideology. And the labels are useless as well.

    That's all political rhetoric.

    All rhetoric aside... we need to be focus on SOLUTIONS (not blame).

    We know who you blame... what are your solutions???

    Will regulating industry fix it?
    Would even totally eliminating all industry fix it?
    No... not unless we change our own lifestyle.

    So maybe you and me are the ones who need to be regulated (not somebody else).

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Feb. 19, 2014 12:54 p.m.

    USS Enterprise, UT

    OK - Let's put all your anti-Health and Anti-Science ideology aside for a moment...

    And look at it from a purely political point of view.

    We can then directly blame it on our Republican Governor and republican Utah State Office of Economic Development who said this is an issue to drawing good business here.

    Not one peep from us left-of-center, tree-Hugging, GreenPeace, Enviromental whack-os.
    Not one.

    If this is coming from YOUR side, from YOUR own political party [no from us] -- then, shouldn't that be telling you something?

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Feb. 19, 2014 12:40 p.m.

    To "Vivian S. Lee" as others have stated, the decision to stay in NYC is not because of air pollution. According to the American Lung association the New York-Newark-Bridgeport area has worse year round pollution than the Salt Lake City-Ogden-Clearfield area.

  • Sal Provo, UT
    Feb. 19, 2014 12:01 p.m.

    I'm not sorry that more people don't want to move to Utah. The fewer the people, the less pollution. And, what they don't realize is that our air is only really polluted about 21 days during the winter. It's beautiful most of the year. So, yes, stay in Los Angeles where you eat the air 365 days a year.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Feb. 19, 2014 10:42 a.m.

    Open Minded Mormon,
    RE: "College educated people who have a choice. Choose somewhere else to go almost every time." and "Only those who have no choice, (5th generation Mormons)"...

    What do you know about the Utah population or our air problems (from your perch in Everett, 00)?

    Are you aware that SLC's population is not even 50% Mormon and more than 50% college educated? What does that say about your theory?

    If college educated people choose somewhere else almost every time... why are so many college educated people moving into my neighborhood from out of state?

    I know LOTS of non-LDS, non-native Utahns, who moved to Utah just this year. And most of them are college educated.

    What does that say about your theory? Maybe not quite fact yet?

  • Open Minded Mormon Everett, 00
    Feb. 19, 2014 9:11 a.m.

    Poor Air Quality & poor Education.
    Deal killers.

    College educated people who have a choice,
    Choose somewhere else to go almost every time.

    Only those who have no choice,
    who have deep deep roots here
    [ie.e., 5th generation Mormon, born and raised and don't know anything else]
    will choose to stay no matter how bad the air or the pay is,
    think air quality is a NON-issue.

    They are wrong,
    it is,
    and the State recognizes it, but is slow to do anything about it.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Feb. 19, 2014 8:47 a.m.

    Maybe that's why the Jazz can't attract any big free-agents to sign in Utah. They are afraid of the air pollution!

    It's the fad now days to blame everything that happens, every illness, every business that doesn't come to Utah, every person who moves elsewhere, etc, etc, ... on the government's inability to control air pollution.

    Well if the government COULD control air pollution.. I would think they would (not only in SLC but in LA, Chicago, Richfield UT, Vernal, etc, etc, etc).


    More government regulation of industry is probably a good idea, but it won't solve our air pollution problem. Every improvement helps, but even if all industry disapeared overnight... we would still have an air pollution problem.

    The biggest contributor is you and I (collectively a huge contributor) driving, heating our homes, running our lights, Running our fireplace, burning our trash, etc, etc.

    Maybe more people and companies deciding to not relocate to Utah is a blessing in disguise.

    IF more companies and people relocate to Utah... would that tend to make our air quality Better? Or Worse?

    Maybe growing the economy, and the population, contributes to our growing pollution.

  • trapdinutah South Jordan, UT
    Feb. 19, 2014 7:06 a.m.

    Sorry, Ma'am, but if your staff stayed in NYC instead of coming here, it was absolutely NOT because of air quality. Public transit, maybe. But air quality? If so, then your staff is seriously lacking in good judgement and should have done their homework. NYC has much more serious air quality issues than this valley ever had. Not only do they routinely violate the ozone standard, but also exceed almost every other standard EPA has ever made. New York City? Really? I know it sounds like a salsa commercial, but really? Are you kidding? The real difference is that on a clear day here (which is not as infrequent as some would have you believe), we have the mountains to look at, and have visibility in the range of over a hundred miles and sometimes hundreds of miles. On a clear day in NYC, all you can see is NYC - but, who knows how often that happens?

    So, come on, if you have researchers who tell you they choose NYC over SLC because of air quality, they better start spending a little more time out of their labs and more in the out-of-doors. Seriously, New York City?

  • liberal larry salt lake City, utah
    Feb. 19, 2014 7:05 a.m.

    Because of its small, homogeneous, population Utah is a fairly well run state, but large problems such as air pollution highlight the inability of conservative governance to tackle BIG social problems.

    Dealing with Utah's air pollution will require seriously reducing transportation pollution, and (god forbid!) REGULATING large industrial polluters. I just don't think that Utah's anti-regulation, fear of government control, legislators have it in them to do what is necessary to curb our atrocious air pollution!

    Maybe when it becomes an even more dire economic development issue we will seriously address our air quality problems.

  • Baron Scarpia Logan, UT
    Feb. 19, 2014 6:53 a.m.

    Yes, the Governor's Office for Economic Development is fully aware that many businesses refuse to come to Utah now. This is why the governor moved his annual energy summit to promote fossil fuels to the late spring to sidestep the inversions. There were too many protestors making the connection between poor air quality and the promotion of fossil fuel development -- bad for business, indeed!

  • Hamath Omaha, NE
    Feb. 19, 2014 5:15 a.m.

    This is true. I am actually a living example. I chose not to apply for job offers in SLC area of Utah when I was headhunted for two positions on separate occasions and the air quality was a factor in the decision.