Why can’t Utah be aspirational as well?
To "UtahBlueDevil " Buy why go after the small contributor? Look at it
this way. If you can get 10% reduction in pollution from cars, that gets you the
equivalent of a 50% reduction from industry.We are headed towards
elimination of the internal combustion engine, but if the goal is to eliminate
pollution why go after the small sources instead of the largest source?
Redshirt - just because we can't fix the problem 100% today, that
doesn't mean you don't start and you don't try.
To "Fitz " but CO2 isn't a pollutant. To clean the air you have to
get rid of the fine particulates, NOx, and ozone.
There was an interesting a couple of days from the WSJ Opinion. The opinion
reads, " A study by the IFO think tank in Munich found that a popular
electric car releases more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere than a comparable
diesel engine. The authors compared CO2 output for a Tesla Model 3 and a
Mercedes C220d sedan....The main Tesla problem-and subject of a long
running-debate- concerns CO2 emitted to manufacture the battery."This is a new opinion from Germany. Many will ignore it, some will laugh at
it, but others will continue to research this WSJ Opinion thought process.
What a boondoggle. If you look at the sources of pollution in the valley, the
primary source is the automobile. How are you going to get rid of that? I
can't afford a new all electric car.Now, if we did go to all
electric cars do we have the nearly pollution free power generation sources for
them or will that just transfer the pollution source?To "Red
Smith" Go to the KUED article "Pollution Sources". You will see that
homes are only responsible for 32% of pollution. Your car is part of the larger
problem.To "Impartial7 " See 'Inland Ports: Planning
Successful Developments " by the University of Texas. They found that the
port REDUCES pollution because fewer trucks are traveling long distances through
Utah legislators don't have the gumption to stand up to big polluters in
Salt Lake Valley! Heck, they don't even have the will to stand
up to small polluters!They totally caved on new building energy
efficiency standards, dropped ev incentives, and raised the speed limit on
I-15!Any improvements to Utah airs quality, can be attributed to
closing Geneva, the price of natural gas driving out coal, seasonal weather
variations, and EPA emission standard advances.
"As an example, emissions from industrial sources in Utah have dropped 47
percent since 1995,"The problem with this quote is a large
amount of that reduction can be attributed to the shuttering of Geneva Steel
which was a single source of a lot of the particulate in Utah Valley, that
flowed up into Salt Lake County. Not all by any means, but a large
contributor.That said, initiatives like these are always best run at
the local level. The environment is actually a very personal thing.
It's something we all interact with regardless of political leanings.
It's not partisan when you look out your window and see a grey ring of haze
below the mountains. It's not a large leap of logic to understand that
breathing that kind of air probably isn't the best for you and your
families.The decision to take action needs to be local. Because the
changes that need to be made are local, and the benefits will be local.
Republicans and Democrats (independents too) all want to breath clean air, have
usable water, and enjoy the outdoors. It's why many of us are here.
" As an example, emissions from industrial sources in Utah have dropped 47
percent since 1995, reports the Deseret News' Amy Joi
O'Donoghue." Doubtful. Utah DAQ/DEQ, if they weren't in the
pockets of Big Extraction and Big Energy, could require tougher pollution
controls, available and in use in other states, to be mandatory here. But,
we'll hear how "regulation kills industry", or as one Inland Port
board member said "the economy is more important than the environment".
That's how they think. $$$ from industry, flowing into their pockets, are
more important than the health of Utah citizens. Until we pass laws that make
"donations" to politicians illegal, from businesses that are regulated
by government, they will always put cash over the health and safety of us and
our kids. It violates their so called religious principles.
A modest reduction in emissions might be possible if strangulating regulations
were removed that restrict rail freight. A lot of companies send their product
by truck because if red tape saddled on rail. Rail makes much less pollution
proportional to the freight carried. It is possible that the
hydrogen fuel invented by Technion of Israel and now in cooperation with
Global-Electriq of Australia is constructing a fuel plant in Holland to test on
trains, barges, and trucks. If it works and goes global it will dramatically
reduce emissions since it's emission is water, and resurrect the internal
When we have the guts, the spine and the backbone to ban charcoal BBQ's, 2
stroke motors, end the use of diesel, require new furnaces to be 95% efficient,
require gov't to minimize paperwork and minimize travel to gov't
offices, reform our Public Daycare system (Public Education), end airport
expansions in dirty air zones like the SLC airport, then we may see some
improvement. Spending millions while being intellectual lazy nice
optics but a waste of money.Utah's air is nasty.
It's called the Green New Deal...it's going to save us
all...we'll never drive again to a burger joint.