Oilpan4
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Tue May 05, 2020 6:21 pm

Why does the electricity have to be pollution heavy? New mexico can generate wind power for California since we know the nimbys will come out of the wood work, protest and weigh the projects down with unnecessary legal BS.
Actually I will encourage California to shoot them selves in the foot when building out renewables.
Yeah, they have been trying to fix the problem locally with their own emissions standards for 50 years and all they have to show for it is worst air quality in the nation.
Time to try something new.
trumpvirus
Is going to get you.

GRA
Posts: 12067
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Tue May 05, 2020 8:50 pm

As has been pointed out to you numerous times, the severity of California's air pollution is due to three factors: topography, climate and population. No need to take my word for it, see the wiki for "Pollution in California". Any area with the same issues would have the same problems. Yet despite a population increase in my lifetime of around 167%, our air quality is better now than it was when I was born, and I believe (have to check) for any time since

BTW, as you've suggested on more than one occasion that the Federal gov't could do a better job than the state has, we're still waiting for you to explain to us how less stringent federal emissions regulations would result in less pollution than California's more stringent regs.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Oilpan4
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Tue May 05, 2020 10:39 pm

Yeah they know what causes it and they still can't fix it.
Air quality is better but still worst in the nation. What do you want, a participation trophy?

How do they fix it with federal standards only?
Obviously by pushing way more electric vehicles.
Maybe even go so far as only allowing hybrid and electrics to be registered.

The only thing proven to clean the air is get the gallons of fuel burned in and around the bad pollution areas way down.
Slowly tightening emissions regulations over 50 years has only been good enough to stay in last place.

Now we know what works, the Xi virus proved it. Why not go straight for it?
trumpvirus
Is going to get you.

GRA
Posts: 12067
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Wed May 06, 2020 7:22 pm

Oilpan4 wrote:
Tue May 05, 2020 10:39 pm
Yeah they know what causes it and they still can't fix it.
Air quality is better but still worst in the nation. What do you want, a participation trophy?

See my previous comments re the need to maintain a functioning industrial society with a similar standard of living. The current shut-down demonstrates one way to solve the problem, at the cost of those two items. Barring a few extremists, the mass of the public doesn't consider returning to a medieval Iifestyle based on subsistence agriculture.
How do they fix it with federal standards only?
Obviously by pushing way more electric vehicles.
Maybe even go so far as only allowing hybrid and electrics to be registered.

Except that the federal government in question is trying to prohibit the state from setting any such quotas and mandates (you know, the subject of this topic) and would also like to end ZEV subsidies. Since the cars remain too expensive to be affordable to the general public for now, how exactly is this transition supposed to occur lacking both subsidies and an ability to force compliance?

The only thing proven to clean the air is get the gallons of fuel burned in and around the bad pollution areas way down.
Slowly tightening emissions regulations over 50 years has only been good enough to stay in last place.

Now we know what works, the Xi virus proved it. Why not go straight for it?

To repeat, we've known what to do to solve the problem immediately, but no one is willing to return to the lifestyle required, here or anywhere else. Are you?
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Oilpan4
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Wed May 06, 2020 9:56 pm

No one is saying to return to go medieval life or force people to a live an agricultural life like Pol pot did.
It would appear that fossil fuels use needs to be cut in half around the problem pollution areas. Then for 98% of the rest of the country nothing changes. There's no need to roll out a solution that fixes a mega city problem on to small cities and rual areas with no real air quality problems attributable to vehicles burning fuel.

I went from buying around $200 worth of gasoline per month down to around $40 and an electric vehicle like a 2011 leaf shouldn't even work for me as I'm rural and have absolutely 0 public charging.

Easy. Tax the sinner and subsidize the winner.
If the fed kills the ZEV mandate then California can add a dollar a gallon fuel tax and subsidize ZEVs with that money.
Maybe it won't work.
But we know what doesn't work: 50 years of slowly increasing tail pipe emission regulations.
trumpvirus
Is going to get you.

GRA
Posts: 12067
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Thu May 07, 2020 12:38 am

Oilpan4 wrote:
Wed May 06, 2020 9:56 pm
No one is saying to return to go medieval life or force people to a live an agricultural life like Pol pot did.
It would appear that fossil fuels use needs to be cut in half around the problem pollution areas. Then for 98% of the rest of the country nothing changes. There's no need to roll out a solution that fixes a mega city problem on to small cities and rual areas with no real air quality problems attributable to vehicles burning fuel.

You might want to check the population distribution in this country - the vast majority of the people live in metro areas. Oh, and most of the areas in California with the worst air quality are smaller cities and the rural areas surrounding them, in the San Joaquin Valley (Fresno and Sacramento being exceptions as the 5th and 6th most populous in the state, but Fresno is in the ag heartland) - Bakersfield, Visalia, Hanford/Corcoran. A lot of their pollution comes from ag and truck traffic, plus some from the Ba Area and Sacramento, which are upwind.

Of course, just concentrating on the urban areas won't reduce GHGs.
I went from buying around $200 worth of gasoline per month down to around $40 and an electric vehicle like a 2011 leaf shouldn't even work for me as I'm rural and have absolutely 0 public charging.

Easy. Tax the sinner and subsidize the winner.
If the fed kills the ZEV mandate then California can add a dollar a gallon fuel tax and subsidize ZEVs with that money.
Maybe it won't work.
But we know what doesn't work: 50 years of slowly increasing tail pipe emission regulations.

On the contrary, those regs have given California far better air quality than when I was born, despite the massive increase in population. That it's not as much as I or some others would like based on our personal priorities is true, but then we're not a dictatorship.

You should note that California has the highest gas tax in the U.S., most recently hiked by $0.12/gal. first by the state legislature and then, after the usual suspects put a measure on the ballot to repeal it, the tax hike was confirmed by popular vote. But the willingness and ability of the public to tax themselves is limited, and in this case it was done as a means of catching up with much deferred road maintenance, not for pollution reduction.

In a time of low gas prices I'd be all in favor of raising fuel taxes further, but since many people have suffered a loss of pay that will take years to recover, assuming they even have a job to go back to, do you think there's any likelihood that an extra $1/gal. gas tax has a hope in hell of passing now? Get real.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Oilpan4
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Thu May 07, 2020 7:53 am

I was going by land area not population, that's why I said "in and around the problem areas".

Wasn't talking about green house gases, one problem at a time.

Either you want to fix the problem or be stuck with worst air quality in the nation.

Has the air around Fresno cleared up?
Because heavily mechanized agricultural doesn't appear to have slowed much.
I know the hand picked veggie producers are suffering with everyone sitting at home on the couch eating junk food.
Just looking at USDA and farm reports out that way there looks to be a lot of vegetable crops.
trumpvirus
Is going to get you.

GRA
Posts: 12067
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 1:49 pm
Location: East side of San Francisco Bay

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Thu May 07, 2020 5:03 pm

Oilpan4 wrote:
Thu May 07, 2020 7:53 am
I was going by land area not population, that's why I said "in and around the problem areas".

OK. Found a McPaper article from last Dec. listing the 30 US metro areas with the worst air quality. NYC metro area is #30, San Francisco - Oakland - Hayward metro (where I live) is #29, and at #28 is . . . Albuquerque, despite it only having 1/5th of our population. Las Cruces is #16, even though it has less than 1/4th of ABQ's population. Google "Pollution: These 30 places have the worst air quality in the US". Why, it might even make you think that local conditions such as topography, climate, types of emitters as well as stringency or laxness of emissions regs and enforcement are as or more important than sheer numbers of people and vehicles.

Wasn't talking about green house gases, one problem at a time.

Either you want to fix the problem or be stuck with worst air quality in the nation.

See above. So what's NM's excuse? After all, the problem should be much easier to fix there, and the solution's essentially the same in both places.

Has the air around Fresno cleared up?
Because heavily mechanized agricultural doesn't appear to have slowed much.
I know the hand picked veggie producers are suffering with everyone sitting at home on the couch eating junk food.
Just looking at USDA and farm reports out that way there looks to be a lot of vegetable crops.

Yes, the air in the central valley has improved during CV, not only due to the drop in Ag, much of which is hand-picked (we grow a high % of the country's fruits, nuts and veggies, and to pre-empt the old joke, I'm not referring to the population), but also because of the reduced pollution in the Bay area, much of which winds up in the valley, as well as reduced N-S and E-W truck/train shipments passing along and across it, respectively.
Guy [I have lots of experience designing/selling off-grid AE systems, some using EVs but don't own one. Local trips are by foot, bike and/or rapid transit].

The 'best' is the enemy of 'good enough'. Copper shot, not Silver bullets.

Oilpan4
Posts: 1491
Joined: Wed Jan 09, 2019 10:51 pm
Delivery Date: 10 May 2018
Leaf Number: 004270

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Fri May 08, 2020 7:51 pm

When I Google search "worst air quality in the country" the top 6 or 7 spots are California according to the American Heart and lung association.

Where did I claim topography had nothing to do with air pollution?
Because I'm pretty sure I said "they have known what causes smog for 70 years" one of those things being local air movement or the lack there of.
Now what do you think we have control over:
The lack of air movement that traps smog over a city?
The topography?
Or what we burn, how much, how it's burned and where?
If you know of a way to get the air moving that would be pretty cool.
I guess we could use millions of tons of blasting agents to remove mountains and haul away rubble in rock trucks that burn 1,000 gallons of diesel per shift, but how environmentally friendly is that?

We don't have the worst air quality in the nation and I would say they are doing pretty good for only smog testing vehicles made after 1983 and not having our own special emissions standards.
Oh and I know enforcement totally sucks, have seen plenty of junkers that were made well after 1983 around Albuquerque and Las cruces that would never pass any kind of emissions test.
The best place to start would be to enforce the laws they have now.
I'm pretty sure my leaf would pass and I bet my wife's 2018 Hyundai hybrid would pass of they went state wide.

New mexico also ranks in the bottom 5 or 6 for electric vehicle sales and has almost no public charging out side the big cities. There's a bit of room for improvement there.
trumpvirus
Is going to get you.

User avatar
Nubo
Posts: 5701
Joined: Fri May 28, 2010 11:01 am
Delivery Date: 31 Oct 2014
Location: Vallejo, CA

Re: California, allies ready for emission-law war with Trump EPA, CARB head says

Sat May 09, 2020 10:14 am

Oilpan4 wrote:
Wed May 06, 2020 9:56 pm
...
But we know what doesn't work: 50 years of slowly increasing tail pipe emission regulations.
Actually we know conclusively that it DOES work, has worked dramatically well and you've been shown the data. Yet you cling to your "worst in the nation" arguments which do not support your conclusions regardless of how many times you repeat them.
I noticed you're still working with polymers.

Return to “Business / Economy and Politics”