PDA

View Full Version : California's over estimation of pollution levels by 340 %.



Arcane
10-08-2010, 09:13 PM
An interesting bit of news in this article.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/07/BAOF1FDMRV.DTL#ixzz11iqEfuN9

wierdscience
10-08-2010, 10:37 PM
It's agenda driven science being substituted for fact based science which has been rampant since the dawn of the environmental movement.

Don't bother with the facts,just give us estimates that dovetail with our preconceived ideas in other words.It's gotten bad too,so bad we must now ban elements from the periodic table.

A local Dingbat has even suggested banning Polio vaccine:rolleyes:

squirrel
10-08-2010, 10:45 PM
California should seced from union an become the Nanny (or ninny, both are applicable) Country.

RancherBill
10-08-2010, 10:53 PM
Did you really think that the GW agenda was science based. GW is a religion, and as such, "solution" can rely on soft figures.

I know there is GW, however, I do not know what is causing it. Articles like this add to my cynicism.

Evan
10-08-2010, 11:23 PM
A news lead like that also shows an agenda. The overestimation of pollution in question applies to only the diesel exhaust of off road construction vehicles. That amounts to nothing at all in the statewide pollution picture and simply reflects that they made a wild guess. When quantities are very small it's easy to make errors of hundreds of percent but that isn't the percentage of the entire pollution picture. The error in the total contribution to air pollution in the state is probably almost unmeasurable.

Of course a news lead that states "California overestimates total pollution by .002%" doesn't sell a lot of papers but the other sure does mislead a lot of people.

J Tiers
10-08-2010, 11:31 PM
A news lead like that also shows an agenda. The overestimation of pollution in question applies to only the diesel exhaust of off road construction vehicles. That amounts to nothing at all in the statewide pollution picture


Don't be so sure....

The total quantity of engines and fuel burned could be smaller, but to make up for it, those engines are worked until they about freeze up, or fall apart.... and then it's "get that thing running we need it NOW!". ONE construction machine may equal 5 or 10 normal vehicles in total pollution. Maybe many more.

it's like garbage trucks....apparently they get no maintenance other than "get it running", either. One garbage truck equals about 15 or 20 city buses....... I basically never see black smoke from city buses, but NEARLY EVERY garbage truck puts out a mushroom cloud of dense black smoke (fine particles of carcinogenic partly burned fuel) at every start from a stoplight, or from a pickup.

Also, watch construction equipment being started on a cold morning...... several minutes of WHITE smoke (totally unburned fuel) intermittently puffing from the exhaust is common. I have seen large clouds drifting away from the scrapers as they are fired up in the morning.

And, of course, the garbage truck style black smoke cloud of carcinogenic particulates is just as common among construction equipment. Scrapers. dump trucks, bulldozers, backhoes (not all are diesel), but rarely from cranes........ Apparently the better maintenance of cranes extends to engines also.

Forrest Addy
10-08-2010, 11:37 PM
Oh goodie, a natter thread. Global warming is real enough for anyone smart enough to look draw conclusions from dated sat photos of the polar icecaps. A glass eye in a duck's ass can see they have shrunk over the last 40 years.

The human activity contribution to this effect is what's up for fruless debate. I'm on the fence myself but I have to think when presented with credible chart showing armospherice CO2 increase tracking of the net global temperature. Add to this the 120 year hitory of in CO2 partial pressure increase follows fossil fuel burning in the same order of magnitue. Makes you wonder if there might be some connection.

One thing's for sure: in any rational discussion interrupted by the witless who parrot ranters, the facts and merits of the discussion go out the window leaving behind lies and fury. Meanwhile the manipulators smirk in the background and rub their hands in glee. People are profiting from obfuscation.

ADGO_Racing
10-08-2010, 11:50 PM
:eek: By California's enlightened estimates alone the entire world should be extinct, and it is OUR FAULT! But yet somehow we are all still here. Oh and let's not forget living longer than ever before. How could that be???

Is it possible that California is WRONG? Everything on the planet won't kill us??? Noooo....:eek:

Evan
10-08-2010, 11:51 PM
Don't be so sure....


You must be joking. On road vehicles traveled 340 billion miles in 2005. No matter how badly the estimated 150,000 off road diesels pollute they can't come anywhere close to the hiway and city traffic.




And, of course, the garbage truck style black smoke cloud of carcinogenic particulates is just as common among construction equipment.

Diesel soot is a non issue in air pollution outside of cities. It's just particulate carbon and falls to the ground in short order.

J Tiers
10-09-2010, 12:09 AM
You must be joking. On road vehicles traveled 340 billion miles in 2005. No matter how badly the estimated 150,000 off road diesels pollute they can't come anywhere close to the hiway and city traffic.


You must be joking............ Cars are so clean now, that ONE of the dirty vehicles can equal HUNDREDS of cars...... not too nice, particularly when it is right nearby.

Not only that, but cars around cities typically drive for 20 min to a hour twice a day..... The construction equipment works all day an 8 hour day, plus overtime. Not to mention the fact that the construction equipment is typically considerably more powerful than most any car, and is working at considerable load, unlike a typical car, and consequently burns much more fuel, both proportionately and absolutely. Unless of course your car can pull a scraper.......



Diesel soot is a non issue in air pollution outside of cities. It's just particulate carbon and falls to the ground in short order.

U,mmmmmm that would be INSIDE CITIES, Evan.......so your comment is off target........... I live in a city, I did not drive a hundred miles to see clouds of carcinogenic soot, and billows of unburned fuel..... I see it right in the middle of residential areas as houses are replaced with new, redevelopment areas are cleared and re-shaped before building again, sewers are replaced, roads repaved, and so forth. Cities are busy with construction on a continuous basis. You may have forgotten that up on the mountain.....

hardly a non-issue as it drifts past....... and that "particulate carbon" is anything BUT "just particulate carbon".......

it is full of cracked fuel molecules, all sorts of heat-converted molecules similar to coal tar creosote, nasty stuff which is N. O. T. good to breathe.

I'm not going to argue the point, we both know it;'s true, and the research is out there to prove it.

wierdscience
10-09-2010, 01:20 AM
Did they study the effects of all particulate,or just that from engines?

I doubt they did,mold spores,pollen,dust all present in the air we breathe and all very much natural and un-regulated also much higher in the daily count than diesel soot.

How about all these super energy efficent houses that are so tight people are breathing they're own dead skin?

Forrest Addy
10-09-2010, 01:22 AM
So far I'm hearing unupported assertion and insistance but no relevent credible evidence, analysis, or credible figures. We are on the internet where valid facts and figures are there for any to dig out and present. We are mature rational adults not minions of propagandists.

Some views I've seen so far are characteritic of rant radio where only selected and distorted facts cherry picked to support a particular agenda are permtted. Related but contrary facts and data that don't are denied, execrated, pilloried, and demonized along with those who would advance them.

By the way dismissing California as a state of fruit and nuts is ad hominem nonsense.

If we are going to discuss a controversial issue, let us argue fair, present sources and links, argue from enlightenment without heat, concede points fairly won. The goal of rational arguement is to seek verifiable and objective truth not empty partisan victory.

jugs
10-09-2010, 03:55 AM
How about all these super energy efficent houses that are so tight people are breathing they're own dead skin?

So what, everyone that sleeps in a bed are breathing they're own dead skin + their partners, humans have done this for milions of yrs (6000yrs if you are fundamental christian) & are adapted for it.
PS, in many large citys if you live down-stream, the drinking water has been thro' several people before it gets to you.

john
:)

mike os
10-09-2010, 06:04 AM
The religion of "climate change" or "anthropogenic global warming" has never had any basis in reality or science.....or if it has the "evidence" is as well hidden as that for the Bermuda triangle, Roswell, yeti, Atlantis etc. then again i may be wrong & MIB is real.

So far most of the "science" has been called into question or shown to be spurious, misleading or plain falsified ( read manipulated to get the result we want, eg Mann et al, & the "hockey stick"), even CO2 has been shown to FOLLOW temp increases by several decades ( search CO2 in ice core data c 2005-6 iirc) in a peer reviewed scientific paper. However as a political tool it is proving very effective....

Climate change is real.... as real as a heart attack, the given cause is in very serious doubt..

or as professor Philip Stott puts it "climate change is a tautology"... only a 4-5 billion year old phenomena, remember about 8-10000 years ago, when most of the places we live were under several miles of ice cap?...... why did it retreat? Holiday or warming?

somehow we think because we have something like 75-100 years very patchy data and 30-50 years half decent data ( a lot of which is now compromised following a major problem with NOAA sensor data) we understand a ridiculously complex self regulating system that is constantly in flux......nothing but hubris

Somehow we are to blaim... because we are so powerful and awesome that only we ( pathetic little johnny come lately's) have the power to do such a thing or to control it....hubris or what?

Now me, I am easy to convince.... show me the data & I will look at it & if I need to update my views I am always willing to do so. I am however not interested in theories that do not admit or explain all the known data or ab hominem bull.

"I'm not going to argue the point, we both know it;'s true, and the research is out there to prove it."

data please... i think this is bull of the finest order.....:D

MrDan
10-09-2010, 06:46 AM
So far I'm hearing unupported assertion and insistance but no relevent credible evidence, analysis, or credible figures. We are on the internet where valid facts and figures are there for any to dig out and present. We are mature rational adults not minions of propagandists.

Some views I've seen so far are characteritic of rant radio where only selected and distorted facts cherry picked to support a particular agenda are permtted. Related but contrary facts and data that don't are denied, execrated, pilloried, and demonized along with those who would advance them.

By the way dismissing California as a state of fruit and nuts is ad hominem nonsense.

If we are going to discuss a controversial issue, let us argue fair, present sources and links, argue from enlightenment without heat, concede points fairly won. The goal of rational arguement is to seek verifiable and objective truth not empty partisan victory.

But that describes every debate I've ever witnessed about global warming, especially the ones that affect policy. :)

Evan
10-09-2010, 06:52 AM
You must be joking............ Cars are so clean now, that ONE of the dirty vehicles can equal HUNDREDS of cars......

Do the numbers Jerry. 340 billion miles for on road vehicles and about 10% of those are diesel trucks.