There are 267 comments.

1. Member
   The Reticulator

   @TheReticulator

   6:16 PM EST ⋅ Dec 9, 2016

   Phil Turmel: Energy is the number one component of wealth for all, and wealthy societies have the cleanest environment. Which cuts into the EPA’s excuse for existence. Regulate pollution at 1990 or y2k levels, but let consumers and manufacturers use any form of energy in any way desired that meets emission limits. Move the little bit of enforcement necessary to the Interior department. The rest of the EPA is a cancerous tumor to be excised.

   Well, it’s you and Comrade Stalin against us conservatives, then.

   I’m old enough to remember when conservatives criticized Stalin for his idea that natural resources are what made America wealthy. We, on the other hand, thought it was our free enterprise system and constitutional, limited government that did it.

   I’m not so completely opposed to you and Uncle Joe that I don’t want us to conserve our natural resources to maximize their value to us.  And for that reason I favor carbon taxes that don’t give the government more money.  Our gas prices at about 1/4 to 1/3 of those in Ireland, and I don’t think Ireland’s living standard is 1/3 to 1/4 of ours, so I bet we can do it and still be a country wealthy enough to take good care of its environment.

   My vote is for a new version of the EPA to do regulation right.  Whether it’s possible to reform the one we have is questionable.

2. Inactive
   skipsul

   @skipsul

   6:28 PM EST ⋅ Dec 9, 2016

   The Reticulator:

   Western Chauvinist: Would Iowa build all its air polluting industries on the eastern border so that the prevailing winds would blow the pollution into Illinois? I think not

   Would local laws and pressure require smokestacks to be built high so the smoke will be blown far away from its source? Why yes, they would. So I don’t know what Iowans would have against their pollution being blown to Illinois.

   Agreed.  Even Thomas Sowell has argued the point that the EPA, whatever its faults, does have a point in dealing with interstate pollution issues.

   For instance – it has been claimed that sulphur emissions from coal plants in the Ohio River valley caused acid rain issues in upstate New York (this was before more advanced scrubbers came into use, and before there were prohibitions on certain older plants burning dirtier coal).

3. Member
   The Reticulator

   @TheReticulator

   7:15 PM EST ⋅ Dec 9, 2016

   skipsul:For instance – it has been claimed that sulphur emissions from coal plants in the Ohio River valley caused acid rain issues in upstate New York (this was before more advanced scrubbers came into use, and before there were prohibitions on certain older plants burning dirtier coal).

   Back when it got started, as the new guy in our department I was charged with operating a collecting station for the National Atmospheric Deposition Program. I didn’t like the time it consumed, and eventually got rid of that duty.  It did get me outside once a week, though.

   We were downwind from Gary, Indiana, and it showed in the data. I don’t have any of those charts and reports in my possession now.

   I was also charged with handling all the media inquiries and interviews, which I liked even less. One of our faculty members would have been well qualified to talk to the media, but due to previous bad experiences refused to do it.  The local paper had a good science reporter, and he did a very good 2-page spread on the issue, but the TV stations sent out some real airheads. The radio people were somewhat better than the TV people, but still…

   When one of them once pressed me for my personal opinion, I warned her that I was a right-wing conservative environmentalist. She asked if I thought James Watt was good for the environment and I said no. But that was a stupid question.

4. Inactive
   Phil Turmel

   @PhilTurmel

   8:47 PM EST ⋅ Dec 9, 2016

   The Reticulator:

   Phil Turmel: Energy is the number one component of wealth for all, and wealthy societies have the cleanest environment. Which cuts into the EPA’s excuse for existence. Regulate pollution at 1990 or y2k levels, but let consumers and manufacturers use any form of energy in any way desired that meets emission limits. Move the little bit of enforcement necessary to the Interior department. The rest of the EPA is a cancerous tumor to be excised.

   Well, it’s you and Comrade Stalin against us conservatives, then.

   Ha! I’m a Stalinist! Yay!  Wait, no sarc tag?

   I’m old enough to remember when conservatives criticized Stalin for his idea that natural resources are what made America wealthy. We, on the other hand, thought it was our free enterprise system and constitutional, limited government that did it.

   I’m not old enough to recall such a debate, and was a liberal as a youth anyways.  As far as I’m concerned, natural resources and political systems are independent contributors to a nation’s success.  Not either/or.  Besides, I don’t really care if the energy is native or imported — it’s the use of energy that drives true wealth, not the production of energy.

   I’m not so completely opposed to you and Uncle Joe that I don’t want us to conserve our natural resources to maximize their value to us. And for that reason I favor carbon taxes that don’t give the government more money. Our gas prices at about 1/4 to 1/3 of those in Ireland, and I don’t think Ireland’s living standard is 1/3 to 1/4 of ours, so I bet we can do it and still be a country wealthy enough to take good care of its environment.

   You haven’t made a case for a non-zero carbon tax other than hand-wavy “it’d be great” greenie fanboy assertions.  We have no carbon tax here and that’s how it should stay.

   My vote is for a new version of the EPA to do regulation right. Whether it’s possible to reform the one we have is questionable.

   The only way for the EPA to do regulation right is to do none at all.  No need to reform what you’re going to kill.

5. Member
   The Reticulator

   @TheReticulator

   9:20 PM EST ⋅ Dec 9, 2016

   Phil Turmel: You haven’t made a case for a non-zero carbon tax other than hand-wavy “it’d be great” greenie fanboy assertions. We have no carbon tax here and that’s how it should stay.

   I said that assuming we need regulation to promote fuel economy, a carbon tax would be better than CAFE standards.  You’re the one who went off on the tangent about whether or not we need government to promote fuel economy. It’s a good topic to discuss sometime, and you can pretty well guess which way I’d argue, but it’s not the topic we started with. I started to take your bait to draw me away from the topic, but before going further along that path I’d like to get back to the original point.

6. Inactive
   Fred Cole

   @FredCole

   5:56 AM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

   The Reticulator:CAFE standards are another type of example of regulation in the worst possible way.

   Much better would be to impose a substantial but net-neutral carbon tax and let the markets figure out how best to deal with fuel economy.

   Yeah. Whenever ppl complain about SUVs or super stretched hummer limos, I explain how CAFE created.both.

7. Inactive
   Umbra Fractus

   @UmbraFractus

   6:03 AM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

   Fred Cole:

   Yeah. Whenever ppl complain about SUVs or super stretched hummer limos, I explain how CAFE created.both.

   People who complain about SUV’s have never been to Texas. The SUV’s here are frequently dwarfed by full sized pickups with wheels that come up to my mid-thigh (and I’m a tall guy.)

   All impeccably washed, of course, because God forbid they actually use those enormous pickups to, y’know, haul stuff.

8. Member
   Bob Thompson

   @BobThompson

   8:05 AM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

   Umbra Fractus: All impeccably washed, of course, because God forbid they actually use those enormous pickups to, y’know, haul stuff.

   What have you got against keeping working vehicles clean? It doesn’t take much hauling trailers of hay, horses and cattle, or earth moving equipment to dirty up the trucks. And those big wheels are necessary as well.

9. Inactive
   Larry Koler

   @LarryKoler

   9:14 AM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

   I’m simply amazed at how many people use those 3/4 ton and 1 ton 4-wheel drive rigs to work every day. Very strange commuter vehicle.

10. Member
    Bob Thompson

    @BobThompson

    12:34 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    Larry Koler:I’m simply amazed at how many people use those 3/4 ton and 1 ton 4-wheel drive rigs to work every day. Very strange commuter vehicle.

    Let me tell you how. I live next to my daughter and her husband. Together we have about 5 acres each with animal rights inside an incorporated city suburb to Salt Lake City. They also have 2,000 acres down the road about 40 miles where they keep 100 or so longhorns and a dozen horses. I look over to their place and see a truck, a flatbed trailer, and a horse trailer. But they also have multiple businesses that require  time in an office setting that they cannot do from home so often the truck will be seen (clean) parked in the office lot, so it looks as if someone is commuting in the truck. They just asked me, for the second time in five years, if they can bring a dozen young heifers and put them in my yard to keep them away from the bulls at the ranch. I have a lot more available space than they do since they have a creek running through and chickens, rabbits, and dogs outside. I know this is anecdotal, but I also know that many urban folks and the EPA just don’t get it. So there.

11. Member
    cdor

    @cdor

    

    12:46 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    Bob Thompson:

    Larry Koler:I’m simply amazed at how many people use those 3/4 ton and 1 ton 4-wheel drive rigs to work every day. Very strange commuter vehicle.

    Let me tell you how. I live next to my daughter and her husband. Together we have about 5 acres each with animal rights inside an incorporated city suburb to Salt Lake City. They also have 2,000 acres down the road about 40 miles where they keep 100 or so longhorns and a dozen horses. I look over to their place and see a truck, a flatbed trailer, and a horse trailer. But they also have multiple businesses that require time in an office setting that they cannot do from home so often the truck will be see (clean) parked in the office lot, so it looks as if someone is commuting in the truck. Theyjust asked me, forthe second time in five years, if theycan bring a dozen young heifers and put them in my yard to keep them away from the bulls at the ranch. I have a lot more available space than theydo since they have a creek running throughand chickens, rabbits, and dogs outside. I know this is anecdotal, but I also know that many urban folks and the EPA just don’t get it. So there.

    Sounds like you have an amazing family, Bob, one that is about 1 in a million. OTOH, those pickups are everywhere, by the tens of thousands

12. Inactive
    skipsul

    @skipsul

    12:55 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    cdor: Sounds like you have an amazing family, Bob, one that is about 1 in a million. OTOH, those pickups are everywhere, by the tens of thousands

    Their use does depend greatly on where you are located.  Here in Ohio, classy pickups are very much a status symbol for suburbanites, so you do see a lot more here that are rarely used for work except in a home handyman capacity, and are used to their fullest extent only for hauling boats and trailers around.

    I had a Chevy Avalanche for several years and drove it daily, and used it in a work capacity only a couple of times a month (deliveries and pickups at suppliers) – I’d have it still if it seated 6 instead of 5, but daughter 4 meant I had to upgrade.  My best friend in high school had an old ’78 Chevy heavy half-ton that he drove to school daily (it, um, had some modifications to it that made it rather quick too).

13. Member
    Bob Thompson

    @BobThompson

    12:57 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    cdor:

    Sounds like you have an amazing family, Bob, one that is about 1 in a million. OTOH, those pickups are everywhere, by the tens of thousands

    Maybe not that rare. Just think how many people might be like I described, those with ranching or farming connections that don’t require them full time or actually require them to have a commuting job, those who commute but have other hobby or sporting activities (hunting, rodeo). There’s plenty of reasons for people who look like commuters to have trucks, more than one in a million. I wonder about those city dwellers who have cars or trucks and don’t ‘need’ them at all. OTOH, I think whatever vehicle anyone wants to have, they should go for it.

14. Inactive
    skipsul

    @skipsul

    1:02 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    Bob Thompson:

    cdor:

    Sounds like you have an amazing family, Bob, one that is about 1 in a million. OTOH, those pickups are everywhere, by the tens of thousands

    Maybe not that rare. Just think how many people might be like I described, those with ranching or farming connections that don’t require them full time or actually require them to have a commuting job, those who commute but have other hobby or sporting activities (hunting, rodeo). There’s plenty of reasons for people who look like commuters to have trucks, more than one in a million. I wonder about those city dwellers who have cars or trucks and don’t ‘need’ them at all.

    There is also this – maybe you only need that truck as a truck a couple of times a month in support of some hobby or pursuit, but you can’t afford, or lack room for another vehicle.  I’ve got a Toyota Sequoia for a couple of reasons:

    • We have a travel trailer that we use spring summer and fall, and I need a vehicle to tow it that also seats 6 (I have 4 kids).
    • My garage only has room for 1 vehicle (currently the ‘vette), and the driveway can hold another 2.  Much as I would love to commute in something smaller, I have to drop the kiddos at school in the mornings too, and don’t have time to double back to drop the SUV and swap out for a smaller car.
15. Member
    Matt White

    @

    3:10 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    skipsul:

    Bob Thompson:

    cdor:

     

    …

    There is also this – maybe you only need that truck as a truck a couple of times a month in support of some hobby or pursuit, but you can’t afford, or lack room for another vehicle. I’ve got a Toyota Sequoia for a couple of reasons:

    • We have a travel trailer that we use spring summer and fall, and I need a vehicle to tow it that also seats 6 (I have 4 kids).
    • My garage only has room for 1 vehicle (currently the ‘vette), and the driveway can hold another 2. Much as I would love to commute in something smaller, I have to drop the kiddos at school in the mornings too, and don’t have time to double back to drop the SUV and swap out for a smaller car.

    That’s close to the point I was going to make. Trucks can be handy for anyone now and then. For most of us it’s full capacity is only used occasionally, but it’s not worth having an extra car. They’re also a much more pleasant ride than most modern cars.

16. Inactive
    Larry Koler

    @LarryKoler

    3:12 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    Bob Thompson:

    Larry Koler:I’m simply amazed at how many people use those 3/4 ton and 1 ton 4-wheel drive rigs to work every day. Very strange commuter vehicle.

    Let me tell you how. I live next to my daughter and her husband. Together we have about 5 acres each with animal rights inside an incorporated city suburb to Salt Lake City. They also have 2,000 acres down the road about 40 miles where they keep 100 or so longhorns and a dozen horses. I look over to their place and see a truck, a flatbed trailer, and a horse trailer. But they also have multiple businesses that require time in an office setting that they cannot do from home so often the truck will be seen (clean) parked in the office lot, so it looks as if someone is commuting in the truck. They just asked me, for the second time in five years, if they can bring a dozen young heifers and put them in my yard to keep them away from the bulls at the ranch. I have a lot more available space than they do since they have a creek running through and chickens, rabbits, and dogs outside. I know this is anecdotal, but I also know that many urban folks and the EPA just don’t get it. So there.

    Yes, anecdotal for sure — and quite atypical.

    I don’t mind clean trucks and I don’t mind that people are spending the money on the extra gas required for such a vehicle. I don’t believe in the sky falling nor in the junk science fraud that is global warming today and global climate change tomorrow. That ain’t me.

    I still am “simply amazed at how many people use those 3/4 ton and 1 ton 4-wheel drive rigs to work every day. Very strange commuter vehicle.”

17. Inactive
    Larry Koler

    @LarryKoler

    3:15 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    Matt White:

    skipsul:

    Bob Thompson:

    cdor:

    …

    There is also this – maybe you only need that truck as a truck a couple of times a month in support of some hobby or pursuit, but you can’t afford, or lack room for another vehicle. I’ve got a Toyota Sequoia for a couple of reasons:

    • We have a travel trailer that we use spring summer and fall, and I need a vehicle to tow it that also seats 6 (I have 4 kids).
    • My garage only has room for 1 vehicle (currently the ‘vette), and the driveway can hold another 2. Much as I would love to commute in something smaller, I have to drop the kiddos at school in the mornings too, and don’t have time to double back to drop the SUV and swap out for a smaller car.

    That’s close to the point I was going to make. Trucks can be handy for anyone now and then. For most of us it’s full capacity is only used occasionally, but it’s not worth having an extra car. They’re also a much more pleasant ride than most modern cars.

    Sure — this makes the most sense.

18. Inactive
    Damocles

    @Damocles

    4:06 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    Bob Thompson:

    Umbra Fractus: All impeccably washed, of course, because God forbid they actually use those enormous pickups to, y’know, haul stuff.

    What have you got against keeping working vehicles clean? It doesn’t take much hauling trailers of hay, horses and cattle, or earth moving equipment to dirty up the trucks. And those big wheels are necessary as well.

    There’s a bit of confusion here.  Two kinds of trucks:

    • “working” trucks — these are the “I have an authentic reason for a work vehicle” trucks.
    • “show” trucks — these are the “I like huge good looking vehicles” trucks.

    Both are fine in my view.  Sometimes they’re even the same vehicle!

    Authority:  based on many years living in Dallas, where 4×4’s are very popular because of the several foot gradient from one end of the city to the other.

19. Member
    Judge Mental

    @JudgeMental

    4:12 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    Damocles: Authority: based on many years living in Dallas, where 4×4’s are very popular because of the several foot gradient from one end of the city to the other.

    They do come in handy when they are stuck in traffic and cut across to the frontage road.

20. Inactive
    Phil Turmel

    @PhilTurmel

    5:31 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    My favorite are also very popular in Texas: The Chevrolet Suburban and its siblings.  Big enough (mass) to meet the government’s definition of a work truck, I can carry eight adults or a bunch of 4×8 sheets of plywood with equal facility.  Mine is a 4×4 equipped with one of these laptop kits for the occasional programming or deployment task out in the boonies (oil/gas wells, etc).  But it cleans up nice for visits to the customer’s IT shop downtown.

    The true magic of the Chevy Suburban, though, is its evolution over the years kept it within the dimensions (just barely) of typical home and public parking garages. I’m currently on my 4th.  (-:

21. Inactive
    rico

    @rico

    5:44 PM EST ⋅ Dec 10, 2016

    Phil Turmel:…

    The true magic of the Chevy Suburban, though, is its evolution over the years kept it within the dimensions (just barely) of typical home and public parking garages. I’m currently on my 4th. (-:

    Not sure it would fit into my garage…

    Maybe if I were to fold in and grease the side-view mirrors.

22. Member
    Bob Thompson

    @BobThompson

    7:41 AM EST ⋅ Dec 12, 2016

    Damocles:

    Bob Thompson:

    Umbra Fractus: All impeccably washed, of course, because God forbid they actually use those enormous pickups to, y’know, haul stuff.

    What have you got against keeping working vehicles clean? It doesn’t take much hauling trailers of hay, horses and cattle, or earth moving equipment to dirty up the trucks. And those big wheels are necessary as well.

    There’s a bit of confusion here. Two kinds of trucks:

    • “working” trucks — these are the “I have an authentic reason for a work vehicle” trucks.
    • “show” trucks — these are the “I like huge good looking vehicles” trucks.

    Both are fine in my view. Sometimes they’re even the same vehicle!

    Authority: based on many years living in Dallas, where 4×4’s are very popular because of the several foot gradient from one end of the city to the other.

    This whole discussion about the trucks has been fun. The fact remains, without regard to the percentage breakdown of the 2 kinds of trucks, that those who require the trucks for work are not going away so those who make the rules and those who support the rules should educate themselves on the effects of rulemaking.

23. Inactive
    Umbra Fractus

    @UmbraFractus

    7:56 AM EST ⋅ Dec 12, 2016

    Bob Thompson:

    This whole discussion about the trucks has been fun. The fact remains, without regard to the percentage breakdown of the 2 kinds of trucks, that those who require the trucks for work are not going away so those who make the rules and those who support the rules should educate themselves on the effects of rulemaking.

    Who said anything about rules?

24. Coolidge
    ctlaw

    @ctlaw

    8:31 AM EST ⋅ Dec 12, 2016

    Fred Cole:

    The Reticulator:CAFE standards are another type of example of regulation in the worst possible way.

    Much better would be to impose a substantial but net-neutral carbon tax and let the markets figure out how best to deal with fuel economy.

    Yeah. Whenever ppl complain about SUVs or super stretched hummer limos, I explain how CAFE created.both.

    Actually, a combination of: CAFE and related regulations; safety regulations; and feminism.

    When I was in nursery school, the husband of one of the teachers picked up like ten of us in an old Buick Sport Wagon. In kindergarten, like five or six of us would be crammed into one of the parents’ cars, sometimes a Beetle. Safety would prohibit that now.

    The natural successor to the old station wagons was the minivan, classified as a light truck, so offering similar capability with lesser CAFE restriction.

    But feminist trashing of traditional motherhood made the minivan unfashionable. The result is the big SUV.

     

25. Member
    Bob Thompson

    @BobThompson

    8:51 AM EST ⋅ Dec 12, 2016

    Umbra Fractus:

    Bob Thompson:

    This whole discussion about the trucks has been fun. The fact remains, without regard to the percentage breakdown of the 2 kinds of trucks, that those who require the trucks for work are not going away so those who make the rules and those who support the rules should educate themselves on the effects of rulemaking.

    Who said anything about rules?

    The language of EPA.

26. Inactive
    skipsul

    @skipsul

    6:41 AM EST ⋅ Dec 14, 2016

    Bob Thompson: This whole discussion about the trucks has been fun. The fact remains, without regard to the percentage breakdown of the 2 kinds of trucks, that those who require the trucks for work are not going away so those who make the rules and those who support the rules should educate themselves on the effects of rulemaking.

    If only.  Do you know that chassis upfitters have to even adhere to front-facing surface area rules?  The laws administrative regulations even dictate the shape of large work vehicles now.

27. Member
    Judge Mental

    @JudgeMental

    6:48 AM EST ⋅ Dec 14, 2016

    skipsul:

    Bob Thompson: This whole discussion about the trucks has been fun. The fact remains, without regard to the percentage breakdown of the 2 kinds of trucks, that those who require the trucks for work are not going away so those who make the rules and those who support the rules should educate themselves on the effects of rulemaking.

    If only. Do you know that chassis upfitters have to even adhere to front-facing surface area rules? The laws administrative regulations even dictate the shape of large work vehicles now.

    You could never build one of these nowadays.