Quote:
Originally Posted by TimFreeh
I agree with the spirit of your post but your numbers are a bit off, its much worse than you state.
I don't think most people realize how clean today's modern cars are compared to vehicles of even 10-15 years ago, compared to vehicles of the 1960's the reductions in emissions are absolutely astounding.
Now with that as a backdrop I've got to say I'm a huge believer in getting the government out of things but in this case I'll admit that government regulations were a prime mover in creating technologies that have had a very beneficial effect on our environment. Well done EPA.
But here is the problem...... We've now reduced emission well over 99% from the days of the 1960's, rational people would say that at some point (and on Diesel technology I'd say we are there) that cost/benefit curve starts to reach a point where the rational person would say "Maybe enough, at least for awhile"
But of course at the EPA that would mean the bureaucracy would have nothing to do - so they mindlessly proceed to try to get the next 1/100th of a percent of a reduction.
The EPA doesn't give a damn about how much it costs or what the users have to do to live with the consequences of their emission new regulations. I'm actually surprised the military was able to get a waiver.
|
I'm guessing EPA will still have plenty to do. But I do agree with most of your remarks (except I doubt they're quibbling over a 1/100% reduction). I've heard a lot about particulate matter from diesels, I mean maybe I'm wrong, it has happened before, but I'd have to see more info before I conclude they're just wasting our time.
Govt. does have a place in these things and much improvement has been made. I recall the kicking and screaming in the early days so it probably wouldn't have happened w/o some coercion.
They've got to fix this and I'm thinking FDs can bring enough weight to bear from their Congress-folk to change this in a hurry.