Slashdot Mirror


Southern California Sees Its Longest Streak of Bad Air In Decades (sfchronicle.com)

According to state monitoring data, Southern California violated federal smog standards for 87 consecutive days -- the longest stretch of bad air in at least 20 years. "The streak is the latest sign that Souther California's battle against smog is faltering after decades of dramatic improvement," reports San Francisco Chronicle. From the report: The ozone pollution spell began June 19 and continued through July and August, with every day exceeding the federal health standard of 70 parts per billion somewhere across Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties. It didn't relent until Sept. 14, when air pollution dipped to "moderate" levels within federal limits for ozone, the lung-damaging gas in smog that triggers asthma and other respiratory illnesses. It's not unusual for Southern California summers to go weeks without a break in the smog, especially in inland communities that have long suffered the nation's worst ozone levels. But environmentalists and health experts say the persistence of dirty air this year is a troubling sign that demands action. Regulators blame the dip in air quality in recent years on hotter weather and stronger, more persistent inversion layers that trap smog near the ground.

107 comments

  1. Good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope it kills everyone there.

  2. Fires by phalse+phace · · Score: 3, Informative

    All the fires they've had this year made things worse too.

    1. Re:Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      As the climate warms due to massive fossil emissions, fires become more frequent, larger, and harder to fight. So the choice is to stop dumping fossil fuel emissions into our saturated atmosphere and use renewables, or die.

      And if Republican denialist faggots would rather die than stop polluting, we should accommodate their decision.

    2. Re:Fires by schwit1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Nice try.

      “We have 100 years of fire suppression that has led to this huge accumulation of fuel loads, just dead and downed debris from trees and plant material in our forests, and in our woodlands,” says Berleman. “As a result of that, our forests and woodlands are not healthy, and we’re getting more catastrophic fire behavior than we would otherwise.”
      https://www.motherjones.com/en...

      Jerry Brown would rather spend the money on a train to nowhere and banning plastic straws.

    3. Re: Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "the more pollution there is, the less oxygen there is" - This rather explains how your brain is malfunctioning more than it actually explains anything related to the atmosphere or fires... you just don't understand the concepts involved.

      Republican education cuts strike again.

    4. Re: Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So your argument is that pollution increases oxygen?

    5. Re:Fires by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 4, Insightful

      From the article:

      Regulators blame the dip in air quality in recent years on hotter weather and stronger, more persistent inversion layers that trap smog near the ground.

      Yeah. And the fires.

      Even here in Seattle, we had a week or so of horribly, smoggy air that was outside the "safe" levels, and that's pretty rare for this area. You could see the haze drifting over from the fires on satellite imagery.

      One could argue that a warming and drier climate encouraged the development and spread of wildfires over a sustained period, but it's pretty odd to not even mention them as a major contributing factor for this season's bad air.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    6. Re:Fires by careysub · · Score: 1

      All the fires they've had this year made things worse too.

      The two things go together. We had the hottest summer in Southern California history this year, in inland valleys (not the desert) it hit 118 F. I have lived years of my life in deserts around the world and have never seen a temperature that high before.

      And when it is really, really hot everything gets really, really dry. Then all it takes is an ignition source.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    7. Re:Fires by Ichijo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Which side is the "nowhere" side, Los Angeles or San Francisco?

      --
      Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
    8. Re:Fires by Powercntrl · · Score: 0

      One could argue that a warming and drier climate encouraged the development and spread of wildfires over a sustained period, but it's pretty odd to not even mention them as a major contributing factor for this season's bad air.

      More likely, California has just been so busy spazzing out over Trump that they forgot to restock on these.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
    9. Re:Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As the climate warms due to massive fossil emissions, fires become more frequent, larger, and harder to fight. So the choice is to stop dumping fossil fuel emissions into our saturated atmosphere and use renewables, or die.

      And if Republican denialist faggots would rather die than stop polluting, we should accommodate their decision.

      Long as faggot California dies first we will die happy.

    10. Re: Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The argument is stupid because: the day atmospheric oxygen is depleted enough to limit forest fire, is the day whole states are strangled from lack of oxygen. Fire works with much lower concentrations of oxygen than people need to stay alive. One of the reasons why people can kill themselves starting a car in a closed garage. The engine doesn't need much oxygen to idle.

      Also, the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere is vast. Burning all of the earths surface wouldn't deplete this oxygen. Such a burn would merely poison us with large amounts of CO2. The atmosphere has 21% oxygen, and we can live with this dropping several percent. But we cannot survive even 1% CO2 for long, and most other combustion products are even worse.

      Which is exactly the problem with smog. Even the densest smog has enough oxygen to breathe - it is all the other gunk that makes it nasty.

    11. Re:Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, that makes total sense -- for a Trumper. (Rolls eyes). It's a good thing for Trumpers they lead such a sheltered live; in the real world they would never survive.

    12. Re: Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hard choice. I suppose we can't pick both...

    13. Re: Fires by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      Actually, IDIOT, the more pollution there is, the less oxygen there is, so that retards fires

      Holy shit, that is the stupidest thing I have read here in a long time. Congratulations, sir.

    14. Re:Fires by DamnOregonian · · Score: 1

      Because here in Seattle, we had 2.5um particulate smog.
      They're discussing ozone here. It didn't come from a fire.
      Your first clue should have been where you typed, "we had a week or so", and then remembered, "damn, the article said 87 days, didn't it."

      You did read it, right?

    15. Re:Fires by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yep, I read it. But you might not be aware that, according to observational data, wildfire smoke may interact with local pollutants to create ground-level ozone.

      https://www.sciencedaily.com/r...

      The Seattle smog was different, but the larger point I was making was that wildfires are huge events that undoubtedly have a very real impact on the regional environment. I'd be very surprised if the two events weren't linked. Can that be proven yet? No, but if you see correlating data, you have to at least LOOK to see if there may be causality before dismissing it out of hand.

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    16. Re:Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > One could argue that a warming and drier climate encouraged the development and spread of wildfires over a sustained period, but it's pretty odd to not even mention them as a major contributing factor for this season's bad air.

      "Odd"? How naïve are you? Why bring non-man-made natural disasters in the current narrative when you can keep blaming humans for everything? Keep with the program please. Don't question the authorities, slave.

    17. Re: Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not the lack of oxygen that kills you in a car garage suicide, rather the carbon monoxide buildup in the blood (hemoglobin)

    18. Re:Fires by drinkypoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nice try.

      The forests are not substantially different after 100 years of fire suppression than they were after 90 years of fire suppression, but fires are much, much more severe than they were 10 years ago. That puts the lie to the notion that it's the built-up undergrowth responsible for the new severity of fires. They're getting fire tornadoes for the first time in built-up areas, not just in forests, which also has nothing to do with that undergrowth. You are in denial.

      Jerry Brown would rather spend the money on a train to nowhere and banning plastic straws.

      The train is meant to go everywhere, and without all the whiners and the corporate interests fighting it, it would. And it might anyway. Banning plastic straws costs almost nothing as government action is measured, and it has the potential to make a substantial difference in oceanic pollution. Like six-pack rings, plastic straws seem to have a disproportionate effect on marine life.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    19. Re:Fires by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Banning plastic straws costs almost nothing as government action is measured, and it has the potential to make a substantial difference in oceanic pollution. Like six-pack rings, plastic straws seem to have a disproportionate effect on marine life.

      Except it's hella ableist, and actually not at all effective because plastic straws from North America and Europe are present contribute homeopathic amounts of oceanic plastics (a tiiiiiny fraction of the nearly-insignificant percent that is those countries' total contribution), so it's basically it's just a show of fanatical religious devotion void of any other significant meanings. If you really want to cut down on oceanic plastic pollution? The biggest problems aren't a 'what' but a 'who'--China is one of the worst offenders, too. It'd be environmentally better to just bury our plastic waste ourselves than export it for recycling.

      But people are going to be patting themselves on the back and feeling they did their part by their nearly-completely symbolic efforts, so they're not actually going to feel like doing something that will produce actual, significant results & keep ignoring the ecological impacts of exporting waste for recycling without checking the eco-friendliness of the recycling facility.

    20. Re:Fires by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Except it's hella ableist,

      No, no it isn't. You can still have them if you ask, especially if you have a disability. The law only prohibits giving them to people who don't ask for them.

      and actually not at all effective because plastic straws from North America and Europe are present contribute homeopathic amounts of oceanic plastics

      Banana peels on football fields, not eyedroppers in tank cars.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    21. Re:Fires by Powercntrl · · Score: 1

      Yeah, that makes total sense -- for a Trumper.

      From my comment history, it should've been obvious I'm no fan of Trump. That doesn't mean I can't call out California when they do something stupid like classify coffee as a carcinogen, or want to secede from the union because waiting 4 years for the next presidential election is just too long, man.

      --

      ---
      DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
  3. Re:But! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And they'll use it to fine gross polluters dumping their trash in the atmosphere and hopefully bit by bit put them out of business and into a better one. Yep. It's nice to see even Republicans can grasp basic concepts like this.

  4. Just eject California into the Pacific by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Then all the human feces spread all over the place can fuse with the floating plastic trash pile through the miracle heat of the fact that California is always on fire and the world will be better off

    1. Re:Just eject California into the Pacific by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      California creates everything from music, to movies, to games, to software, to technology, to computers, to fashion, to foods. California has the 5th largest economy in the world, above the UK and the remainder of the freeloading US states.

    2. Re:Just eject California into the Pacific by rfengr · · Score: 2

      Damn, what would I do without my sexting apps, ANTIFA-chic clothing, and E Coli lettuce?

    3. Re:Just eject California into the Pacific by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The E Coli lettuce came from Arizona, not California. California actually has food quality standards.

  5. The federal government should fine the air by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Tax the air until it complies with federal standards. That will teach it.

    1. Re: The federal government should fine the air by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That sounds like a California type law, not a Federal law.

  6. I think I know who by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably that jackass with the smoke stacks coming out of the bed of his diesel truck.

  7. Re: But! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Iâ(TM)m gonna vote trump and then give you a swirly

  8. Too many hippies... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...they need to take a bath.

  9. Re: But! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Don't drop your iphone in the toilet, drop your personal integrity into the toilet instead by supporting Trump?

  10. Umm - 4 counties? Perspective... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino? That's an area bigger than South Carolina, West Virginia, and 8 other States. For our European friends, that's an area larger than Belgium. So, SOMEWHERE in that area it was above the limits. Yeah, doesn't seem quite so bad now...

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  11. Was creimer wolfing down Taco Bell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    a lot lately?

  12. Re: Trump full of shit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pic please

  13. Re:Umm - 4 counties? Perspective... by aaarrrgggh · · Score: 1

    Pretty much... I have been in all four counties at least 4 days in the past three months, and never really noticed it especially bad... aside from the feedlot in Ontario. Mostly in the morning, so it would usually be less then, but not especially bad.

    I live by the ocean though, so I am not getting it consistently bad; this could skew my perception.

  14. Re:Extremely misleading article by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How could there be that much moisture in the air? It's a desert not a rainforest.

  15. Re:DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    every day exceeding the federal health standard of 70 parts per billion somewhere across Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside and San Bernardino counties

    Not the ENTIRE area, just somewhere in that area. AC needs to learn to read, rather than spending all that time trying to dream up snarky remarks...

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  16. I know! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's welcome another 10 million immigrants into CA and see if that improves the air quality.

    1. Re:I know! by careysub · · Score: 1

      Isn't your meme how everyone is fleeing California?

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
    2. Re:I know! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are going to pollute the other states with their social diseases.

  17. Re:DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Not the ENTIRE area, just somewhere in that area.

    I wish there was a way to concentrate it right at the Trump apologists.

  18. Re: Trump full of shit by BeauHD++(3492052) · · Score: 0

    Pictures of naked girls are overrated. As are you.

  19. This Republican trashmind doesn't understand fire? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My argument is that you're too stupid to understand that ~150 PPM 02 displacement isn't reducing the rate at which fires burn enough to matter compared to the insulating effects warming and drying the climate, you fucking moron.
    And you've already proven me correct about that, because you have no science background and that retarded line of thought was the best you could come up with, lol. (QED, go look that up. It's Latin for "you're a moron")

    Morons like you are the reason human civilization can't continue in representative governance, you're just too fucking dumb for the species to carry as we are. You literally revel in your retardation.
    Learn or die, those are your options. I don't care which you pick, but you've got 10 seconds or I'm deciding for you, for the benefit of mankind.

      Retard hour is over. Science will take over from Republican children of pollution now. You are simply too dumb for this job, you blew it.

  20. Exceeded what standard? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The standard for O3 changed in 2015, dropping to 70ppb from previous 75 in 2008 and 80 in 1997 and 120 before that. So the headline that Federal standards were exceeded for the longest streak in 20 years is misleading since that standard has not been standard.

  21. Duhhh? Wildfires out the ass this year in Cali?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Probably a lot of that smog is the result of the huge wildfires that have happened (and probably continuing right now) this year?

  22. Re:Umm - 4 counties? Perspective... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not those entire counties. The stuff west of the mountains and what amounts to the sprawl that is called LA if not from the area. Still a good area but not bigger than states.

    The counties extend all the way to Arizona but are still fairly pristine due to being uninhabited desert.

  23. Re:DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "OMG THEY AVERAGED THE DATA" Congratulations, trashmind GOP retard, you have finally comprehended that most data is averaged. You graduate at the top of your retard denialist party with a D- in basic shit, magna dumb loud.

    That doesn't make the air any better for children, seniors, athletes, athsmatics. You're just demonstrating how dumb you are for slashdot, again. Nothing changed.

    Meanwhile, the air WAS BAD and your TAPDANCING FAGGOT DENIALIST ACT doesn't actually AFFECT THAT AT ALL, whether or not you actually COMPREHEND what the data says or even look at it.

    Which you haven't yet even done, you whiny tapdancing denialist faggot.

  24. Re: This Republican trashmind doesn't understand f by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    So, again, without moving the goalposts, does increased pollution increase oxygen levels?

    Just a yes/no answer please

  25. Re:Umm - 4 counties? Perspective... by careysub · · Score: 0

    ... aside from the feedlot in Ontario.....

    I know this place!

    --
    Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  26. Re:Umm - 4 counties? Perspective... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    We feel your pain... I live in Ventura, to stay as far away from that lot as I can, and still be in the "greater LA area"...:)

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  27. What Standard? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Federal standards were exceeded for the longest streak in 20 years might be more meaningful if the standards were the same for the last 20 years, which they are not. Current ozone standards of 70 PPB were lowered from 75 in 2015, and again in 2008 and 1997. So it's hard to say if it was actually a long streak on an objective scale or on a moving target. I'm not arguing that standards shouldn't change over time, just when you say it's the worst streak in 20 years based on a "standard" that changes, it's not useful information.

  28. This Republican trashmind doesn't understand MUCH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    So, again, you're too stupid to be able to comprehend the effect that ~150-200 PPM reduction of 02 does not affect flames at sea level (or any environment really) noticeably. It's measurable in a lab, but insignificantly tiny compared to the effect that raising the temperature or lowering the humidity have on flames and by extension forest fires. The amount of c02, methane and other insulants is very tiny compared to the overall atmospheric composition but because of their IR-reflecting properties even a slight increase to the entire atmospheric composition traps a significant and EXPONENTIALLY INCREASING additional heat, which both dries and warms areas traditionally cooler in the recent epoch and with substantial fuels. Hotter fires also drive faster winds, and all of these drying, heating and blowing effects have a massive effect on actual wildfire intensity and occurrence, as any "red flag" fire warning sign explains even to illiterates like yourself, if you manage to read it. DRY/HOT = FIRE DANGER. Increasing 02 by 150-200 PARTS PER MILLION does not nearly have the same effect. QED, you're a fucking moron. Class dismissed.

  29. How much of that comes from China? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Smog is a global problem.

  30. Re:DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Somewhere" doesn't mean "87 days of smog in at least one place in at least one of the counties". When the air quality index is bad it tends to be bad over a large area, particularly in the inland valleys. Take a look at this map. On a typical day the coast (except SoCal) will be 'good' while the inland areas and SoCal will be 'moderate' or worse.

  31. Re:Umm - 4 counties? Perspective... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The word "somewhere" means that a reading or readings were above the limits, up to the point where the entire area exceeded the limits.

    Your SOMEWHERE minimisation is as improper as saying that EVERYWHERE was over the limits.

    Were these just single point failures - just one point failed across the whole expanse on any given day? I don't think so.

    I have filed you under "those who would snarkily deny a real problem".

    How about fixing the problem, so you don't have to reveal your true nature?

  32. Re: This Republican trashmind doesn't understand M by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so, again, you are gay and dumb

  33. Re:DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish there was a way to concentrate it right at the Trump apologists.
    --
    -- Be careful what you wish for.

    You should heed your own sig's advice. Trumpers have guns. Lots and lots of guns. And they love any excuse to cap an SJW and watch him bleed out.

  34. Shiteater republican schtwat here eats plastic? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jerry Brown doesn't spend "money" banning straws, industry creates a better way than littering the ocean floor with plastic shit. You're a shit eater by nature, obviously.

  35. Re:DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Stick your guns into your asshole and pull the trigger, don't coward your way out of war like Trump. You're a faggot, you know nothing about killing lol. Retarded inbred white faggots get shot to death everyday lol.

    We are replacing you.

  36. None in this case by Bruce66423 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The chemicals concerned (e.g. NOx, O3) have a low lifespan in the atmosphere and so are not going to make the trip across the Pacific. A more interesting question is how much of China's smog is as a result of USA manufacturers moving their production to China.

    1. Re:None in this case by drinkypoo · · Score: 4, Informative

      The chemicals concerned (e.g. NOx, O3) have a low lifespan in the atmosphere and so are not going to make the trip across the Pacific.

      Nonsense. Got any more lies which are easily disproven?

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  37. Re:DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Stick your guns into your asshole and pull the trigger, don't coward your way out of war like Trump. You're a faggot, you know nothing about killing lol. Retarded inbred white faggots get shot to death everyday lol.

    We are replacing you.

    Really ?

    Of your 30+ genders how many can actually breed ?

  38. But the same article.... by tanveer1979 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Also says this

    "Further complicating the picture is climate change—the major factor behind the longer fire seasons and bigger fires. This creates a feedback loop, where megafires exacerbate climate change, which then encourages even bigger wildfires. One study found that from 1984 to 2015, climate change doubled the area burned by wildfires across the West, compared to what would have burned without climate change."

    --
    My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
    FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
    1. Re:But the same article.... by Rockoon · · Score: 1

      So what you are saying (and citing) is that climate change is responsible for as many fires as all the other causes of fire put together.

      When its put like that... doesnt fucking sound believable, does it? But here you are, saying it, and citing it, as if you didnt even know what it says....

      --
      "His name was James Damore."
    2. Re:But the same article.... by dryeo · · Score: 2

      What he said was that twice the area got burned, not twice as many fires. Could be the same number of fires, each one burning double what it would have if it was cooler and/or damper.
      I don't know about California, but where I am further north, the early warm springs has caused a lot of undergrowth of grasses and such which then dries out and forms fuel. Whether the early springs are caused by climate change or natural variation is hard to pin down but statistically the winters have been getting warmer, spring showing up earlier and summers drier.

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  39. The offending air has been removed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a victory for justice, the air was convicted of violating regulations and sentenced to 20 years imprisonment - all air is to be sucked out of the state within the next two weeks and stored securely until 2038.

  40. Re: DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You took the blue pil dident you you retardistan

  41. With so many... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....liberals/socialists/illegals there, are you surprised? They're all full of hot/bad air

  42. Re:This Republican trashmind doesn't understand fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    You liberal morons hate science when it talks about there actually being differences between genders, or that there actually are genders--or when it talks about differences in intelligence levels across populations (even populations of the same race, so leave that out of this). When science doesn't fit your narrative you don't just ignore it, you actively suppress it.

    Also, the last time I checked, California is governed by not just liberals but actual total leftists and has been for quite some time. They have stricter regulations on just about everything imaginable and pretty much get their way on anything that gets proposed--and yet you still have this problem while other areas don't have that problem. Now why might that be? Geography certainly. As others have pointed out and you've roundly ignored, it's been proven (again, by science) that suppressing wildfires is bad for forests and leads to bigger and worse wildfires when they finally do break out. Nobody in California wants to hear that though because naturally occurring wildfires may be beneficial for forests and a part of the natural cycle of things but they are of course not good for real estate developers and other bigwigs who make up the top end of the "small class of wealthy people and huge underclass of poor and illegal aliens with no middle class" that your ill-conceived social experiments have wrought.

    In other words, you mindless twerp, all of this really proves that leftists are total failures at governing, that their policies objectively and provably don't work because nature doesn't give a damn about your political opinion, and that leaves you with the only options leftists ever have open to them--suppress the message and, when you get in power, literally kill the messengers. It is you who are obsolete and since you're probably young and stupid, let me give you some advice: being obsolete before you even get started is a bad position to be in.

    Now, for the rest of you, conservatives are scarcely perfect. Conservatives do favor big business too much, they have in the past allowed the few to get away with way too much and push the costs of their messes off on the public. Leftists may be off the handle about global warming causing specific things but pollution is bad and should be held to a minimum--and people who cause environmental disasters like dumping chemicals into rivers and such should be held criminally accountable and financially accountable for their mess. That's the problem with pollution--it doesn't cost anything. Sincere minded people who want it to cost something aren't wrong about that because that's using economics to solve a problem caused by economics. In other words, everyone needs to grow up and figure out how to make things work.

  43. How is that possible? by guruevi · · Score: 0

    California is one of the most regulated states when it comes to emissions, have an area of the country with the least amount of heavy industry per capita, less cars (due to taxes), much more expensive living (and thus smaller areas to heat/cool, also due to taxes), yet when you look historically, they've been the top violators of CO2 and O3 standards.

    Now it seems either, all the regulation is counterproductive to the end goal or it doesn't do anything but cost money and thus energy (money spent = energy spent). People and businesses across the world are slowly changing (you can't just replace 200 years of progress in 15 years) and it seems like less regulation eventually wins out.

    --
    Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    1. Re:How is that possible? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      Now it seems either, all the regulation is counterproductive to the end goal or it doesn't do anything but cost money and thus energy

      False. We had a severe problem in LA with air quality in the seventies, children with bleeding lesions on their lungs and the like. We instituted the CARB and cleaned that problem right up. However, the USA has been exporting its production to China, and the pollution doesn't stay in China. And sadly, it comes to Los Angeles. What's needed is not less regulation, it is more. As a nation (and not just California) we should place tariffs on goods which come from polluters, to account for the cost of the pollution. That would mean massive tariffs on Chinese goods. We don't do this because some already-rich pricks want to get richer by selling us the toxic fruit of Chinese pollution.

      The regulations did what they were supposed to in California. But China doesn't have such regulations, and even where they do, the state-operated businesses don't have to follow them.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    2. Re:How is that possible? by guruevi · · Score: 1

      If what you're saying is true, then kids would still have the same problems, emissions have doubled since the 70's and Ozone doesn't have a lifespan long enough to travel the ocean (O3 is highly reactive and breaks down in a matter of days, much faster than average air currents)

      If China would be the problem, we would expect Seattle and parts of Canada and Mexico as well to be much more affected. So the claim that California's problems are "China's fault" is poorly supported. On the other hand, places with less regulation have improved their emission rates much better than CA. Likewise 1970's Democratic-Socialist "model city" Detroit has the same problems, much higher pollution levels now compared to similar cities in the 70s even though they've likewise regulated the crap out of their industry.

      My theory is that regulation drives up cost and innovation down leaving less money to replace inefficient processes. Everybody agrees that pollution is bad and we've improved since the 70s, but business people understand that whatever you dump/waste during a process has a cost of money and energy. Thus all emissions are by definition inefficiencies in a process that can be improved ONLY by engineering and innovation NOT by regulation and limitation. Businesses really don't want to pump 50% of their fuel in the atmosphere like they were doing in the 70s. Government's role is to stimulate that innovation and efficiency, not stifle it.

      --
      Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
    3. Re:How is that possible? by drinkypoo · · Score: 2

      If what you're saying is true, then kids would still have the same problems, emissions have doubled since the 70's

      Which emissions, where?

      and Ozone doesn't have a lifespan long enough to travel the ocean

      The big problems are particulates, VOCs, unburned hydrocarbons, and oxides of nitrogen, not ozone.

      If China would be the problem, we would expect Seattle and parts of Canada and Mexico as well to be much more affected.

      Why? You don't know how air currents work?

      My theory is that regulation drives up cost and innovation down leaving less money to replace inefficient processes.

      Your theory is dumb. Regulations drive efficiency by demanding it.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    4. Re:How is that possible? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      California has way more people living in it now, than in the 70's as well.. regulate all you want, but more population = more pollution.

    5. Re:How is that possible? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      California has way more people living in it now, than in the 70's as well.. regulate all you want, but more population = more pollution.

      Wrong. There is not a direct link between those two things. That's how much we've cleaned up emissions, especially in California. The EPA tells us that todayâ(TM)s cars emit 75 to 90 percent less pollution per mile driven than cars made in 1970 did. You can have three times as many cars, and still have less pollution from that source. We also cleaned up industrial sources significantly.

      The fact is that you can have less pollution with more people if you start out with excessive pollution.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  44. Gee, what a coincidence by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  45. Re:Umm - 4 counties? Perspective... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even though somewhere in that large area was not above the limits that long for the previous 20 years?

  46. smug by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its all that smug.

  47. Re:DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Really ?

    Of your 30+ genders how many can actually breed ?

    BREED? To breed denies the basic right to abortion! Breeding is a sign you hate genders which include a feminine part and are a bigoted, racist, Nazi who should be punched in the face! Breed? You're SICK!

  48. Re:Umm - 4 counties? Perspective... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

    Given the previous O3 levels have changed historically, we may well have been above the current limit - but it wasn't newsworthy because the limit was higher.

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  49. But in good news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But in good news, thanks to California climate change policy, LA had the lowest levels of CO_2 in decades...

  50. Re: This Republican trashmind doesn't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no u r.

  51. Fascinating, thank you by Bruce66423 · · Score: 1

    That really surprises me, but I agree that the source appears valid.

  52. Pack your bags by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Leave the smog, we're moving house to Bel Air.

  53. Re:This Republican trashmind doesn't understand fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You should get a job as a beamer, the only thing you can do is projecting.

  54. Stop farting! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You smelly buggers!

  55. Re: This Republican trashmind doesn't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can pump as much pollution in the air as you want. Unless you actually remive oxygen from it, the level of oxygen stays pretty much the same. Pouring sand into water does not decrease the overall amount of water in the system.

  56. It's My Entourage by Gnostic+Teflon · · Score: 0

    Blame it on my popularity.

  57. Re:DENIALIST FAGGOT LYNNFAG DENIES THE FACTS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wish there was a way to concentrate it right at the Trump apologists.

    Ironically, this story would indicate it's concentrated at those who oppose his views.

  58. Re: This Republican trashmind doesn't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "pretty much the same" - synonym, "not the same"

  59. Re: This Republican trashmind doesn't understand by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And I'm sure you've done the research showing the difference in wildfire strength between the micro-differences in the amount of oxygen in the air?

  60. Democratic commercial? by ebvwfbw · · Score: 1

    Reading the article I can't help but to think it's a Democratic commercial. They like regulation. We need more! Yea, not so fast. Nothing on what's really the cause, just a guess.