Just in time for the SEMA show, a group of four enterprises (Physicans for Social Responsibility-Los Angeles, the National Resources Defense Council, Communities for a Better Environment, and the Sierra Club) asked the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to reject a proposed plan that was drawn up by the South Coast Air Quality Management District in late 2012 and approved by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) in early 2013. The four groups claim that in the 1990 revision to the federal Clean Air Act, instead of requiring plans that reduce for the 1-hour and 8-hour ozone levels, that instead the areas in question, the “South Coast air basin” and the San Joaquin Valley, are able to hit targets underneath the 80 parts per million level for ozone set in 1997. Originally set to reduce oxides of nitrogen (NOx) and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emissions by 80%, which would be a reduction of between 150-185 tons of output, the current plan would only reduce output by about 35 tons once all of the legislation is implemented, expected to be completed by 2022. The Environmental Protection Agency signed off on the plan on May 5th and formally approved it on September 3rd, 2014.
Earth justice attorney Adrian Martinez, who represents three of the four plaintiffs (he does not represent Communities for a Better Environment), summed up the reasoning for the lawsuit: “The EPA is kicking the can down the road, as it has done for decades, turning a blind eye to the hundreds of thousands of people who need clean air because they have asthma and other chronic lung disorders.” Evan Gillespie, director of the Sierra Club’s “My Generation” campaign, had this to say: “We are extremely disappointed to see this loophole was relied on again in the plan submitted by the air district. We have all the tools at our finger tips to solve this problem. It is really at this point not a technological problem but a political problem.” Those tools include electric vehicles and other “less-polluting technologies”.
(Source: San Gabriel Valley Tribune)
Smog, earthquakes, lack of water “the Kardashians”, I think it’s time “left coasters” to defy Horace Greeley and move back East. 🙂
I’m all for cleaner alternatives for daily-driving and commuting, like public rail and transit. Let’s be honest, we all hate commuting to some extent, it sucks and if resources can be made available for all of us 9-5ers to get to work and back efficiently and practically, it would be great.
I hate driving my Corolla, and I wish that I could drive my project truck every time I hit the road. The only way that’s becoming a practical reality would be a transition to better and more practical public transit system, which would also be a triple-win: we gearheads waste less money on our commutes or paying for DD cars, we also get to take our beloved projects out for a romp on our terms, enhancing the special nature of owning them. The environmental groups win because less cars are used daily, reducing pollution and energy waste as well as reducing the impact of highway expansions. The politicians win because they can reduce road budgets a bit because the infrastructures are seeing much less daily wear.
Now, as a historian, I say the place to start is suing GM for their conspiracy in the 30s and 40s to dismantle the public rail and transit systems throughout the Golden State in order to stimulate the sales of cars. They took the trains out, they should be held responsible for putting them back.
Suing GM [ as well as Goodyear and ExxonMobile/ Chevron formerly Standard Oil ] for the intentional destruction of our mass transportation system back in the 30’s 40’s thru out the entire US [ never mind just CA ] … which was previously one of the best in the world … as well as continuing to spend billions in order to block any attempts at rebuilding and renewing it today !
Amen Mooseface … in spades !
But like you said … Suing the EPA by these Californication groups aint a solution to much of anything . More like shifting the blame where it not only doesn’t belong .. but taking the focus off those who do deserve the brunt of the blame .
For the record though … once GM in conjunction with Goodyear/ then Standard Oil jumped on the bandwagon … Ford soon followed suit .. with then Chrysler /Dodge/Plymouth jumping on board as well . With now all three as well as the rest of Big Oil and now the foreign manufactures as well continuing the fight to keep mass transportation in the US to an absolute minimum .. and nary a politician to be found anywhere with the cojones to stand up to the Corporate Machine .
Amen to the rest of your post as well . Preach it brother … I love my car(s) .. but would be damn happy to use them a hell of a lot less … if I could .. which we may be able to … as we’re leaving the ExUurbs and moving back to the center .. with Light Rail ,,, buses etc readily available in Denver .. to a point … a limited point mind you … but at least to a point ..
We find ourselves in agreement.
I love my cars / trucks. I dislike the necessity of driving them.
When I lived in Berkeley it was paradise: drive once a week when I needed to get to a classroom far off the BART line.
Otherwise, bicycle & mass transit got me where I needed to go.
You’re very right, it definitely wasn’t GM alone, all of the manufacturers associate with automobiles of that particular had their fingers in the pie. In the world of reality, I think my advocacy organization of suing GM is really born out of spite towards the company I feel personal animosity towards. It would not solve anything, but it’s one of those things that sounds really practical from afar.
I would dearly love to have better public transport for daily driving. Commuting really just sucks all of the pleasure out of being on the road, it would be nice to preserve some of that.
The problem with mass-transit is that at the end of the day more energy in gallons of diesel equilivent is burned per man/mile than using your average utility vehicle, plus the wages and maintenance costs.
I think you guys need to do more research on the urban legend of GM shutting down the railways. Maybe start here:
http://debunkportland.com/printables/TQOrigin.pdf
http://marketurbanism.com/2010/09/23/the-great-american-streetcar-myth/
Back in the 40-50’s the city of Cincinnati had electric trolley busses that served the city well. GM came in and sold the city, almost at cost, diesel busses to replace them.
Ohio, and much of the Mid-West had “Interurban” light duty trains that served the major cities well. They were built on the “right of ways” of the old canals that laced the various states. They were fun to ride (according to my dad), fast and very luxurious.
Tit for Tat. EPA sues CARB near daily lately. CARB passes laws and regs that are federally illegal. Gets sued when they try to enforce them.
BTW, LA skyline hasn’t had that filthy of a skyline in years. The downtown area had two borderline unhealthy air days in the 15 years I lived there. The days of the brown dome over the LA basin are gone. Riverside and Bakersfield still have issues late in summer. At least Riverside wins awards for the best tap water in the country. “I can’t breathe.” “It’s OK. Have a glass of water.”
i live in the IE of Socal and for one i can tell you that the smog problem is still very bad here .If i’m driving the 210 west from the IE towards LA and especially in the IE you can definitely see a very noticeable brown inversion layer . it’s easily seen ea day over the I-15/210 area or along the I-10 corridor
NRDC makes me sick, as it turns out they are so in bed with the EPA (no surprise) they were the ones who wrote the recent over haul of the Clean Water Act which is going to be a huge problem for property rights in the next few years.