Jump to content

Charlotte Metro Air Pollution and Environment


monsoon

Recommended Posts

Just as a side note, Consumer's Reports has dinged the Ionic Breeze for being a bunch of hype (it doesn't work) and even worse, it produces undesirable levels of ozone in your home.    :blink:

Maybe we need something else.  It would make a neat looking skyscraper though.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

do you happen to have a link to something about the ionic breeze being harmful? we just got one of the ones with the additional "germicidal protection" UV lights from my girlfriend's parents. i would definitely like to know if this thing is doing more harm than good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Replies 120
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I will refer you to the May 2005 issue of Consumers Reports, but here is a small quote from the story they did on air purifiers in that issue. Unfortunately I can't post a link as their site is subscription based.

But as we reported in our October 2003 report on air cleaners, models like Sharper Image's Ionic Breeze, the market leader, did a poor job removing dust and smoke from the air. Our latest tests also show that some ionizing models can expose you to significant amounts of ozone.....

They do also give additional info that Ozone is really bad for people suffering form asthma and other similar difficulties.

Also decades ago they used UV lights in public bathrooms to supposidly kill germs. They found long ago this doesn't work at all which is probably why none of you have problem seen one of these setups.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

you clearly were confounded earlier when you wanted to know why everybody was so serious about smog during the summer.  MC answered you rather well,  however you insist with your limbaugh-esque whining.  the truth is you don't really care whether it's smoggier during the winter or summer.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Limbaugh-esque whining?

Sorry, just saying that no one posts "5 page pollution threads" when its below 80 degrees. Everyone seems to forget about it during those times. If you were so gung-ho about air pollution, wouldn't you be out there lobbying during the clearest day in January when it is sunny and 35 degrees. I don't think you would be. I understood your scientific explanation rather well thank you, but some of us have different opinions, and want to have the right IN AMERICA to drive an 8 cylinder car with one person, 50 miles, to and from work. Just to clarify something else, people with respiratory problems actually have a lot worse time in the cold, but you dont hear people on TV telling you in the winter not to breathe the air because it's unhealthy. Sorry again if I differ from you, but hey, that's what this message board is about.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will refer you to the May 2005 issue of Consumers Reports, but here is a small quote from the story they did on air purifiers in that issue.  Unfortunately I can't post a link as their site is subscription based. 

They do also give additional info that Ozone is really bad for people suffering form asthma and other similar difficulties. 

Also decades ago they used UV lights in public bathrooms to supposidly kill germs.  They found long ago this doesn't work at all which is probably why none of you have problem seen one of these setups.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

thanks for the info. i'll definitely have to research this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  I understood your scientific explanation rather well thank you, but some of us have different opinions, and want to have the right IN AMERICA to drive an 8 cylinder car with one person, 50 miles, to and from work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Which is why I sometimes fantasize about gasoline going beyond $3.00 a gallon. Twisted? Yes, probably. But I sure would enjoy seeing folks that think like this crying as they pay their Exxon/Mobile bill. Talk about a way to curb sprawl and dependence on foreign oil! Park that Hummer, pull out the Geo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

can't we all just get along??? hippies and neo-cons alike :D

There IS a way to reach a middle ground though. Try this on for size:

http://www.e85fuel.com/index.php

You don't have to drive a go-kart er i mean Geo; but you won't be killing the environment (as much) either.

edit:

I found a recent Observer article talking about some stations that offer Ethanol/Gas mix

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/12243611.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...but some of us have different opinions, and want to have the right IN AMERICA to drive an 8 cylinder car with one person, 50 miles, to and from work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why is it that whenever people start discussing initiatives to reduce pollution, your type always start with the "But my rights," and "This is America"? How does providing people with other choices negatively affect your personal rights? And how is a clean environment and ease of movement anti-American?

I just don't get it. I mean, I'm not trying to bait you or anything, I just can't figure out what's so threatening.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understood your scientific explanation rather well thank you, but some of us have different opinions, and want to have the right IN AMERICA to drive an 8 cylinder car with one person, 50 miles, to and from work.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You may have the right to an 8 cylinder car with one person driving a daily 50-mile commute to work if that is what you want. But living in Atlanta, I get tired of listening to the suburbanites/exurbanites I work with in the city complain of the high gas prices, long commutes, and traffic. They made a lifestyle choice, so suck it up so I do not have to listen to it.

I also do not think local, state, and federal governments should be obsessed with making the lifestyle (i.e., McMansions on acre lots in exurbian subdivisions named after what they destroyed, gas guzzling SUVs, and road systems to connect all the far flunged developments) affordable and convenient. While an individual may have the right to try for that lifestyle, it is not in the national interest to help them do so with tax dollars and public policy decisions.

Furthermore, if public health is endangered by smog and if smog is in part due to auto emmissions, then it is the responsibility of government to act through regulation and public policy. An individual's unfettered right to something ends when it starts harming others through no fault of their own. The bottom line is that the pollution produced by an individual's 8 cylinder vehicle does not stay in the car and only affect the individual. If it did, then that would be that individual's problem as far as I am concerned. But in reality, the pollution produced by the individual's 8 cylinder vehicle harms the air that everyone has to breath, including those who are not contributing as much to the problem. Of course, this also applies to polluting industries that were discussed previously. Our nation respects freedom of choice and that is great, but freedom of choice is not absolute and is not as they say a "suicide pact" as such. There must be some balance of individual rights with the greater common good on some issues like the state of the urban environment and public health.

So, you may have the right to the "SUV" lifestyle, but be prepared for the responsibilities of that life, including the expenses, inconveniences, and the regulatory compliances. Rights ALWAYS come with responsibilities.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it isn't really a matter of "right" to drive a big car or truck, as obviously that isn't going away. I think is whether public policy needs to be adjusted to include the costs of collective public health and quality of life into the costs of driving large, polluting vehicles. By using a capitalist/market-based public policy, people can make their choices however they want, but they will not be free to ignore the effect on the collective welfare.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

it isn't really a matter of "right" to drive a big car or truck, as obviously that isn't going away.  I think is whether public policy needs to be adjusted to include the costs of collective public health and quality of life into the costs of driving large, polluting vehicles.  By using a capitalist/market-based public policy, people can make their choices however they want, but they will not be free to ignore the effect on the collective welfare.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well said dubone. People want freedom without responsibility. Let's make the developers and residents of suburban sprawl pay the real costs of suburban life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

E85 is a great alternative.  It's a shame there is only one place in NC to buy it right now.  Interestingly enough, its mainly American and a few European cars that can burn it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I think I might go to Asheville for Belle Chere this weekend. If I do, I'll be filling up my dual-fuel pick-up in Shelby on the way there and on the way back.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may have the right to an 8 cylinder car with one person driving a daily 50-mile commute to work if that is what you want. But living in Atlanta, I get tired of listening to the suburbanites/exurbanites I work with in the city complain of the high gas prices, long commutes, and traffic. They made a lifestyle choice, so suck it up so I do not have to listen to it.

I also do not think local, state, and federal governments should be obsessed with making the lifestyle (i.e., McMansions on acre lots in exurbian subdivisions named after what they destroyed, gas guzzling SUVs, and road systems to connect all the far flunged developments) affordable and convenient. While an individual may have the right to try for that lifestyle, it is not in the national interest to help them do so with tax dollars and public policy decisions.

Furthermore, if public health is endangered by smog and if smog is in part due to auto emmissions, then it is the responsibility of government to act through regulation and public policy. An individual's unfettered right to something ends when it starts harming others through no fault of their own. The bottom line is that the pollution produced by an individual's 8 cylinder vehicle does not stay in the car and only affect the individual. If it did, then that would be that individual's problem as far as I am concerned. But in reality, the pollution produced by the individual's 8 cylinder vehicle harms the air that everyone has to breath, including those who are not contributing as much to the problem. Of course, this also applies to polluting industries that were discussed previously. Our nation respects freedom of choice and that is great, but freedom of choice is not absolute and is not as they say a "suicide pact" as such. There must be some balance of individual rights with the greater common good on some issues like the state of the urban environment and public health.

So, you may have the right to the "SUV" lifestyle, but be prepared for the responsibilities of that life, including the expenses, inconveniences, and the regulatory compliances. Rights ALWAYS come with responsibilities.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

For God's sake, I don't have an 8 cyl SUV, it was just an example. Apparently, if I support anything other than what Miesian Corners, Urban Southerner & ngp's opinions are, then I am environment killer. OK, whatever. I'm moving on to a more friendly post...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/12280972.htm

Sadly, the EPA will not take strong action against TVA and other nearby states to force them to cut down their power plant emissions.

On the bright side, i think we will still see major air quality improvements in Charlotte and the rest of the state, regardless of what happens in other states. NC's Clean Smokestacks legislation forces Duke and Progress to make almost 80% reductions in the major pollutants from their NC powerplants over the next decade. http://daq.state.nc.us/news/leg/cleanstacks.shtml

The legislation forces us to continue to pursue the other states agressively, so i'm sure with the EPA backing down a little that NC will now sue the states and TVA directly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/12431035.htm

Apparently, with the NC Clean Smokestacks act, changes in truck engine requirements and EPA crackdown on powerplants, the ozone situation in charlotte is improving over a few years ago. As the power plant emission reductions will continue over the next 5 years and as low-sulfur diesel becomes standard next summer, this situation could continue to get better, even with growth in traffic and population.

ozone_days_explainer_0820.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At the Marshall Steam Generating plant north of Charlotte, Duke is building some kind of massive structure that is supposed to help with air pollution according to the sign on the fence that surrounds it. The thing can be seen from miles away on lake norman it is so large, If it were located in the downtown area, would change the skyline. I need to get a photo of it one day.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/news/13188246.htm

Apparently, the group "American Forests" is doing a study to detail the monetary value of the trees and forests in the area. They also plan to use high-resolution imagery to map and count the remaining trees, so they can better define any deforestation.

Hopefully, this study will result in better compensation by developers when they deforest their property. I think Charlotte has a tree ordinance, but it is fairly weak. Hopefully by putting a value on the tree cover, it will result in requirements to save or plant more trees.

If Salisbury's trees are worth $95m to the community, imagine how much the trees in Mecklenburg are worth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is Charlotte considered a green city?

In what meaning? Charlotte is green with envy for bigger, more respected cities. Charlotte is green with money with the headquarters for some major national banks. Charlotte and Mecklenburg still have fairly significant woods and forested areas. Charlotte prides itself on stately street-lining trees.

Charlotte is not really known for environmentalism. Most of the parkland in the city is flood plain and old garbage dumps. The area has pollution problems, in part, because of a lack of strong controls on emissions, etc., and a strong pro-business/industry slant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.