Posted by Balanced View on June 14, 2008, 11:07 am
Eeyore wrote:
> Balanced View wrote:
>
>> Eeyore wrote:
>>
>>> Balanced View wrote
>>>
>>>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Balanced View wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If it wasn't for " enviro-wackos" the USA would have the pollution
>>>>>> level of China and third world working conditions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> What makes you think that ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Oh please, where have you been since the 1960's? Industry and the Big
>>>> Three auto makers fought tooth and nail
>>>> against any legislation regarding pollution. Lake Erie was on the verge
>>>> of being dead and the Cuyahoga River
>>>> actually caught on fire. It was the Wacko's protests that brought about
>>>> the clean up......
>>>>
>>> Wrong COUNTRY. I live in the UK. We had Clean Air acts before you were born
>>> I'm sure.
>>>
>> And it took the London Fogs of 1952 killing 12,000 to wake up the UK
>>
> And that was what, more than HALF A CENTURY ago ?
> Your problem with that is ?
> Graham
>
It's like I said, it took public outcry to bring about the Clean Air
Act, which you appear to disagree with. The only reason
the UK Government of the time did anything about it was because the
death toll was so large they couldn't hide it . Public
outrage forced Harold MacMillan, Minister of Housing, to appoint a
committee to advise on the question .
I suggest you read Hansard to see what really went on, Government
records reveal Harold Macmillan telling the Cabinet
“We cannot do very much, but we can seem to be very busy – and that is
half the battle nowadays.” Ministers decided
that doctors should prescribe up to two million cheap gauze ‘smog masks’
to people with heart and respiratory diseases,
even though they knew the masks were useless. Health minister Iain
Macleod told Macmillan that the distribution of masks
was “only a gesture” and that there was “no known mask” which would
protect those at risk.
Posted by Eeyore on June 14, 2008, 10:30 pm
Balanced View wrote:
> It's like I said, it took public outcry to bring about the Clean Air
> Act, which you appear to disagree with.
Where exactly did I disagree with it ?
Oh and btw 'clean air' is what comes out of car exhaust pipes these days.
Graham
Posted by Balanced View on June 14, 2008, 11:34 pm
Eeyore wrote:
> Balanced View wrote:
>
>> It's like I said, it took public outcry to bring about the Clean Air
>> Act, which you appear to disagree with.
>>
> Where exactly did I disagree with it ?
> Oh and btw 'clean air' is what comes out of car exhaust pipes these days.
> Graham
>
If you believe that, go and inhale
Posted by Eeyore on June 15, 2008, 2:57 am
Balanced View wrote:
> Eeyore wrote:
> > Balanced View wrote:
> >
> >> It's like I said, it took public outcry to bring about the Clean Air
> >> Act, which you appear to disagree with.
> >
> > Where exactly did I disagree with it ?
> >
> > Oh and btw 'clean air' is what comes out of car exhaust pipes these days.
> If you believe that, go and inhale
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/11/13/video-saab-trionic-actually-cleans-the-air/
Remarkable but true. Guess what I drive.
Graham
Posted by daestrom on June 15, 2008, 11:50 am
Eeyore wrote:
> Balanced View wrote:
>> Eeyore wrote:
>>> Balanced View wrote:
>>>
>>>> It's like I said, it took public outcry to bring about the Clean
>>>> Air Act, which you appear to disagree with.
>>>
>>> Where exactly did I disagree with it ?
>>>
>>> Oh and btw 'clean air' is what comes out of car exhaust pipes these
>>> days.
>>
>> If you believe that, go and inhale
>
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/11/13/video-saab-trionic-actually-cleans-the-air/
> Remarkable but true. Guess what I drive.
Well, what that says is if you take the exhaust of another, older car and
put it directly into the Trionic engine, the Trionic engine burns away more
CO and hygrocarbons from the exhaust of the older car.
That's not the same thing as saying air from the surroundings is dirtier
than the exhaust of a Trionic engine. The Trionic discharge is about 0.01%
CO. That's about 100 ppm which is excellant *for a car's exhaust pipe*. In
many areas of the states, the outdoor level of CO is in the 1 to 2 ppm
range. The limit for sustained 8-hour exposure is only 30 ppm.
So while I would agree the Trionic engine's emission levels are excellent,
it's CO content in the exhaust is still much higher than the air in your
home.
daestrom
>
>> Eeyore wrote:
>>
>>> Balanced View wrote
>>>
>>>> Eeyore wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Balanced View wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> If it wasn't for " enviro-wackos" the USA would have the pollution
>>>>>> level of China and third world working conditions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> What makes you think that ?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Oh please, where have you been since the 1960's? Industry and the Big
>>>> Three auto makers fought tooth and nail
>>>> against any legislation regarding pollution. Lake Erie was on the verge
>>>> of being dead and the Cuyahoga River
>>>> actually caught on fire. It was the Wacko's protests that brought about
>>>> the clean up......
>>>>
>>> Wrong COUNTRY. I live in the UK. We had Clean Air acts before you were born
>>> I'm sure.
>>>
>> And it took the London Fogs of 1952 killing 12,000 to wake up the UK
>>
> And that was what, more than HALF A CENTURY ago ?
> Your problem with that is ?
> Graham
>