Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 126

Thread: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

  1. #61
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    12-16-17 @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    True, nor did I say that. However, to scientifically verify a result of a particular process, it must be isolated from other process/data which could generate the same results. Otherwise, you cannot prove that that process or item is a causal factor. A researcher looking at whether a particular particle cause a particular disease, then the study must be set up to isolate any other factor that would cause the same disease. They wouldn't have to isolate it from, say, the herpes, but anything that can cause a "false positive" has to be removed or the data is corrupted.
    And are you under the impression that the EPA hasn't done this? What gave you that impression?
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  2. #62
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    And are you under the impression that the EPA hasn't done this? What gave you that impression?
    Why are you under the impression they have?

    Did you know this latest ruling regarding sulfur is the result of actions taken by California, and the California Air Resources Board, and not by the EPA?

    Did you know the automaker support is purely from the standpoint of lowering costs, since the adoption of lower sulfur standards by the EPA would result in one set of standards, rather than one for California vehicles, and one for the other 49?

    Are you comfortable with a single state mandating the standards for every other state in the US?

  3. #63
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    And are you under the impression that the EPA hasn't done this? What gave you that impression?
    Because, at least where the lung cancer, emphysema and other respiratory diseases are concerned, I know they haven't because it would be impossible to accomplish short of putting the test groups in total isolation for a lifetime. Further, I know they have been wrong on other things also. I argued for years that their parts per million measures were an inaccurate measuring of pollutants. Funny, I still say that and yet the EPA has now, after 40+ years, has now changed to grams/mile. In other words, I was correct the whole time, regardless of the number of environmentalist and enviro-supporters that said I was wrong and full of ****.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  4. #64
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,572
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by ludin View Post
    http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/03/us...rule.html?_r=0



    Fuel makers have said that the new regulations will cost you 10 cents more per gallon at the pump. at a time when people are already feeling cost increases from insurance, food, etc ... we now get hit at the pump due to more government regulations.
    Will add 10 cents? Stripping sulphur out of diesel fuel added more than a dollar per gallon to the cost of diesel at least for awhile. All the refineries had to completely retool and add mechanisms to do that.
    Last edited by AlbqOwl; 03-06-14 at 03:11 PM.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  5. #65
    Sage
    Unitedwestand13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Sunnyvale California
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    14,992

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    Will add 10 cents? Stripping sulphur out of diesel fuel added more than a dollar per gallon to the cost of diesel.
    It is the price we pay.
    "If you can't stand the way this place is, Take yourself to higher places!"
    Break, By Three days grace

    Hilliary Clinton/Tim Kaine 2016

  6. #66
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by ocean515 View Post
    Why are you under the impression they have?

    Did you know this latest ruling regarding sulfur is the result of actions taken by California, and the California Air Resources Board, and not by the EPA?

    Did you know the automaker support is purely from the standpoint of lowering costs, since the adoption of lower sulfur standards by the EPA would result in one set of standards, rather than one for California vehicles, and one for the other 49?

    Are you comfortable with a single state mandating the standards for every other state in the US?
    Definitely not California, that would be last state I would choose to put in such a position. Luckily, many of the things they wanted in OBD II got thrown out and others were thrown out through lawsuits.

    I guess he never heard that anything enjoyable in life is either illegal, immoral or causes cancer in laboratory rats.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  7. #67
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by AlbqOwl View Post
    Will add 10 cents? Stripping sulphur out of diesel fuel added more than a dollar per gallon to the cost of diesel.
    Yes. It will also raise the price of vehicles to meet those standards and will cause problems with older vehicles. The sulfur is used to help keep the valve train working properly. It is also proposed to apply to gasoline also, not just diesel.

    And keep in mind, that $.10 is going to be applied to farmers who grow food, then to the transportation of the end product to market. Other industries also rely upon diesel in other areas. Many Hospitals use diesel powered generators as back up power. A power outage could cause a significant increase in their costs, even at only 10 cents per gallon. Not to mention other fuels which also use diesel fuel as part of their formula.
    Only a fool measures equality by results and not opportunities.

  8. #68
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,572
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by Unitedwestand13 View Post
    It is the price we pay.
    But before we pay the price, where is the empirical evidence that doing this will significantly improve air quality? They've already stripped most of the sulphur out of gasoline and diesel. Admittedly the following study was paid for by the American Petroleum Institute, trade and lobby group for big oil:
    http://www.api.org/news-and-media/ne...-emissions.pdf
    . . . .and it strongly concludes that further sulphur reduction in fuels will have negligible effect on air quality.

    Are there any comparable studies to show that air quality will be significantly improved?

    The EPA has just as much motive to force such a regulation to promote Obama's incessant push to force out big oil and install all so-called 'green energy' as the API has to protest it.
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  9. #69
    Sage

    ocean515's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Southern California
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    24,705

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Definitely not California, that would be last state I would choose to put in such a position. Luckily, many of the things they wanted in OBD II got thrown out and others were thrown out through lawsuits.

    I guess he never heard that anything enjoyable in life is either illegal, immoral or causes cancer in laboratory rats.
    Indeed. Not California.

    Think about it. California was the first government in the World to identify CO2 as a GHG. That was done in 2002. In 2006, it fired more rounds into the heart of industry in the state by adopting AB32, the Global Warming Solutions Act, which has resulted in tremendous increases in energy prices, and a not unexpected outflow of middle class manufacturing jobs.

    The California Air Resources Board has recently mandated 20% of all vehicles sold in the state be ZERO emission vehicles. This must be met by 2025. You can welcome a price increase of @ $1,500 - $2,000 per car nationwide to meet the standard on this unilateral regulation by California.

    That is how Progressives role. You have no choice about California's position, that choice was stolen from you long ago.

  10. #70
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,572
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: EPA Set to reveal new Sulfer regulations

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    Yes. It will also raise the price of vehicles to meet those standards and will cause problems with older vehicles. The sulfur is used to help keep the valve train working properly. It is also proposed to apply to gasoline also, not just diesel.

    And keep in mind, that $.10 is going to be applied to farmers who grow food, then to the transportation of the end product to market. Other industries also rely upon diesel in other areas. Many Hospitals use diesel powered generators as back up power. A power outage could cause a significant increase in their costs, even at only 10 cents per gallon. Not to mention other fuels which also use diesel fuel as part of their formula.
    Currently farmers do get some exemptions on fuel so that might not be an issue. And you could be right on your other concerns too--I honestly don't if that would be a problem, but if it would, it certainly should be considered.

    All I know is I get sick and tired of government putting out these initiatives--all with a noble sounding title on them so they can reel in the gullible--that cost the taxpayers gazillions of dollars and simply don't produce the promised results. Instead of feeling all righteous and warm & fuzzy that the air will be cleaner, don't we deserve honest data and evidence that the program will actually accomplish that and is necessary?
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 56789 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •