4 ms·

"Right but the problem with a lot of these positions is obstructionism. Take a look at the '70s environmental movement and the way its legacy, laws like NEPA an

"Right but the problem with a lot of these positions is obstructionism. Take a look at the '70s environmental movement and the way its legacy, laws like NEPA and CEQA, are used to simply block development" One of the difficulties with being young is that one tends to assume that the conditions from the beginning of time were static up until one's childhood memories. Getting older doesn't really help that, but one does remember conditions farther back. Ever seen those pictures of Beijing on a bad air day? With the lovely brown-gray air? Los Angeles was kinda like that in the 1980s. Air quality: https://www.statista.com/statistics/1139418/air-pollutant-emissions-by-type-us/ https://www.statista.com/statistics/1139418/air-pollutant-em... "Annual emissions estimates are used as one indicator of the effectiveness of our programs. The graph below shows that between 1980 and 2022, gross domestic product increased 196 percent, vehicle miles traveled increased 108 percent, energy consumption increased 29 percent, and U.S. population grew by 47 percent. During the same time period, total emissions of the six principal air pollutants dropped by 73 percent. The graph also shows that CO2 emissions, after having risen gradually for decades, have shown an overall decrease since 2007, and in 2021 were 7 percent higher than 1980 levels." (https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-national-summary https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-national-summary) https://airquality.gsfc.nasa.gov/power-plants https://airquality.gsfc.nasa.gov/power-plants https://airquality.gsfc.nasa.gov/us-air-quality-trends https://airquality.gsfc.nasa.gov/us-air-quality-trends https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-national-summary https://www.epa.gov/air-trends/air-quality-national-summary https://www.epa.gov/air-research/history-air-pollution https://www.epa.gov/air-research/history-air-pollution Water quality https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-safe-are-u-s-rivers-50-years-after-the-clean-water-act/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-safe-are-u-s-... (Some good pictures of the Cuyahoga River fire.) https://e360.yale.edu/features/delaware-river-clean-water-act https://e360.yale.edu/features/delaware-river-clean-water-ac... https://acwi.gov/monitoring/webinars/industrial_internet_11242015.pdf https://acwi.gov/monitoring/webinars/industrial_internet_112... https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/history-clean-water-act https://www.epa.gov/laws-regulations/history-clean-water-act

Karrot_Kream 3y ago
> One of the difficulties with being young is that one tends to assume that the conditions from the beginning of time were static up until one's childhood memories. Getting older doesn't really help that, but one does remember conditions farther back. I'm not sure why you draw a binary here. I have no problems with environmental regulation. You've posted several examples about the benefits of CEQA. I'm also not so young that I don't remember LA being covered in soot. I remember driving down to LA and putting a scarf on my face in the car with my parents as we descended into the valley. But CEQA, today, is being used to block new housing and is calling students "noise pollution." This is the problem. Crafting regulation is very difficult. While the good intentions behind CEQA were realized quickly, NIMBYs also found that they could use CEQA to block development. What I ultimately mean is that this high-level, mile in the sky debate about "techno-optimism" and "techno-pessimism" or "pro-regulation" vs "anti-regulation" is silly. I think almost everyone agrees that we need some form of regulation. The questions to discuss are much thornier: what do we regulate, how much of it do we regulate, what should the penalties be, and how do we enforce the regulation. The problem is that once you get into these details, the general public stops paying attention, and special interest groups (industry leaders, NIMBY neighborhood groups, union leaders, etc) start to weigh in. Most of these internet fights turn into people sparring over vague philosophies, we never get so far as to discuss what and how a regulation should be made!
- mcguire 3y ago
  Pardon me! I was apparently misled by "Take a look at the '70s environmental movement and the way its legacy, laws like NEPA and CEQA,..."

Karrot_Kream 3y ago

> One of the difficulties with being young is that one tends to assume that the conditions from the beginning of time were static up until one's childhood memories. Getting older doesn't really help that, but one does remember conditions farther back. I'm not sure why you draw a binary here. I have no problems with environmental regulation. You've posted several examples about the benefits of CEQA. I'm also not so young that I don't remember LA being covered in soot. I remember driving down to LA and putting a scarf on my face in the car with my parents as we descended into the valley. But CEQA, today, is being used to block new housing and is calling students "noise pollution." This is the problem. Crafting regulation is very difficult. While the good intentions behind CEQA were realized quickly, NIMBYs also found that they could use CEQA to block development. What I ultimately mean is that this high-level, mile in the sky debate about "techno-optimism" and "techno-pessimism" or "pro-regulation" vs "anti-regulation" is silly. I think almost everyone agrees that we need some form of regulation. The questions to discuss are much thornier: what do we regulate, how much of it do we regulate, what should the penalties be, and how do we enforce the regulation. The problem is that once you get into these details, the general public stops paying attention, and special interest groups (industry leaders, NIMBY neighborhood groups, union leaders, etc) start to weigh in. Most of these internet fights turn into people sparring over vague philosophies, we never get so far as to discuss what and how a regulation should be made!

mcguire 3y ago
Pardon me! I was apparently misled by "Take a look at the '70s environmental movement and the way its legacy, laws like NEPA and CEQA,..."