4 ms·

What amazes me is that none of the stories I have read address the decrease in health costs these changes will bring. “An EPA analysis showed that the Clean Air

by KenSF 2y ago

What amazes me is that none of the stories I have read address the decrease in health costs these changes will bring. “An EPA analysis showed that the Clean Air Act’s benefits outweigh its costs by a factor of 30.” [0] Nor has any one talked about how this will drive adoptions of other transportation methods including public transportation. If we fully baked in the actual costs, health and environmental, I suspect gasoline would cost much, much more. [0] https://www.sciencefriday.com/segments/clean-air-act-50-years-climate-change-loophole/ https://www.sciencefriday.com/segments/clean-air-act-50-year...

akira2501 2y ago
> “An EPA analysis showed that the Clean Air Act’s benefits outweigh its costs by a factor of 30.” For Americans. For the Chinese? Probably a different story.
- dangus 2y ago
  It's a very similar story, actually: as China industrialized, it has very similarly realized that curtailing air pollution is an extremely important issue with benefits that outweigh costs. It has continually tightened standards and its overall air quality is improving (although it still has notable areas where more improvement is needed) https://enviliance.com/regions/east-asia/cn/cn-air/cn-air-act https://enviliance.com/regions/east-asia/cn/cn-air/cn-air-ac... https://www.cfr.org/blog/chinas-battle-against-air-pollution-update https://www.cfr.org/blog/chinas-battle-against-air-pollution...
- chiefalchemist 2y ago
  Exactly. The USA brags about its environmental improvements but fails to mention it exported plenty of manufacturing to do that. Come the summer when the media highlights the smog over Beijing, The West ownes a good chunk of that violation of Mother Nature. China, etc is cheaper not only because of the cost of labor but because of lack of environmental protections.
  - dzhiurgis 2y ago
    Classic whataboutism
    - akira2501 2y ago
      Classic bullying. We know now that while these laws have local impacts they clearly also have global impacts and they are not always positive. Attempting to use the local success of the EPA Clean Air Act to justify a flat 16%+ increase in the price of a widely used and important commodity is inappropriate.
    - chiefalchemist 2y ago
      Classic let me stick my head in the sand as I bow my thinking to the propaganda.
rqtwteye 2y ago
It’s probably really hard to determine the cost of pollution and other things. I suspect sugar producers and fast food companies would look really bad
- spacephysics 2y ago
  How far does this go? Should we charge taxes on sugar due to health care costs? What about taxes on fiber due to increase wear on sewers? Go to electric. What about the environmental impact on battery creation/recycling/maintenance? Or the electricity to power them (until nuclear comes online)? This line of argumentation can go on endlessly. How about instead let’s reduce taxes and try focusing on lowering the cost of living for middle and lower income brackets.
  - TaylorAlexander 2y ago
    > Should we charge taxes on sugar due to health care costs? Doesn’t New York City do this with a soda tax?
  - Dylan16807 2y ago
    Sugar tax doesn't work well. The fiber thing sounds like a joke? Pollution from producing electricity sounds like a great thing to tax. What makes you treat that as an idea so obviously bad you don't need to say why? And the impact of manufacturing already is addressed in a lot of ways, even if it could be better.
  - cjbgkagh 2y ago
    Work in priority order and stop when things are fantastic
    - spacephysics 2y ago
      Sounds like utopic thinking seeking an unattainable perfection. What happens when taxes are so high, we have an egress of businesses from regions within the US causing collapse of local communities like saw with Detroit?
ReptileMan 2y ago
>Nor has any one talked about how this will drive adoptions of other transportation methods including public transportation How is the high speed rail in California going? Asking for a friend. Is California able to build public transport fast? To make it safe? Is is able to keep the vagrants, homeless, smelly, and crazy away so to make it palatable for the good standing citizens to use them?

by KenSF 2y ago

akira2501 2y ago

> “An EPA analysis showed that the Clean Air Act’s benefits outweigh its costs by a factor of 30.” For Americans. For the Chinese? Probably a different story.

dangus 2y ago
It's a very similar story, actually: as China industrialized, it has very similarly realized that curtailing air pollution is an extremely important issue with benefits that outweigh costs. It has continually tightened standards and its overall air quality is improving (although it still has notable areas where more improvement is needed) https://enviliance.com/regions/east-asia/cn/cn-air/cn-air-act https://enviliance.com/regions/east-asia/cn/cn-air/cn-air-ac... https://www.cfr.org/blog/chinas-battle-against-air-pollution-update https://www.cfr.org/blog/chinas-battle-against-air-pollution...
chiefalchemist 2y ago
Exactly. The USA brags about its environmental improvements but fails to mention it exported plenty of manufacturing to do that. Come the summer when the media highlights the smog over Beijing, The West ownes a good chunk of that violation of Mother Nature. China, etc is cheaper not only because of the cost of labor but because of lack of environmental protections.
- dzhiurgis 2y ago
  Classic whataboutism
  - akira2501 2y ago
    Classic bullying. We know now that while these laws have local impacts they clearly also have global impacts and they are not always positive. Attempting to use the local success of the EPA Clean Air Act to justify a flat 16%+ increase in the price of a widely used and important commodity is inappropriate.
  - chiefalchemist 2y ago
    Classic let me stick my head in the sand as I bow my thinking to the propaganda.

rqtwteye 2y ago

It’s probably really hard to determine the cost of pollution and other things. I suspect sugar producers and fast food companies would look really bad

spacephysics 2y ago
How far does this go? Should we charge taxes on sugar due to health care costs? What about taxes on fiber due to increase wear on sewers? Go to electric. What about the environmental impact on battery creation/recycling/maintenance? Or the electricity to power them (until nuclear comes online)? This line of argumentation can go on endlessly. How about instead let’s reduce taxes and try focusing on lowering the cost of living for middle and lower income brackets.
- TaylorAlexander 2y ago
  > Should we charge taxes on sugar due to health care costs? Doesn’t New York City do this with a soda tax?
- Dylan16807 2y ago
  Sugar tax doesn't work well. The fiber thing sounds like a joke? Pollution from producing electricity sounds like a great thing to tax. What makes you treat that as an idea so obviously bad you don't need to say why? And the impact of manufacturing already is addressed in a lot of ways, even if it could be better.
- cjbgkagh 2y ago
  Work in priority order and stop when things are fantastic
  - spacephysics 2y ago
    Sounds like utopic thinking seeking an unattainable perfection. What happens when taxes are so high, we have an egress of businesses from regions within the US causing collapse of local communities like saw with Detroit?

ReptileMan 2y ago

>Nor has any one talked about how this will drive adoptions of other transportation methods including public transportation How is the high speed rail in California going? Asking for a friend. Is California able to build public transport fast? To make it safe? Is is able to keep the vagrants, homeless, smelly, and crazy away so to make it palatable for the good standing citizens to use them?