3 ms·

I grew up in LA. In the late 80s the joke was that you had to chew your air before breathing it. The sky was brown most days. > Now it's very often crystal c

I grew up in LA. In the late 80s the joke was that you had to chew your air before breathing it. The sky was brown most days. > Now it's very often crystal clear. It's really stunning how much policy changes can impact the air. I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say that the air is often clear. There is still the natural geography that traps all particles in the air over the basin. But the policy changes absolutely made a huge difference. Interesting to note however that during the first couple of days of COVID lockdown, when almost no one was driving in LA, LA had the lowest AQI on the entire planet (it was just 4). So the next thing they have to do is solve traffic to get the air cleaner. :)

dylan604 2y ago
> the first couple of days of COVID lockdown To me, this was the clearest example of how much human activity truly is causing issues, and how it can be reversed.
- pllbnk 2y ago
  What I would like remote working advocates to say more for the benefits of this arrangement is not only the time saved, being with families, but also these things regarding pollution: by not driving to the offices co-located in the same districts, people not only stop emitting themselves, they also reduce the emissions of those who must drive by reducing or eliminating traffic jams. Also, expanding and living in suburbs, I believe in contrast to the general consensus, reduces emissions as well. Though people still need cars to get somewhere just because the distances are larger, the use of cars is much more efficient.
  - mojomark 2y ago
    I would recommend all in this thread give "Cheaper, Faster, Better" by Tom Seyer a read. This book has a liberal air, while I am a fiscal conservative republican (not a "Trumpian" 'flat-earther', nationalist, or handmade tale dreamer - never have been or will be... not all 'Republicans' are the same. These days I generally don't vote republican due to lack of sane options. F'ing painful and horrific). [Just wanted to provide context for who was making this statement] Disclosure aside, as anyone with two brain cells can see, the world has been snookered by the oil and gas industry and their kickback Trumpian-like Lackies for decades (old puppets same as the new). Seyer discusses the history of all of these topics, and additional similar ones, raised above fairly well (acid rain, LA smog, UK smog, etc.). The biggest idea Seyer conveyed to me, that I wish was just a leaflet air-dropped accross the US is that Climate Change activists are preaching to the choir when they state that we need to reverse climate change because it's irreversibly harming the planet. They need to instead focus primarily on the human harm due to extreme weather (towns, societies, crop lands, god forbid ocean front property) that polution/carbon emissions are causing. I couldn't agree more. It's like you have to point out how it's going to affect 'these people' directly, specifically, in their lifetime, for it to even register. We are North American Scum. Unfortunately, common sense is a rare commodity these days. The internet gave too many selfish ding dongs a podium to preach to and 'unionize' other selfish ding dongs. OK, this ding dong is off his podium. Sorry (but do check the bood out)

dylan604 2y ago

> the first couple of days of COVID lockdown To me, this was the clearest example of how much human activity truly is causing issues, and how it can be reversed.

pllbnk 2y ago
What I would like remote working advocates to say more for the benefits of this arrangement is not only the time saved, being with families, but also these things regarding pollution: by not driving to the offices co-located in the same districts, people not only stop emitting themselves, they also reduce the emissions of those who must drive by reducing or eliminating traffic jams. Also, expanding and living in suburbs, I believe in contrast to the general consensus, reduces emissions as well. Though people still need cars to get somewhere just because the distances are larger, the use of cars is much more efficient.
- mojomark 2y ago
  I would recommend all in this thread give "Cheaper, Faster, Better" by Tom Seyer a read. This book has a liberal air, while I am a fiscal conservative republican (not a "Trumpian" 'flat-earther', nationalist, or handmade tale dreamer - never have been or will be... not all 'Republicans' are the same. These days I generally don't vote republican due to lack of sane options. F'ing painful and horrific). [Just wanted to provide context for who was making this statement] Disclosure aside, as anyone with two brain cells can see, the world has been snookered by the oil and gas industry and their kickback Trumpian-like Lackies for decades (old puppets same as the new). Seyer discusses the history of all of these topics, and additional similar ones, raised above fairly well (acid rain, LA smog, UK smog, etc.). The biggest idea Seyer conveyed to me, that I wish was just a leaflet air-dropped accross the US is that Climate Change activists are preaching to the choir when they state that we need to reverse climate change because it's irreversibly harming the planet. They need to instead focus primarily on the human harm due to extreme weather (towns, societies, crop lands, god forbid ocean front property) that polution/carbon emissions are causing. I couldn't agree more. It's like you have to point out how it's going to affect 'these people' directly, specifically, in their lifetime, for it to even register. We are North American Scum. Unfortunately, common sense is a rare commodity these days. The internet gave too many selfish ding dongs a podium to preach to and 'unionize' other selfish ding dongs. OK, this ding dong is off his podium. Sorry (but do check the bood out)