View Single Post
Old 03-25-2008, 11:23 PM   #40 (permalink)
roflwaffle
Master EcoModder
 
roflwaffle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 1,490

Camryaro - '92 Toyota Camry LE V6
90 day: 31.12 mpg (US)

Red - '00 Honda Insight

Prius - '05 Toyota Prius

3 - '18 Tesla Model 3
90 day: 152.47 mpg (US)
Thanks: 349
Thanked 122 Times in 80 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Big Dave View Post
You don’t think there is an elevated level at ready tracks, or in truck stops, or in mines, or on test stands?

If it were going to cause cancer don’t you think it would in a 39 year period?

The fact of the matter is that this eco-mindless EPA policy is driving people away from the most powerful tool there is for increasing MPG.
Sure there is, although maybe not as much since the worst areas are like a combination of a few truck stops, mines, and maybe a track or two. The difference is that the people at tracks, truck stops, or mines, for the most part people are there willingly, and aren't exposed to it 24/7/365. The people who live in and around, for instance, the port of LA, don't have a choice and can be exposed 24/7/365, from thousands of diesels, hundreds of ships, and who nkows what construction equipment, in an area where said pollution can sit. It also won't cause cancer in everyone, it just elevates the risk for everyone, which is seen in higher rates of lung cancer and other pulmonary trouble in specific areas.

Maybe if emissions systems didn't result in a negligible decrease in mileage over their lifespans, I suppose the cost would be greater, but as it stands even the economy angle is kinda moot.
  Reply With Quote