"Steven M. Charette" wrote:
> Year One, a supplier of resto parts for 60's cars, is a big proponent of
> opposing this type of legislation. I have information from them about this
> very issue, but I've never taken the time to read it. I'll check it out and
> report back.
Pollution credits are actually a very good idea, as it allows the free market to
decide how best to reach a certain level of emissions across all modes of
polluters. The environmentalists are wising up though, and realizing that most
of
the cars that are being used for "credit" don't run anyway, and therefore don't
pollute.
The car does not necessarily have to be crushed -- in many areas now they are
"black tagged". The block is punctured or the crank pulled, and the VIN number
is
blacklisted from ever being registered again. That way it protects the
hobbyists
and allows for reusing of the parts, that is in actuality better for the
environment. (see below)
Environmentalists were once fueled solely by emotion, and not factual data.
That
is changing, however. Most are learning that:
1) Producing a new car will use 10,000 times more energy than any existing car
will ever use in it's lifetime.
2) The production of a new car releases 1,000 times more pollutants into the
environment than any existing car will ever release in it's lifetime.
Thus, they're learning that the middle "R" in "Reduce, Reuse, and Recycle" is
more
important than they had thought, and perhaps the most important when it comes to
automobiles.
There's nothing wrong with protecting the environment. But there's nothing
worse
than miseducation and misunderstanding causing an even greater harm to be done.
"Never listen to an environmentalist; but listen closely to an environmental
economist" was my Environmental Econ. Professor's favorite saying, and he's
right...
-Dave
|
|
Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network