Do we have a right to breathe air?

It seems a silly question, doesn't it?

And yet, it was a question asked by Government, about permitting smoking in pubs, clubs, etc, a few years ago.

And caving in to the health lobby, the passed legislation to outlaw the smoking of cigs, in such places.

And smokers accepted and adapted to this, they respected the law, and a person's right to breathe clean air.

Here is the hypocrisy.

There are so many cars spewing poision into the air, every time you walk down the street, that it almost makes the smoking ban seem hollow.

In my city, there are an absurd number of cars, cabs, buses, and other vehicles, on roads that were never designed to take that volume of traffic.

Walking around the shops is not a pleasant experience, not unless you wish your lungs to be full of car exhaust fumes.

Many of those that were bleating about smokers are the same people who take their off roader into the city centre, and contradict themselves, by denying others the right to what they wanted - breathe decent air.

That is not to mention that high number of lives that absurd levels of traffic cause, both car to person, and car to car.

I see no reason for so many to take their car into a city centre, there they are, in their high performance car, in a zone in which you can do 30mph.

If anything this is worse than when smoking was allowed in private businesses.

At least you could choose not to eat or drink there, but you have no choice but to go out into the open, do you?

It is time that genuine measures were taken to give the city back to the people, for health reasons, and for a better shopping experience.

If people must drive something into the city, make it one of these

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_car

 

LMFAO!!!!

With all the coal regulations we'll be lucky enough to have electricity for our homes let alone cars.

 

As far as the Republicans and the Right is concerned, the air (as well as the land and water) is a free dumping ground for anyone who wants to fill it with trash and poison, and no one has any right to interfere with someone who wants to make killing (money-wise and literally) mucking it up to make money with no effort at all to clean it up.

The EPA may not even make it to 2012.

Here is the Right Wings utopia! LA Civic center 1948




The Right Wings ideal individual citizen government-free Free-Market solution!

"When air pollution reached its worst levels in Los Angeles during the 1940s, the University of Southern California (USC) concerned itself with air pollution research. In this photo from the USC University Archives, two researchers test a protective helmet and suit designed to help Southern Californians cope with the smog:"

 

That pic of LA reminds me of growing up outside of DC in the 70s. During the summer one could see the brown haze of the 'air' every day.

 

Has anyone even been to Bangkok?

I haven't, but I am told the pollution is staggering there.

Why do we stand back and no care, while our planet is dying?

Are we blind?

Why is anyone that shows concern mocked as a 'tree hugger' etc?

 

It's that "rugged individualism".

 

Car pollution is less of a problem than power plant pollution.

Coal plants are the largest contributor to air pollution in America. I wouldn't be surprised if the same is true of the U.K.

Unfortunately, power plants have a lot of political power in addition to electrical power. Most local electric markets are government regulated monopolies, yet pollution regulation is usually lax.

We need better emissions standards for power plants, since the pollution generated by them can lead to public health problems like chronic bronchitis.

The likelihood of this regulation happening, however, is very low.

 

I tends to be an ideal put forward by the very same people who would be first to complain when it is revealed, in the future, how the absurd influx of car toxins has caused a sharp rise in asthma in their family, as well as other nasties.

 

And yet most electricity comes from coal plants, so why is Obama pushing or electric cars?

 

Maybe so, that doesn't mean we cannot try to be sensible about the former, esp in city centres.

It should be a nice experience for shoppers.

It's not.

You are in the city for an hour, and you literally feel unclean, on the inside.

Cities who have entirely pedestrianised the centre are to be commended.

You have to be consistant.

If someone supports the smoking ban in all places, other than your home etc, then they cannot go driving around spewing fumes on people, and expect not to be called two faced, imo.

 

Well, he does have deep connections with GE.

That being said, more electric cars in and of themselves are a good thing. We just need to convert over more of our infrastructure to nuclear power. It's much cleaner.

 

Indeed. I'm thankful that I've lived in a smaller city with overall clean air and relatively low pollution, but I don't know how long that will last-- All over.

 

The UK can probably implement a wider range of metro and pedestrian solutions than America. You seem to more consistently use space efficiently in city planning.

A lot of America is sprawled outward, so it's harder to set up a viable metro or pedestrian system.

 

GE built some nice reactors which by the way pollute the air a lot less than coal

 

Reactors are definitely cleaner, but if I'm not mistaken, GE also has some coal plants.

 

they are into everything , they should pay more taxes for the clean up

 

Because so many extremist clowns have made a mockery out of an issue that calls for serious, rational deliberation and action. Kurt Vonnegut observed and lamented this same counterproductive behavior on the parts of elements within the "anti-war" movement back in the 1960s and '70s...

 

My city has a population of around 400,000, not large really.

However, during the Edinburgh Festival, it can grow to twice that, with tourists.

The city is not able to deal with all the existing cars, as well as all that extra traffic, and extra people.

It is downright dangerous, every single day.

So something needs to give.

No one wants to attract less tourism, I suppose.

So, at least during the month of the Festival, the city should make it pedestrian only zones, in the city centre, outwith maybe cabs and public buses.

That would calm it all down, and benefit everyone.

A lot of car drivers make needless trips that could be done on foot, or at least a bus.

Then, in the city, you find a lovely spot like Holyrood Park (see vid).

Really lovely there, it is.

Yet, only on a Sunday do they ban cars from using it as a short cut.

The traffic ruins the experience.



[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjLsy-o2lV8"]A summer walk: Holyrood Park, Edinburgh - YouTube[/ame]

 

Even as a heavy smoker, I can fully appreciate the desire for nonsmokers to demand a law which requires me to enjoy my cigarette outside. If only for the stench alone, I can understand such their requirement. It's not so bad, really. I almost always welcome a breath of fresh (even if frigid) air whilst enjoying a few drinks at a bar or while enjoying a meal at a restaurant. Of course, the convenience factor is such that I have to get up off my butt and leave the company of whomever I am with, but it is not really that much of a price to pay considering what I get in return. A small break, if you will.

This cannot truly be compared to cars polluting densely populated city sectors because, for one thing, cars are not the only thing making the air toxic. And I will go on a limb here and say that they are, by far, not the leading producer of the toxicity we urban-dwellers breathe on a daily basis. I agree with you on the notion that measures should be taken to make the air significantly cleaner, but this is an acutely aggressive campaign. One that would be far-reaching and far too radical for the status-quo. It cannot happen overnight, if it could happen at all.

 

Just having them pay taxes at all would be a good start....

 

I must make a point to read up on him.

Why do you think the majority seem to fall for this ruse of treating rational and serious discussion, as something to be feared, mocked, or even violently opposed?

I would say only about 10% of people do not fall, in some way, for this repeated manipulation. What sets them apart? What makes them less prone?

 

so very true !

 

Back when the cigarette ban was being discussed, I said that it would cause a slippery slope on two platforms. One would be the governments ability to tell business owners what legal activities may take place inside of their business. The second being the 'RIGHT' to not be subjected to exhaust or other pollutants.

The left laughed. They claimed I was going overboard, and that it was ridiculous in regard to the cigarette ban topic.

Uh huh.

 

In an earlier post, I made a passing reference to things that are generally more toxic than cars. With the recent example of Fukushima in mind, I can confidently say that nuclear power is a far cry from "clean". Of course, you can call that a worst-case scenario, but the fact remains. It's quite dirty even if emissions from the plants themselves are are typically low in radioactive particles.

I must also point out the interesting tangent of your post which mentions much Obama's campaign money coming from GE and the fact that they are a leading force in nuke plants. Perhaps you did this intentionally and quite cleverly, I don't know. I just felt like I had to say something there.

Yes, definitely, I am a firm believer of the need to do away with the century-old technological hindrance we call internal combustion engines. I am a fan of the electric car and hope to see the proliferation of cars that don't run on some sort of fossil fuel in my lifetime.

 

The fact that they are not the 'only thing' is a non issue.

They are a major thing.

So let us stick with cars.

Most cities were not designed to cope with the volume of cars that we now see on roads. True or false? Most roads were not designed with this flow of traffic. True or false? Many drivers make single journey's that could be shared. True or false? Citizens, including myself, have the right to breathe air that is that bit cleaner, and not to have years taken off their lives. True or false?

If someone cannot walk around a city centre, then I propose that something like these be rented out to those people, so that they can get around.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JEmpQ19Kw14"]GoCycle electric bike test - YouTube[/ame]