[Stoves] Off-topic: News from Colorado: 'Rolling Coal"

[Traveller]

Anil:

They are unlikely to be supporters of Obama or Jerry Brown.

Trump is rather immaterial to US climate policy. The Clean Power Plan
<https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/achievements/atf_climate_booklet.pdf>
was issued by Executive Order, which can be overturned by another
president. What is more important is EPA's authority under the law to issue
regulations for greenhouse gases. The Supreme Court allowed that it had
that authority and EPA issued a final rule
<https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2015-10-23/pdf/2015-22842.pdf> that was
stayed by the Supreme Court (5-4) earlier this year just before Antonin
Scalia died. As I write this, the Federal District Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit has convened en banc, and begun hearing an
appeal.
<http://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2016-09-27/dc-appeals-court-set-to-hear-clean-power-plan-case>
Merrick
Garland - Obama nominee for the Supreme Court - has recused himself, but he
may well get confirmed to the Supreme Court and then rule in favor of EPA;
otherwise there's a 4-4 freeze that will probably let the appellate
decision stand.

What is being litigated is rather obscure. There is a clerical error, for
instance; see Obama Climate Plan, Now in Court, May Hinge on Error in 1990
Law
<http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/26/us/politics/obama-court-clean-power-plan.html>.
Others think the core of US federalism is at stake
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/clean-power-plays-and-the-last-stand-for-federalism-1474841482>.
Laurence Tribe of HLS, Obama's teacher at some point, is going to argue
against the administration. Markets are pricing coal companies

As the NYT story points out "Still, fans of truck pulling insist — and
environmental officials largely agree — that it is harmless entertainment.
When the E.P.A. completed new truck emissions standards this month, it
emphasized that it did not intend to go after trucks used in motor sports."

Where coal power - with best environmental control technologies - is much
cheaper than its alternatives, and can substitute dirty combustion of solid
fuels faster than superior direct use technologies, taxing coal is
anti-poor and anti-environment.

Nikhil

---------

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 8:47 AM, nari phaltan <nariphaltan at gmail.com> wrote:

> Are these guys Trump supporters?
>
> Nimbkar Agricultural Research Institute (NARI)
> Tambmal, Phaltan-Lonand Road
> P.O.Box 44
> Phaltan-415523, Maharashtra, India
> Ph:91-2166-220945/222842
> e-mail:nariphaltan at gmail.com
>            nariphaltan at nariphaltan.org
>
> http://www.nariphaltan.org
>
> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 9:53 PM, Traveller <miata98 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> An infantile rebellion like the Earth Hour, and where else... ? (As
>> infantile as the Earth Hour). Click on the headline to see more pictures
>> and text.
>>
>> "Last year, New Jersey became the first state to explicitly ban rolling
>> coal, going beyond the federal laws that already prohibit drivers from
>> tinkering with emissions controls. A similar bill is on the table in
>> Illinois, while Colorado and Maryland have defeated proposed bans."
>>
>> Truck owners intent on rolling coal need only to turn to the Discovery
>> Channel reality show “Diesel Brothers” for guidance. The show, which has
>> more than 2.2 million viewers an episode, follows Heavy D, Diesel Dave and
>> a team of mechanics in Utah who “build the baddest diesel trucks ever
>> seen on the planet
>> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JnoLkx33Un0&list=PLEq_6M2_yw5GLRL6VajVw0uQBZvm3i9xd>.”
>> Some of the modified trucks are offered for sale with no emissions controls
>> on DieselSellerz.com <https://www.dieselsellerz.com/>, a site affiliated
>> with the show.
>>
>> The Diesel Brothers have alarmed health professionals. Even short-term
>> exposure to diesel smoke can increase the probability of heart attacks,
>> strokes, lung disease and cancer, said Brian Moench, president of the Utah
>> Physicians for a Healthy Environment <http://uphe.org/>.
>>
>>
>> Will WHO modeling of concentrations from emission rates - and BAMG
>> presumptions of linking concentrations to DALYs - work here? A readymade
>> experiment worth so many PhDs.
>>
>> There's a Kirk Smith dictum “you don’t get what you expect, you get what
>> you inspect.”
>>
>> All the assumptions behind IERs, GBD, and BAMG exercises are driven
>> toward one goal - to get what one expects (or demands the models to show so
>> the output can be marketed).
>>
>> What you fail to inspect, or choose to ignore, ensures that you don't get
>> what you don't expect.
>>
>> There's a lesson here for those who are willing to learn.
>>
>> Nikhil
>> --------------------
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20160927/faf8e639/attachment.html>