Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

cbsnews.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

#51

Post by saosebastiao »

ars wrote: post #50
saosebastiao wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah yes, we should go ahead with a ban on public transportation due to a fucking anecdote. You and my former boss would get along quite well.

I guess you are not as secure in your beliefs as you thought if you need to resort to swearing. You thought buses are modern and clean, and when you discover different you swear? Diesel is very polluting compared to gasoline and I hate it. And stop/start diesel is the worst. So despite its great reputation public buses are not the automatic win they are made out to be.

They aren't beliefs. And yes, I have a tendency to curse when people advocate for very stupid policies using ideas that can be refuted in less than 5 minutes on Google.

Re: Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

#52

Post by ars »

saosebastiao wrote: post #51
ars wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess you are not as secure in your beliefs as you thought if you need to resort to swearing. You thought buses are modern and clean, and when you discover different you swear? Diesel is very polluting compared to gasoline and I hate it. And stop/start diesel is the worst. So despite its great reputation public buses are not the automatic win they are made out to be.

They aren't beliefs. And yes, I have a tendency to curse when people advocate for very stupid policies using ideas that can be refuted in less than 5 minutes on Google.

I did do some google searches first.

Buses help with traffic and CO2, they do not help with soot. And the city in this article is having trouble with soot.

It would be wonderful if all buses were LNG, then there'd be little drawbacks. But right now they aren't, and because LNG is more expensive cities are buying diesel instead.

PS. In general cursing means you acknowledge your position is incorrect but you wish to use bluster to defend it anyway. It makes little difference if you don't intend this meaning - this is the meaning that is transmitted.

Re: Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

#53

Post by meh01 »

VaedaStrike wrote: post #41
darrenkopp wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you seen the public transportation in Utah? We got a commuter rail train in 2002 for the olympics, which was pretty much limited to a small area in downtown Salt Lake, and then a straight line down through sandy. Then a few years ago we got Front Runner, which is a somewhat fast commuter train between Ogden and salt lake, but which costs somewhere around $250/month last time I checked. Buses are OK, about as goo…

I'm just curious if you're aware how much money beyond that 250 a month is subsidized by federal money? You seem to imply that the cost is outrageous to expect people to pay, and I'd agree, yet the irony is that few things are as insanely subsidized as FrontRunner and TRAX (Utah's light rail system). TRAX has a per rider subsidy, if you factor in construction cost and maintenance, of 6-7 dollars. So if the people wer…

You don't know how pricing infrastructure works.

Just because Utah doesn't know how to run public transit doesn't mean no one else can and do so with decent financials.

Re: Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

#54

Post by meh01 »

saosebastiao wrote: post #45
ars wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was driving behind a bus in the US just last week - every time the bus accelerated a huge cloud of black smoke poured out of it. Yes, new buses are good. But there are still plenty of old ones. (And this one didn't look old.)

Ah yes, we should go ahead with a ban on public transportation due to a fucking anecdote. You and my former boss would get along quite well.

Welcome to HN. Where we state opinions as fact and anecdotes as truth, usually with some hand wavey out in case we're called on BS. :)

Re: Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

#55

Post by cmccabe »

thoughtcriminal wrote: post #12

I'm amazed by people's ability to rationalize why it's okay to continue commuting long distances and driving cars in general, despite the toxic smog that gets deadlier every year. Instead of making those hard changes like using public transit or living locally, I guess everyone is waiting for Elon Musk to save the world with his magic-mobiles. Go ahead, downvote me for telling the truth. I got karma to spare.

I'm amazed by people's stupidity in continuing to advocate solutions that just don't work. And hopeful for the future of electric and hybrid cars, which will do a lot to reduce this problem. Although, judging from the comments, it sounds like a pretty large amount of the problem has nothing to do with commuters.

Re: Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

#56

Post by seanmcdirmid »

darrenkopp wrote: post #27
seanmcdirmid wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty amazed someone would claim that Trax is only limited to a small area of downtown Salt Lake.

It is. The only cross line is up 4th South. I mentioned there's a fairly long straight line down through sandy, but stations are more sparse, and misses the majority of salt lake. Aerial Map: https://www.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&oe=UTF8&msa=0...

True that the Wasatch valley isn't sufficiently dense enough for public transit to be very effective, but they sure are trying! If you live in SLC and commute to the U, you are good to go, and I hear the airport line will be open (finally) soon enough, but I haven't been back in 7+ years.

The valley really needs to build up some density to make transit really work, but its difficult with all that land available + a conservative Republican state government (along with the people who vote for that government).

Re: Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

#57

Post by pazimzadeh »

ars wrote: post #42
saosebastiao wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you been reading research papers from the 1950's? If you get on any bus anywhere in the US, you are virtually guaranteed that the bus is less than 10 years old. The average replacement time for Municipal buses is 7 years...10 years with complete engine replacement.

I was driving behind a bus in the US just last week - every time the bus accelerated a huge cloud of black smoke poured out of it. Yes, new buses are good. But there are still plenty of old ones. (And this one didn't look old.)

A puff of smoke larger than the combined smoke produced by 55 cars? (http://www.mahalo.com/answers/is-there-a-seating-chart-provi...)

Re: Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

#58

Post by Sanddancer »

thoughtcriminal wrote: post #12

I'm amazed by people's ability to rationalize why it's okay to continue commuting long distances and driving cars in general, despite the toxic smog that gets deadlier every year. Instead of making those hard changes like using public transit or living locally, I guess everyone is waiting for Elon Musk to save the world with his magic-mobiles. Go ahead, downvote me for telling the truth. I got karma to spare.

Except the air in most places has been getting cleaner, even with more vehicles on the road. First Stage smog alerts on Los Angeles, for example, used to be something that happened every few days. Now, they happen at most every few years. Yes, there is work to be done, but your mix of ignorance and outright lies doesn't help. At all.

Re: Toxic fog settles over Salt Lake City

#59

Post by saosebastiao »

ars wrote: post #52
saosebastiao wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't beliefs. And yes, I have a tendency to curse when people advocate for very stupid policies using ideas that can be refuted in less than 5 minutes on Google.

I did do some google searches first. Buses help with traffic and CO2, they do not help with soot. And the city in this article is having trouble with soot. It would be wonderful if all buses were LNG, then there'd be little drawbacks. But right now they aren't, and because LNG is more expensive cities are buying diesel instead. PS. In general cursing means you acknowledge your position is incorrect but you wish to us…

In general, being wrong makes you wrong. It makes you more wrong when you tell someone who is right that they are wrong. Soot per passenger hasn't been anywhere near car levels for over a decade. You have to go back past the 1990s to find buses that fare worse than cars on per passenger soot emissions. In 2007, diesel soot emissions were regulated to similar standards as gasoline vehicles. Stop being wrong if you want to be right.
Post reply on HN