Mercedes states that their diesel cars are NOT legal for sale in California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, or Vermont. A limited number will be available for lease in California.
The 2008 E320 BLUETEC does not meet the emissions requirements of California, Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, or Vermont and is not available in these states.
In California, a limited number of Model Year 2007 E320 BLUETEC vehicles are available for a limited duration and mileage lease only. No purchase option available. Available only to qualified customers through Mercedes-Benz Financial at participating dealers. Not everyone will qualify. Subject to credit approval and inventory availability. See your authorized Mercedes-Benz dealer for complete details on this offer.
So, there you have it. Of all the car manufacturers out there only Mercedes has any solid data on a diesel automobile for release in the United States for 2008. Many of these same manufacturers are offering full diesel lineups in Europe but because of tighter emissions standards here in the states we can’t get most of these cars imported.
In the past, diesels were incredibly polluting, spewing higher levels of sulfur, NOx and particulates (that blue stuff) than conventional unleaded fuel. As part of the Lower Emission Vehicle program, new passenger diesel sales were shunned. At the same time, incremental lowering of sulfur levels has been enacted nationwide. Many Californians, people who desperately needed to own a diesel for whatever reason, could do so by the only slightly illegal loophole of buying a car in a state like Arizona and registering it at their mom/sister/cousin's address. These people (who will go unnamed) then drove around the Golden State with license plates from Oregon or whatever until they reached the magic number 7,500. When the odometer clicked past that reading, they could register in California legally.
Modern diesels require something of an environmental trade-off. While generating fewer greenhouse gas emissions (due to greater fuel efficiency), diesels emit larger amounts of two other pollutants:Particulate matter is the black cloud that trails many older diesel vehicles. Diesel particulates are harmful to human health as well as aesthetically unpleasing.
NOx, while less visible, is a key ingredient in the formation of urban smog, and also can contribute to the formation of acid rain.
Higher emissions of these pollutants are diesels' greatest drawback. There has been an ongoing split in diesel emissions regulations in the US between those required by the Environmental Protection Agency, and those required by the California Air Resources Board.
Currently no new diesel passenger vehicles can be sold in the five states that adhere to the more stringent California requirements: California, Massachusetts, Maine, New York and Vermont. The current diesel Liberty, Beetle, Golf and Jetta, in other words, are 45-state vehicles. The EPA, however, is tightening its diesel emissions requirements, and moving them more into alignment with the California requirements. The point at which the two map exactly for passenger cars is called Tier 2 Bin 5 (T2B5).
For a 2007 or later model year diesel passenger car to be sold in all 50 states, it must meet the T2B5 emissions requirements. Currently, there are no T2B5-compliant, 50-state diesel cars. One is on the horizon—the new Mercedes E320 BLUETEC, to be introduced in 2007. BLUETEC refers to the emissions after treatment system that enables the vehicle to meet the T2B5 standard. The 2007 E320 BLUETEC has NOx emissions that are more than eight times lower than the outgoing 2006 E320 CDI
But we digress, (and I really don't want to get into a debate on the merits of Al Gores and his arguments)
When I looked around the table and asked if any of them were from Oregon, they sort of giggled and said no. The six came from Seattle, Hong Kong, Pakistan, India, San Diego and New York. All did their graduate studies in the U.S., all outside Oregon.
"The general public does not put Oregon synonymous with high-tech research," said Tahir Ghani, an Intel electrical engineer from Pakistan.
So why are they in Hillsboro, doing some of the most advanced technology research anywhere, hundreds of miles from any of the nation's top engineering schools?
Oregon is home to D1D, a $2 billion research factory in Hillsboro that Intel opened in 2004. The company put it here, along with other big factories that date to the early '90s, in large part because the cost of living and the cost of employing a work force here is much lower than places like the Silicon Valley. Oregon tax breaks, which exempt Intel from property taxes on most of its equipment, made the decision easier. And we're still relatively close -- less than two hours on Intel's jet, flying from the Hillsboro Airport -- to the company's Santa Clara headquarters.
“[Roosevelt] came up with a recovery package that would be unimaginable today, allowing businesses in every industry to collude without the threat of antitrust prosecution and workers to demand salaries about 25 percent above where they ought to have been, given market forces. The economy was poised for a beautiful recovery, but that recovery was stalled by these misguided policies," Cole said in a press release dated Aug. 10, 2004.
The professors paid particular attention to the National Industrial Recovery Act (NIRA) and the effect it had on competition. Passed in June 1933, the NIRA required companies to write industry-wide fair competition codes that fixed prices and wages, established production quotas, and imposed restrictions on companies if they wanted to enter into alliances, according to OurDocuments.gov.
The Supreme Court declared the NIRA unconstitutional two years after it was passed, but Cole and Ohanian said that the act caused enough damage during those two years leading to even more regulation.
Roosevelt pushed on after the NIRA was declared unconstitutional with the 1935 National Relations Act (NRA), which sought to regulate private sector labor and management practices, according to the National Labor Relations Board.
The NRA swelled the strength of Labor unions in 1936 and 1937 and as a result Cole and Ohanian estimated that there were 14 million strike days in 1936 and 28 million in 1937.
But the negative influence of FDR’s policies on the economic crisis of his day has been virtually ignored by the news media – despite hundreds of comparisons to the Great Depression in 2008.
Unit Banking Laws - Hoover and FDR - the laws as I understand them were in place before either was in power and neither did anything to repeal them. These laws prevented banks from expanding to new areas in order to cover short-falls in their current business plan. In other words, they couldn’t expand the services they provided to clients in order to increase profits. Canada experienced a GD at the same time that we did and yet, without unit banking laws, not a single Canadian bank failed while 9,000 failed in America.
...Federal Reserve kept raising interest rates (1928-1929) Hoover - The Fed raised interest rates up to 6% in 1929 making previously available capital scarce if not non-existent. For some reason they failed to effectively regulate interest rates for the next decade.
...The Smoot-Hawley Tariff (1930) Hoover - One of the most protectionist pieces of legislation ever enacted in America. It essentially increased import taxes on nearly everything and as a result, not only did imports grind to a halt, so did exports. Almost overnight he destroyed the jobs of 60,000 Americans employed to make clothing from cheap imported wool that now increased in price by 140%. That’s just one example of the 1000’s..
...Increased income tax from 24% to 90% for top income bracket (1932-1940) Hoover and then FDR - Hoover increased them to 63%, FDR took it from there and even signed an executive order levying a 100% income tax on all individuals making $25,000 per year or more!...Government spending (1928-1941) Hoover and FDR - Hoover increased the government’s percentage of GNP from 16.4% to 21.5% from 1930-1931! FDR proposed a $10 billion dollar budget with $3.5 billion in revenue. From 1933-1936 government spending increased 83% while the debt increased 73% under the guidance of FDR.
...National Recovery Administration (1933) FDR - or NRA was estimated to increase the cost of doing business by an average of 40% - 5 months before the NRA was enacted, factory employment was up 23% and payrolls were up 35% - within 6 months after the NRA industrial production dropped 25%.
Earthquake engineers say that constructing a building to resist a quake of magnitude 7 or 8 is possible, but is often considered cost prohibitive, adding 7 to 8 percent in costs.
"Earthquake resistance is really more workmanship, than material," Amr Elnashai, director of the Mid-America Earthquake Center at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, says.
Most seismologists interviewed say that China's quake code is adequate, if not the most up-to-date. "It is well-defined and has all the right features," says Mr. Elnashai.
China has "fairly rigorous building codes that have been in place. The problem is implementation of the codes," says Andrew Smeall, an associate with the Asia Society's US-China Center in New York.
In September , a Chinese government scientist acknowledged that a rush to build schools in recent years likely led to construction flaws causing so many of them to collapse — the first official admission that low construction standards may have been behind the student deaths.
Often schoolhouses were the only buildings in the area to fully collapse, and experts say China's problem, similar to that in many other parts of the world, was a lack of commitment by governments to safe schools.
Brock wrote: »
All true, yes they are getting better. I, and this is just me, would prefer NOx (smog, low lying gasses) to CO2 (green house gasses). In the CO2 realm diesels tend to be much better than gasoline engines, about 1/2 to 1/4 that of gasoline for a gallon burned.
The "very unhealthy" range for some other pollutants are:... 0.65 ppm - 1.24 ppm for NO2
0.053 ppm (100 μg/m³)
[FONT=Times New Roman,Georgia,Times] "Nitrous Oxides (NOx) are reported by several researchers to be increased with Biodiesel. However, our own data shows a reduction in nitrous oxides, very consistently, throughout all these [dynamometer] tests. NOx started at 6.2 gm/mile for diesel and goes down to around 5.6 gm/mile with 100% ester (Biodiesel), with slightly more reduction with REE (rapeseed ethyl ester) than RME (rapeseed methyl ester)... Emissions results for 100 percent ester compared with diesel control fuel show a 53% reduction in HC (Hydrocarbons), a 50% reduction in CO (Carbon monoxide), 10% reduction in NOx and 13.6% increase in PM (particulate matter)." -- "Toxicology, Biodegradability and Environmental Benefits of Biodiesel", Charles L. Peterson and Daryl Reece, Professor and Engineering Technician, Department of Agricultural Engineering, University of Idaho, 1994[/FONT]
Tests conducted by the U. S. Environmental Protection Agency show that properly tuned propane engines produce 30% to 90% less carbon monoxide than properly tuned gasoline engines.
[SIZE=-1]Is carbon monoxide a problem with diesel engines? Usually not, although any engine, including diesel, produces CO when combustion is incomplete. Diesel (compression ignition) engines run with an excess of air and often produce less than 1200 ppm CO. When diesel fuel is burned incompletely or when overloaded and over-fueled (rich mixture), diesel engines will produce high concentrations of CO. Diesels usually pollute the air with particulates and nitrogen oxides, not CO.
[SIZE=-1]Is carbon monoxide a problem with LPG engines? Yes, and the same precautions against running a gasoline engine in an enclosed space should be observed with an LPG engine. Industry sources report a properly tuned LPG engine will produce from 200 to 20,000 ppm, depending on load. A difference in CO production from an engine operating on LPG and one operating on gasoline usually results from more complete combustion of the LPG because it is already a vapor. Unfortunately, most LPG engines have simple fuel delivery systems which can easily be adjusted too rich, allowing extra fuel into the engine and the subsequent high production of carbon monoxide. On one new engine, adjustment of the idle mixture reduced CO concentrations from 44,500 ppm to 600 ppm.
[SIZE=-1]If LPG engines can produce high levels of CO, why are they used inside buildings? LPG burns cleaner than gasoline, and is a common fuel for forklifts and other engines used inside. The exhaust fumes are noticeably free from aldehydes, the odorous and eye-irritating compounds found in gasoline exhaust. Typically LPG engines produce less carbon monoxide than a straight gasoline engine, however new modern gasoline engines with catalytic converters and fuel injection, will produce less CO than an LPG engine. Remember that LPG engines do produce CO, and LPG engines running rich or misfiring produce extremely high concentrations of CO. NEVER USE LPG ENGINES IN AN UNVENTILATED AREA![/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]What about other engines used inside, like those on gasoline powered electrical generators, concrete finishers, water pumps, and high pressure power washers? Small gasoline engines used on many tools typically use simple carburetor systems with limited control over the air-fuel ratio. The engines run rich with high concentrations of carbon monoxide, typically 30,000 ppm or more. Manufacturers stress that the engines are to be used only in well-ventilated outdoor areas, and are NEVER to be used indoors even with ventilation. A 1996 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Alert calculated carbon monoxide concentrations in a 10,000 cubic foot room (21 x 21 x 21 feet) when a 5-horsepower gasoline engine was operated. With one air change per hour CO concentrations reached over 1,200 ppm (the Immediately Dangerous to Life and Health level) in less than 8 minutes. Even with ventilation providing 5 air changes per hour, 1200 ppm was reached in less than 12 minutes. It is not safe to operate gasoline engines indoors![/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]Are LPG powered floor buffers safe to use indoors? The combustion pollutants produced are a potential health risk and are known to have caused carbon monoxide poisoning. Special engines with oxygen sensors and catalytic converters which closely control the air-fuel ratio and reduce contaminant concentrations (including carbon monoxide) in the exhaust stream are available. Only buffers with low emission engines should be used indoors. Manufacturers' recommendations must be followed; provide adequate ventilation, proper maintenance, training for workers, and using carbon monoxide detectors. Remember that high risk individuals, such as the elderly, the young, and the sick are at special risk of carbon monoxide poisoning.[/SIZE]
You ask "what is the cost of government?" Using your example of the cost of gasoline in Europe vs the cost in the US. If the EU takes that tax money and funds good health care, good urban mass transit, good intercity highspeed rail, and the market responds with smaller, fuel efficient cars to reflect the cost of fuel, then in my mind every one wins. (Perhaps some more than others, but everyone gets some benefit).
The US has a medical system that is the envy of no one, except perhaps insurance company execs.
A letter from the Moncton Hospital to a New Brunswick heart patient in need of an electrocardiogram said the appointment would be in three months. It added: "If the person named on this computer-generated letter is deceased, please accept our sincere apologies."
The patient wasn't dead, according to the doctor who showed the letter to The Associated Press on condition of anonymity. But there are many Canadians who claim the long wait for the test and the frigid formality of the letter are indicative of a health system badly in need of emergency care.
The average Canadian family pays about 48 percent of its income in taxes each year, partly to fund the health care system. Rates vary from province to province, but Ontario, the most populous, spends roughly 40 percent of every tax dollar on health care, according to the Canadian Taxpayers Federation.
The system is going broke, says the federation, which campaigns for tax reform and private enterprise in health care.
It calculates that at present rates, Ontario will be spending 85 percent of its budget on health care by 2035. "We can't afford a state monopoly on health care anymore," says Tasha Kheiriddin, Ontario director of the federation. "We have to examine private alternatives as well."
The RCN [Royal Canadian Navy] expanded greatly during the Second World War and following the end of the war was the third-largest navy in the world, behind the United States and the United Kingdom.
If you are poor and have no insurance your only course for care in many places is the Emergency Dept. of a public hospital.
As a result most poor people have no primary care doctor because the payment from medicaid is so small, family docs can't treat more than a handful of medicaid patients.
Which brings us to US medicare. Why is it that single payer "socialized" medicine bad once we turn 65? My mother had great care, choice of doctor, specialist after she turned 65,, all while medicare paid the bill.
Consider this staggering comparison: State and local public employees comprise approximately 12 percent of the U.S. workforce and have an estimated $800 billion or more of unfunded pension liabilities (not counting other post-employment benefits). By comparison, employees in the private or corporate sector make up about 78 percent of the U.S. workforce with an estimated $450 billion of unfunded liabilities.
California cities, counties and other agencies borrowed $54 billion last year, nearly twice as much as in 2000, and governments are straining under the load.
Statewide, 24 cities and public agencies missed scheduled debt payments this year or were forced to tap reserves or credit lines to stay current, records show. That's up from nine in 2006, according to the bond industry's self-regulatory agency.
The city of Vallejo, burdened with huge debt obligations, in May became the largest city in California history to file for bankruptcy protection. Chula Vista, Orange County and Palmdale are among the other cities and counties staring at red ink.
"They're circumventing the intent of the law," said Larry Stein, an Oxnard accountant and longtime city activist. "They're indebting the taxpayers using future revenue streams that may or may not pan out in the long run. But the taxpayers have no say."
Of more than 10,000 bonds and other debt vehicles issued between 1998 and 2007, fewer than 700 went to a public vote, according to the state treasurer's office.
...but the reality is the people in CA [California?] an afford it.
What is clear from the New Deal, is that FDR brought real hope to people at a time when there was little. Since you can't quantify what didn't happen, it is hard to guess as to what the net effect of the great depression would have been without the intervention of The New Deal. (I agree that the real end of the depression came with the advent of WWII).
I will leave it to historians to sort out the reality of The New Deal. I do know that the hope and change that FDR brought to the country was real. My other grandfather was an engineer with the CCC and without that work, my mothers family would have starved in the dust bowl.
I see value in a balance, that indeed liberalism gone too far leads to a disintegration of the value of work, but conservatism gone to far leads to people starving in the street.
Along the way, the WSJ analysis focuses on the crucial role of the government's Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) rules in the undoing of the Big Three:"The fuel-economy rules apply equally to foreign brands, of course, some of which also specialize in big, powerful vehicles. But they afford themselves an out. BMW paid $230 million in CAFE fines from 1983 to 2007 to avoid building small cars at a loss to please Washington. Volvo paid $56 million. Daimler paid $55 million."Why don't the Big Three take this out? Explains the Government Accountability Office, because they fear the political repercussions of being tagged with "unlawful conduct.""They must be laughing up their sleeves in Stuttgart, having unloaded Chrysler in the nick of time. Democrats had just taken over Congress the previous November, vowing tough new mileage standards. One week before the Chrysler sale, candidate Barack Obama gave an environmental speech harshly critical of the Detroit auto makers. Three weeks after, the Big Three ran up the white flag and agreed not to oppose new fuel economy rules."This year, Daimler paid one of the biggest CAFE fines ever, $30 million -- or $118 per car, a pittance to Mercedes buyers. By dumping Chrysler, meanwhile, it avoided its share of an estimated $100 billion in unremunerative investments the Big Three will have to make to meet the new fuel-mileage rules."
Why is it that education is a right, but health care is not?
Mann started to work actively for the establishment of what he called the common school. He believed that education should be a common, secular experience, available free of charge to all children in America. The Constitution had made no mention of education, and so the responsibility fell to the states. Under Mann's urging, Massachusetts became the first state to establish a board of education in 1837, and Mann was appointed as its first head. Establishment of this board helped solidify public acceptance of Mann's ideas. In 1852, Massachusetts, under Mann's leadership, passed the nation's first compulsory education law, requiring all children ages 8 to 14 to attend public school at least 12 weeks a year, six of which had to be consecutive. This requirement only applied where public schools existed but put some pressure on school boards to provide schools. Other states followed Massachusetts' lead. Henry Barnard (1811-1900) became secretary of the second state board of education, established in Connecticut in 1838. However, some southern states did not set up boards of education until as late as 1916
icarus wrote: »
I will end with this note. Someone recently did a study, and I am sorry I can't cite it ( I will look for citation later) asking the question, paraphrased here: "If we were to spend money on ANY public policy, ANY, infrastructure, k-12 education, post secondary education, food stamps, welfare, tax cuts, ANYTHING, what would yield the greatest public good? The answer is early childhood education. Every dollar spent on programs like head start pay better dividends than ANY other investment. Better than the stock market over the last 60 years, better than real estate, better than anything!
By the time they reach the age of 3, more than one-third of low-income urban children are already overweight or obese, according to a study released yesterday that provides alarming evidence that the nation's battle of the bulge begins when toddlers are barely out of diapers.
Researchers armed with scales and measuring devices visited nearly 2,000 families in 20 US cities, including Boston, and evaluated the weight and height of 3-year-olds in an unprecedented effort to focus on obesity among the nation's most vulnerable children.
Their finding: 35 percent of the low-income 3-year-olds were overweight or obese, a result more than twice the national rate for obesity among preschool children of all income levels and racial groups. Low-income Hispanic children, the researchers reported in the on line version of the American Journal of Public Health , were the most likely of all to have a weight problem, with 44 percent of those toddlers overweight or obese.
In a nutshell, even though carbohydrates themselves are fat-free, excess carbohydrates ends up as excess fat. That's not the worst of it. Any meal or snack high in carbohydrates will generate a rapid rise in blood glucose. To adjust for this rapid rise, the pancreas secretes the hormone insulin into the bloodstream. Insulin then lowers the levels of blood glucose. The problem is that insulin is essentially a storage hormone, evolved to put aside excess carbohydrate calories in the form of fat in case of future famine. So the insulin that's stimulated by excess carbohydrates aggressively promotes the accumulation of body fat.
In other words, when we eat too much carbohydrate, we're essentially sending a hormonal message, via insulin, to the body (actually, to the adipose cells). The message: "Store fat."
Hold on; it gets even worse. Not only do increased insulin levels tell the body to store carbohydrates as fat, they also tell it not to release any stored fat. This makes it impossible for you to use your own stored body fat for energy.
Welfare spending advocates often paint very alarming pictures of poverty in the United States in order to promote even more rapid increases in welfare spending. To the average voter and the average politician the term poverty provokes images of destitution. In reality the typical "poor" person in the U.S. has standard of living far higher than our normal images and expectations for poverty.
According to the government's own data, the typical American, defined as poor by the government, has a refrigerator, a stove, a clothes washer, a car, air conditioning, a VCR, a microwave, a stereo and a color TV. (Half of the poor own two color TV's; a third have telephone answering machines.) By his own report, the typical poor individual is able to obtain medical care for himself and his family; he lives in a home that is in good repair and is not over-crowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry and in the last year he had sufficient funds to meet his essential needs. While this poor individual's life is certainly far from opulent, it is equally far from the popular images of poverty conveyed by activists and the press.
Created in 1965 by the Head Start Act, Head Start is the longest-running program to address systemic poverty in the United States. As of late 2005, more than 22 million pre-school aged children have participated in Head Start. The $6.8+ billion dollar budget for 2005 provided services to more than 905,000 children, 57% of whom were four years old or older, and 43% three years old or younger. Services were provided by 1,604 different programs operating more than 48,000 classrooms scattered across every state (and nearly every county) at an average cost of $7,222 per child. The staff consists of nearly 212,000 paid personnel in addition to six times as many volunteers.
Not all studies support the claim that Head Start is effective when measured by long-term gain. Many researchers acknowledge that Head Start appears to make a significant educational impact early-on but argue that these benefits quickly fade. This phenomenon known as “Head Start Fade” begins to show itself as early as second and third grade when students who attended Head Start programs begin to fall behind their non-participant peers.
Windsun wrote: »
The problems with questions like that is that they are far too dependent on public attitude and the current "crisis of the month". It was not long ago that Iraq was the biggest problem.
However, aside from that - I am going to disagree with you.
Several other studies have shown that it is NOT government programs of any type - head start types or not - that lead to better educated people.
The single biggest factor - and this has been true in the US for many years - is the public and personal attitudes towards education. Some of the most famous studies were done back when the thousands of Vietnamese and Cambodian refugees came to the US. They arrived with nothing, yet 25 years later their childrens education - and their family income - had risen something like 6x as fast as similar black families tracked during the same time period. In fact, Bill Cosby caused a lot of hate among the rapper crowd when not long ago when he pointed that out.
Many Asian and other countries have a long tradition of education at all costs (and sometimes the costs, like in Japan can be high, and not just in money), while the US and many other western countries have the general attitude that "school sucks".