Blame The Buildings?

Bloomberg is completely out of control!!!!!!!!!

Cigarette smoking outside, salt and fat in restaurants, now this?

Anyone that's stood on a sidewalk and observed traffic in NYC knows exactly where the sooty pollution is coming from. Uh, could it be all of the trucks, cars and buses?

What study determined that 85% of the city's soot pollution is coming from a relative few buildings?

Once Bloomberg has turned his city into a ghost town, I hope he will find that the pollutant levels are acceptable.

That's 85% of the soot pollution coming from builds. Not 85% of the total. But even at that it's a bit to take that these 1% of the building are producing 85% of the soot coming from all buildings.

Although only 1% of the Big Apple's boilers burn these so-called "dirty oils", buildings that use them are responsible for more than 85% of the city's soot pollution.

From the blog. Isn't it saying that 1% of the total amount of boilers.................the ones burning dirty oil, are responsible for 85% of the entire city's soot.

Oops. I just read the article, I hadn't before. The blogger goofed a little too.

Alright, the cost to retrofit is $10,000 or less per building.............that's a drop in the bucket. Bloomberg should write a personal check to cover the retrofits and write it off his taxes. He'd be a hero.

Sometimes it makes me wonder if the omitted facts are just a mistake.

I don't think it was intentional on the blogger's part. The New York Times, on the other hand, consistently omits, skews and misrepresents information.

I wonder if the Times and other newpapers that have stopped the objective reporting of news and have instead decided to run stories based on a political agenda will be able to accurately report their own demise.

Having lived in NYC at a time when thousands of apartment buildings (including the one I lived in) had their own waste incinerators, I can attest to how dirty, soot-wise, the city used to be. Those incinerators have all been shut down over the last 20 years or so; there are no waste-burning incinerators left at all. It's made a difference.

So consider the air quality impact of combined, rather than piece-meal, measures in an area where 7 million+ people live and breathe: vehicular emission controls, a growing fleet of hybrid/electric vehicles, OSHA and EPA controls on industrial stacks, feel-good stuff like the greening of the Empire State Building, and even something as seemingly trivial (albeit costly) as switching to a 'less dirty' heating fuel.

Jus' sayin'.

I am totally for cleaning things up.

This particular study sounds completely bogus. I also don't like Bloomberg. I don't live in NYC, but from the outside looking in, it sure seems like he's on a one man mission to control every aspect of the people's lives that live there.

I would think that they could retrofit the existing boilers to burn the cleaner oil fairly easily and inexpensively. Maybe not. If Bloomberg really cares, and it's such a few amount of buildings, why not just cut them a tax break to help get it done?

I also don't like Bloomberg

O, c'mon, Kram, he says nice things about you all the time.

Despite some nanny state-leanings, Mayor Mike has done some good things for NYC, and has saved the city buckets of $. To wit: he has never taken a salary and has never lived in the official mayor's residence.

Not bad for a Boston guy.

Alright, I'll calm down..........I also don't like the New York times, or their writing. There is no way they can directly attribute deaths and athsma cases to these particular buildings.

Here's what looks like a more realistic presentation of the new law.

http://eprinc.org/?p=714

That's a great find; thanks for posting!

There's also this. http://blog.urbangreencouncil.org/2011/02/farewell-6-hello-bioheating-fuel/

I don't understand what this means............any ideas. From the article:

One caveat to that nip vs. bite prognosis: The actual conversion of a burner using #6 oil to use #4 is very simple, as is the conversion to gas and #2 oil of a burner now set up for multiple fuels, as most systems installed in the last few years are. But there are rumors that the DEP will require considerable extra work, pushing the price of simple conversion up into the thousands of dollars.

Let me know if it's time to blame the politicians.

So now what they do with the trash. I see a lot of full trash container going south on the tracks. Empty when they go back north. So what are we doing just putting the soot in some one else's back yard?

Karmarat it's coming your way what you doing with it?

The plot thickens:

http://cooperator.com/articles/1323/1/Where-Does-the-Garbage-Go/Page1.html

Yep, a lot of it comes out my way (Pennsylvania) to be landfilled. I see the municipal waste semis on I-80 all the time.

Seems their best option is to step up the recycling/reuse and RDF game. _{O, but where's the $ gonna come from to do that?}