|
yeah well I grew up in a yurt at the base of Mt. Everest so anyone living below 18,000 feet is a flatlander to me
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 16:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 04:02 |
|
|
don't make fun, there are rural mysteries that only people living 40 miles outside a major metropolitan area can possibly understand
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 16:29
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:don't make fun, there are rural mysteries that only people living 40 miles outside a major metropolitan area can possibly understand in California that means they know about the secret of "my taxes are too high so I'm moving to a state where they'll replace pavement with dirt and rocks and then I'll complain about potholes  " which is just beyond my wavelength apparentlyprobably
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 16:46
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:don't make fun, there are rural mysteries that only people living 40 miles outside a major metropolitan area can possibly understand Boomers who moved to Orange County from LA back in the 70s seem to feel this way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 16:54
|
|
|
Buckwheat Sings posted:Say what you will about people from LA but their ability to not give a flying gently caress about anyone's opinions about them is pretty neat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 17:52
|
|
|
Infinite Karma posted:don't make fun, there are rural mysteries that only people living 40 miles outside a major metropolitan area can possibly understand I honestly kind of do feel this way about the night sky. I recently moved to LA County and the amount of light pollution is insane to me. On a good night I can see maybe a dozen stars, and the constant sky glow makes my brain think it's twilight all night, which has a noticeable impact on my sleep patterns. Research shows that this amount of light pollution is terrible for people and for animals but no one in LA seems to care, or maybe even know what they are missing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 18:48
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:I honestly kind of do feel this way about the night sky. I recently moved to LA County and the amount of light pollution is insane to me. On a good night I can see maybe a dozen stars, and the constant sky glow makes my brain think it's twilight all night, which has a noticeable impact on my sleep patterns. Research shows that this amount of light pollution is terrible for people and for animals but no one in LA seems to care, or maybe even know what they are missing. Ohh, we care. But what are we supposed to do about it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 18:54
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:I honestly kind of do feel this way about the night sky. I recently moved to LA County and the amount of light pollution is insane to me. On a good night I can see maybe a dozen stars, and the constant sky glow makes my brain think it's twilight all night, which has a noticeable impact on my sleep patterns. Research shows that this amount of light pollution is terrible for people and for animals but no one in LA seems to care, or maybe even know what they are missing. We have a Museum of Jurassic Technology, such concerns are for lesser beings.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 19:24
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:Ohh, we care. But what are we supposed to do about it? Well, LA County could always pass light pollution laws and install dark-sky friendly outdoor lighting. Putting limits on the brightness of billboards and store signs would be great, too (there are some near me that I can read from literal miles away). And also, we could give people some money to retrofit their outdoor lighting to be dark-sky friendly. This link shows what some other legislatures have done. I get that we have lots of other stuff to worry about here in LA, but I do also think that part of the problem is that residents seem like they are all just kind of used to the level of light pollution, so it's not a priority to fix it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 19:46
|
|
|
VikingofRock posted:Well, LA County could always pass light pollution laws and install dark-sky friendly outdoor lighting. Putting limits on the brightness of billboards and store signs would be great, too (there are some near me that I can read from literal miles away). And also, we could give people some money to retrofit their outdoor lighting to be dark-sky friendly. This link shows what some other legislatures have done. I’m with you on all of this. In addition, I’d like noise levels on streets (not just just freeways) enforced (none of those loud motorcycles and so forth). In fact, I’d like the freeways closed after 10 or 11 PM until the morning. Light pollution isn’t the only problem in LA at night. MickeyFinn fucked around with this message at 20:07 on Oct 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:We have a Museum of Jurassic Technology, such concerns are for lesser beings. the museum of jurassic technology is a ton of fun, especially if you go in knowing absolutely nothing about it
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 20:02
|
|
|
i propose we force all households to turn off all their lights after 9 PM with heavy fines for noncompliance. obviously, businesses are exempt.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 20:04
|
|
|
As long as we are wishing for a better LA, can we have parks that are used for things other than homeless encampments and dog toilets?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 20:39
|
|
|
MickeyFinn posted:As long as we are wishing for a better LA, can we have parks that are used for things other than homeless encampments and dog toilets? how about taxpayer-funded film sets that are closed to the public
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 20:42
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:i propose we force all households to turn off all their lights after 9 PM with heavy fines for noncompliance. obviously, businesses are exempt. oh good I just built a featureless glass office tower that is at 10% occupancy and it would really affect the feng shui to turn off the lights at night
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 20:45
|
|
|
withak posted:
well, I am. however like that other guy said don't count the loser transplants who are slowly gentrifying the sierras because they ran out of black neighborhoods to displace and/or wanted to move out of state but got cold feet so they just bought a lifted truck
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 20:52
|
|
@ hillbillies trying to act like they are better than someone
|
Centrist Committee posted:This loving state, lol lol 2019 yeah wouldn't want to use any of the numbers from when everyone in san jose started working from home
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 22:39
|
|
|
H.P. Hovercraft posted:lol 2019 I think this is going to screw me pretty badly. I live in San Jose and bought this house last year from a retired couple. If they are going to compare our family of four usage against what they were using, that's going to suck. It is completely hosed up that they are going to exempt businesses. They should be doing just the opposite. If the price of doing business goes up, the pain is spread across of all of their customers and they have, in general, more capability to economize. Outside of watering plants and taking shorter showers, it's not like individuals have much room to improve their water efficiency.
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
Well, if they don't exclude businesses, how else are they going to do absolutely nothing about the drought and also score feel good points like they tried?
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 23:46
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:Well, if they don't exclude businesses, how else are they going to do absolutely nothing about the drought and also score feel good points like they tried? can we probate the guy advocating for a flatlander genocide *i am kidding of course
|
|
#
?
Oct 16, 2021 23:49
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:how about taxpayer-funded film sets that are closed to the public i don't know about on the local level, but the state charges film productions out the nose for permits. it might not be the best use of the space, but the parks makes sure the state is turning a profit on the use of the space
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 02:41
|
|
|
GhostofJohnMuir posted:i don't know about on the local level, but the state charges film productions out the nose for permits. it might not be the best use of the space, but the parks makes sure the state is turning a profit on the use of the space perhaps they simply should not turn a profit
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 03:07
|
|
|
Larry Parrish posted:perhaps they simply should not turn a profit yeah, that's why i said it might not be the best use of space. but it isn't a direct taxpayer subsidy to the film maker, not any more than the general taxpayer subsidy that comes from all government infrastructure like roads. and even then, unlike roads the cost scales to reflect wear and tear of bigger productions
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 04:43
|
|
|
confused posted:I think this is going to screw me pretty badly. I live in San Jose and bought this house last year from a retired couple. If they are going to compare our family of four usage against what they were using, that's going to suck. If you just bought a house you're rich, so you can afford the fines. Do whatever you want.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 15:48
|
|
|
Boot and Rally posted:If you just bought a house you're rich, so you can afford the fines. Do whatever you want.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 17:59
|
|
|
Boot and Rally posted:If you just bought a house you're rich, so you can afford the fines. Do whatever you want. I have no issue paying more for water. This is just a terrible policy. I'm fine with raising the price of water. I'm fine with tiered pricing plans. What I'm not fine with is two things: 1. Using people's prior usage as a standard for punishing them. 2. Exempting businesses from the policy. This policy actually rewards people who have wasted water in the past and punishes people who have been efficient in their water use. While doing nothing to address the biggest abusers of water, ie. businesses.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 19:08
|
|
|
It's the equivalent of banning backyard BBQs to reduce carbon emissions but then giving businesses an exemption to emit however much they want. Like yes, it technically will help, but it's ignoring the main culprit that causes the vast majority of the problem.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 19:48
|
|
|
Seph posted:It's the equivalent of banning backyard BBQs to reduce carbon emissions but then giving businesses an exemption to emit however much they want. Like yes, it technically will help, but it's ignoring the main culprit that causes the vast majority of the problem. Exactly. See also: banning gas leaf blowers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 19:52
|
|
|
Nah banning leaf blowers and other gas-powered landscaping equipment is actually cool and good. Beyond the general public noise reduction, most of them use two-stroke engines which put out a ridiculous amount of pollution:quote:Gas powered leaf blowers and lawn mowers are more detrimental than one would think. Many consumer-grade blowers (and some mowers) use a two-stroke engine, which lacks an independent lubrication system, so fuel has to be mixed with oil. Burning oil and fuel emits a number of harmful toxic pollutants into the air, including carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides (which cause smog formation and acid rain), and hydrocarbons (a carcinogenic gas that also causes smog). This is not a "cars good" or "industrial pollution good" post, but phasing out gas-powered leaf blowers isn't some on the margins thing it appears to be on the surface. They actually do contribute meaningfully to air pollution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 19:59
|
|
|
the point is to look like theyre doing something
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 20:00
|
|
|
Gas-powered landscaping equipment should be phased out. The problem, as I understand it from friends who are in the business, is that there are no viable electric replacements yet. Apparently the type of electric mowers that can handle wet grass - which is to say, the type they're usually dealing with - are corded, which presents some fairly obvious difficulties; the battery-powered types don't have the cutting strength, and just get hopelessly snarled. "Ban something to force the industry to create its replacement" is certainly a tactic, but we'll see how it plays out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 20:06
|
|
|
Banning gas-powered leaf blowers would be great. It's not just that the actual environmental impact would be more significant than people realize, or that noise pollution is very much a real thing worth reducing, but that getting the ball moving on societal change in response to the climate crisis is really important. It makes the public more comfortable with other needed regulatory action. If folks are experiencing water rationing and seeing major industries getting regulated due to climate change, then they're not quite as likely to be shocked by things like carbon taxes or wind farm projects. I would definitely prefer a different system of water rationing, but once it starts happening then the conversation shifts from "Should we ration any water y/n?" to "I'm already doing my part, why is that company allowed to waste so much water?" Changing the status quo is critical. Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:33 on Oct 17, 2021 |
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 20:28
|
|
|
Kestral posted:Gas-powered landscaping equipment should be phased out. The problem, as I understand it from friends who are in the business, is that there are no viable electric replacements yet. Apparently the type of electric mowers that can handle wet grass - which is to say, the type they're usually dealing with - are corded, which presents some fairly obvious difficulties; the battery-powered types don't have the cutting strength, and just get hopelessly snarled. The new 40V stuff is getting closer and closer to parity with gas-powered. Battery tech has come a long way in the last decade.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 20:37
|
|
|
edit: doublepost
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 20:37
|
|
|
luminalflux posted:The new 40V stuff is getting closer and closer to parity with gas-powered. Battery tech has come a long way in the last decade. Yeah I have all-electric lawn equipment and it's been great. Maybe if I was cutting down and chopping up a 50' tree I'd want a gas powered chainsaw, but for all my day-to-day uses electric is fine. The only downside is the batteries don't last more than a couple of uses without being recharged. If you're a gardener doing 6-8 lawns per day with a bunch of equipment you'd need a ton of backup batteries to get you through the day.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 20:43
|
|
|
How easy it is for the state Democrats to proffer up meaningless bills that beguile the childlike liberal imagination. Even in the face of apocalyptic fire season this page’s wildest reform fantasies can’t conceive of simply letting the lawns lie fallow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 20:53
|
|
|
Taxes? In my libertopia???? First they came for centrist's lawnmower, and everyone was fine with that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 21:02
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Nah banning leaf blowers and other gas-powered landscaping equipment is actually cool and good. Beyond the general public noise reduction, most of them use two-stroke engines which put out a ridiculous amount of pollution: they should replace two stroke motors with something but until someone makes a miniaturized radial engine im not sure what you want people to do. the electric ones suck, aren't as useful, and need cables so you can only use them on tiny suburban lawns. unfortunately fossil fuels are really the only portable energy source we've invented that's capable of doing significant physical work. also you could just lower the amount of freighters carrying Amazon bullshit to the states by literally one and probably cut more carbon than the entire worlds use of two stroke motors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 21:36
|
|
|
All I know is that every Sunday at 8:15 is the cue for the landscapers at the medical center down the street (and upwind) to rev the gently caress up and any law that makes that not happen is OK in my book
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 21:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 04:02 |
|
|
also this is literally the gas emissions version of the we should ban pools and lawns thing lol. someone find the state 2020 water use pie chart where residential use (including pools and lawns and laundry) was like 2% of total usage lol. i understand where you're coming from but the first step to solving many of these problems seems to be 'bring back the ELF' and 'punish planned obsolescence with the death penalty'
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2021 21:40
|
|