How much do you care about pre emissions

[MAGA Patriot]

I find most everything from the Gubment is exaggerated to fit their agenda.

If you want to talk about harm to humanity, just look at what these "experts" put in our food. And people wonder why they have cancer and other ailments.

Thank God I survived swimming in a creek and drinking out of a garden hose.....and riding a bike with no helmet or God forbid, I rode in the back of a pickup!! I even drove a beat up old 1961 Chevy pickup when I was 12.

We need more common sense and logical thinking.

Just my opinion....
M

 

[Snobdds]

Assuming global warming is a fraud (which I'm 100% sure it is at this point; we haven't even reached Temps of the medieval warm period); what urgent environmental problems are we facing? Fresh water in some areas, yes, but that's not generally a pollution issue. Landfills overfilling, like they told us in school, zero signs of that. Running out of oil in next 50 years, nope. Acid rain, nope. Lithium shortage, no, they've discovered vast amounts in Chile, Boliva, Afghanistan, ect.

The only issues I really know, are mostly legacy issues; old landfills leaking contaminants, old pole pole treatment yards, old gas tanks left in the ground, old lead/asbestos. Yeah, there is a nuclear bomb in the ocean somewhere off S. Car allegedly dropped in an airforce incident; but that wouldn't go up, and it is probably no more than a blip in the ocean,

Climate change has become this convoluted term that really has no definition, by design. One distinction that needs to be drawn is the difference between pollution and climate. They are two completely different things, but they get lumped together in the debate.

Do I think US society both in terms of ideals and practices, dealt with pollution. Yes. Outside of spontaneous polluting events like a train derailments, the US has largely solved the pollution issue.

Now climate is much harder to deal with because of mother nature. I have not seen any evidence put forth that says, this region should be a temperature of "x" and have a participation amount of "y". Then get to these stated goals by doing the following...

Now since there is no scientific way to identify the problem and a way to solve the climate problem, we get these platitudes that are rooted in pollution reduction. Again, largely solved.

So logically, since we have done great strides in eliminating pollution, shouldn't the climate respond to these actions?

 

[DarkBlack]

Agree , direct pollution should be minimized wherever technically and economically feasible.
“Climate change ®” on the other hand is a separate subject and one of major gaslighting of the masses

 

[ericm979]

Here's a graph of CO pollution from areas mostly in California for 1970-2018:

It's too busy a graph and just one pollutant, but the idea comes across.
However while the levels are lower, they're not zero. I still see a sick looking greenish layer in the air above Silicon Valley often in the summer when the inversion layer traps the smog from a million cars in the valley.

 

[stoyan79]

I do care about emissions. That's why I bought TYM

 

[LouNY]

It will never be ZERO, the regulations in place by 2000 had done the "needed" drop and it would have and still would be slowly dropping without any additional interference from the government.

 

[WinterDeere]

So if the Saudi's are using more resources to get more fuel to market and then the US has emisisions...is there a per unit benefit globally?

Since most people can't think beyond what their two eyes see...they think the US is all unicorns and rainbows while ignoring the production side.

 

[Jeepnford]

I have a pre-emissions Case DX35 and have thought about moving up to a 50-60 HP compact. I was looking at a used Kubota L6060 with a DPF and still not sure if I want to buy. Dumb question inbound. Do the new tractors that use exhaust fluid still regen or did the fluid make that unnecessary?

 

[Grateful11]

Climate change has become this convoluted term that really has no definition, by design. One distinction that needs to be drawn is the difference between pollution and climate. They are two completely different things, but they get lumped together in the debate.

Do I think US society both in terms of ideals and practices, dealt with pollution. Yes. Outside of spontaneous polluting events like a train derailments, the US has largely solved the pollution issue.

Now climate is much harder to deal with because of mother nature. I have not seen any evidence put forth that says, this region should be a temperature of "x" and have a participation amount of "y". Then get to these stated goals by doing the following...

Now since there is no scientific way to identify the problem and a way to solve the climate problem, we get these platitudes that are rooted in pollution reduction. Again, largely solved.

So logically, since we have done great strides in eliminating pollution, shouldn't the climate respond to these actions?

A bit off-topic but here's my take on Climate Change.
I’ve been a weather watcher for over 50 years and keeping records of extreme events but a few years ago when I retired I started keeping my own accurate records. I met someone that has over 50 years of his own accurate weather records. I asked him what the biggest change has been since he started keeping records and he said warmer nights that the daytime temperatures overall have hardly changed at all. Well naturally the nighttime temps are pushing up the averages overall but higher nighttime temps aren’t nearly as bad on this old rock as daytime temps. I also concur it’s mostly warmer nights, daytime temps have hardly changed at all for the majority of us.

You can’t always believe these computer models or numbers the weather folk are putting out either. Back in Spring 2023 we had almost 4.5” of rain in a two day period. The biggest local weather person, whom calls himself a scientist, said our area only got 0.03” of rain during for that period. Everyone was like are you high on something. That day in 2023 he said we’re low on rainfall for the year. We had already had 34.7” of rain here so far that year. If we continue that trend we’ll be looking at 57” for the year or 15” above average. The problem is every county I believe in the country only takes one measurement for their official record keeping and usually always near an airport. What do all airport have in common, lots of concrete, asphalt and no trees. It’s probably the worst place to use for weather record keeping and it’s no wonder they’re showing a steady rise in temperatures with all that hard surface being added continually and no natural cooling from trees. I could talk forever about weather but I’ve gone on long enough.

Also we're still warming from the last "Little Ice Age" that occurred 1560 to 1630 for when the worldwide glacial expansion, known as the Grindelwald Fluctuation, began 1650, not the start of the Little Ice Age, but the start of the coldest years midway through, i.e., the First Climatic Minimum. The Little Ice Age ended in the latter half of the 19th century or in the early 20th century.

BTW: The latest trend in mainstream weather is to only go back 30 worth of records for comparisons. I say go to where we started keeping accurate records, around 1883 in many places.

 

[paulsharvey]

I have a pre-emissions Case DX35 and have thought about moving up to a 50-60 HP compact. I was looking at a used Kubota L6060 with a DPF and still not sure if I want to buy. Dumb question inbound. Do the new tractors that use exhaust fluid still regen or did the fluid make that unnecessary?

The exhaust fluid is only used in 75hp and greater, as far as I know. I don't "think" it's a specific requirement, it's just the easiest/cheapest way to get to the required numbers. That could be mistaken, so I would research myself. But basically the regen is just a self cleaning cycle to burn soot out of the filter.