Major BLUNDER by California Air Resources Board

[DrGregory]

A major BLUNDER by the California Air Resources Board
is being reported by the San Francisco Chronicle.

Evidently the California Air Resources Board miscalculated
and is 340% in ERROR:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/07/BAOF1FDMRV.DTL

The Chronicle speculates that this may influence
the response to Proposition 23 to repeal AB32
which will be voted on in a few weeks:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/09/BUC21FQ88R.DTL&type=business

Dr. Greg

[wtmusic]

1. Tempest in a teapot.

228 million gallons of diesel fuel are consumed annually by offroad vehicles in CA.

18 billion gallons of gasoline/diesel are consumed annually in CA. For those who like percentages, the whole BLUNDER amounts to about a 4% difference in fuel consumption.

[DrGregory]

4. Not according to the recent news reports..

Tempest in a teapot.
=========================

According to recent news reports since this was
released - support for Prop 29 which would
repeal the State's CO2 bill is growing because
of this disclosure.

If Prop 29 passes and the CO2 bill is repealed;
it won't be a tempest then.

Dr. Greg

[wtmusic]

5. Support for Prop 23 (not 29) "is growing" because of this disclosure?

All I can find is the author's opinion that it "may fuel" support for 23. :shrug:

Judging by the insignificance of the error, it's really not much of a story unless it's hyped into some kind of relevance, is it?

[XemaSab]

2. I don't see how they miscalculated

if the number they were using was valid a few years ago.

They came up with a good number that no longer fits today's environment.

[DrGregory]

3. It wasn't valid a few year ago - they only thought it was valid

I don't see how they miscalculated if the number they were using was valid a few years ago.
============================================================

READ the article. The UC - Berkeley professor and the scientists
from Lawrence Berkeley National Lab found that the numbers they
were using a few years ago were NOT VALID. For example, they
cite that the values that CARB had been using a few years ago
for nitrous oxide were OFF by a factor of 4.5!!!!! Particulate
matter was off by a factor of 3.1.

That's the problem, CARB has been giving the California legislature
BAD, INACCURATE, WRONG data for years.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/07/BAOF1FDMRV.DTL&ao=3

"The problem, and the revised counting method, came to light after Robert Harley, a UC Berkeley professor of environmental engineering, and a colleague at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory did their own evaluation, which was published in December in the journal Atmospheric Environment.

While air board officials and other defenders of the board's science point to the economy as a major factor in the overestimates, Harley found that prior to the recession the board's estimates of nitrous oxide were too high by a factor of 4.5 and its estimate of particulate matter was off by a factor of 3.1, an extraordinarily high amount to be off scientifically.

"The difference is large enough that it changes policy," Harley said."


Dr. Greg

[Kolesar]

6. You sound rather "celebratory" about it

Are you "celebratory"?

[OregonBlue]

7. Sure sounds like he's hoping 29 will pass. Who is this person? A Dem?

[DrGregory]

8. ????????????????

Sure sounds like he's hoping 29 will pass. Who is this person? A Dem?
============================================

By what perverse logic did you come to the conclusion that I
was hoping 29 will pass???

You are 100% WRONG!!~!

There was a news report on the TV news to that
effect last evening - that support for 29 was
building in light of the monumental BLUNDER
by CARB.

From THAT you conclude that I am hoping 29 will pass.

GEESH - one can tell you never studied logic.

Dr. Greg