Who here thinks that truckers are likely to smoke more cigarettes than the average person?

Shhhhhhhh!!!! This "study" has the power to allow for even MORE government control (how about that Illinois governor?!?) over people's lives. Adding truth that was left out could hinder that.

They could always get new lungs, arteries, heart and brain every 20 years or so and keep smoking, inhaling diesel and wood stoves fumes etc.

Good citizens die young (before 62). Older people cost too much to keep alive and are responsible for higher taxes.

OK, so the study was about truckers, etc. who choose to work in these environments, even though it's obvious that diesel exhaust is bad for your health. But that doesn't mean they shouldn't have a better working environment anyway. AND.... this also affects everyone else, since we're all exposed to this unnecessary pollution. So I'm all for it. Also, the increased health care costs associated with diesel are passed on to the rest us, since health insurance spreads out the cost of sick people to the healthy ones.
Exhaust filters are an EASY and CHEAP (compared to all the health care costs) solution to this problem that should have been cleaned up long ago.

Diesels have improved about 10,000% in the last decade. ULSD of today is about 1,000 times less toxic than the LSD from 2 years ago. If your going to make huge claims, make sure your study hasn't been outdated by technology. Maybe the last generation was plagued with sooty, black smoke pumping smog machines but the new generation will not be. Today's diesels are cleaner than a gas engine from five years ago and is 30% more efficient.

Yes the '5 year' statement has more to do with the passenger diesels because rigs do not use gas engines. However, Rigs benefit from ULSD as well, the new trucks are beginning to get PF and APU's so they don't have to idle. I am not saying big rigs are clean but on the green scale they are up about 30 notches. This study may be good FYI, although not anything we didn't already know, but would be bad to base today's peceptions or regulations.

Read the reports about diesel soot and health -- there are many of them.

There are web sites dedicated to the topic.

Trucking alone is bad but add shipping and it's even worse. The effects on people wo live near our nation;s ports is deadly.

We've know this for years. And we've been slowly working on improving this for years...

http://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/nr120507.htm
>A 2005 ARB exposure study at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach shows that more than two million people live in areas around the ports with predicted cancer risks of greater than 10 in a million due emissions from docked ocean-going vessels. From that study and other data, ARB estimates that about 61 premature deaths per year can be attributed to exposure to diesel exhaust generated from ships in port.

Its great having access to the insights of the contrarians, who know more about every subject on the planet than those idiots that go to higher education.

Without these opposing views I'd be so ignorant and maybe one day even believe the evidence that till now only convinces those gullible " goody goody smarty lot."

Indeed why not just pay some of the contrarians to come up with the answers for us. Heck I intend to donate my brain to this new group so they can do all my thinking for me. Then I wouldn't have those uncomfortable doubts.

When there were no longer any issues of merit in the world we could get on with really important things like oh proving everyone wrong, well why should we need to prove it? Hang on then we'd be out of a job.

My next door neighbor drives diesel, and every time he starts his truck, I get sick.

The windows stay closed. The house is black from the air pollution created on that side of the house.

Diesel is Dirty!

ACAGal:

I think you are exaggerating quite a bit. A black side of the house? Sick EVERY time he starts it? And this is on CARB ULSD in Cali, right? Hmmm... And if it were a cold engine it would make "white" smoke. Not black, like when overfueled.

Lets not go too far into trying to make a point.

Nate H.
Dover, Ohio

Obviously vehicle emissions are hazardous to the health of any living organism especially those aerobes like ourselves that stay nearby. If vehicle emissions were not hazardous they wouldn't write death by smoke inhalation in closed garages into murder mysteries. The blessing is that the toxicity of air pollutants goes way down as it is diluted over a vast expanse. Water quality on the other hand can in fact accumulate thus is more of a social concern to most consumers. Air quality however should be a higher priority for voters and their elected officials alike. The simple reason as this study implies is that the negative effects over the long term are absolutely deadly and by no means pain free or inexpensive. Every time we intake polluted air into our lungs a bit of the toxics remain. After so many breathes the accumulated toxics may cause a number of health effects including cell mutations that lead to certain cancers. IF anyone wants to still argue the need to reduce emission control type requirements I suggest they take a walk without a face mask along one of the congested highways near them and try to go five minutes without having to cough or gag. Several South East Asian countries have conducted research studies where actual individuals that died hard their lungs disected where particulate matter was not only visible without a microscope but obviously caused great pain for the individual to even breathe up to their death. Emissions control is not as much an environmental issue as it is a health concern. Several studies have concluded that near major emission sources the incident of asthma in children's developing lungs is drastically increased not to mention the extra strain placed on those who are elderly. Even at fifty years of age the increased amount of certain emission toxics can have a drastic effect of the performance and lung capacity of individuals making it harder to overcome inborn illness or even fight the flu.

Diesels are known for having higher particulates than gasolene cars which contribute more towards ozone gasses. Keeping this in mind most state and federal agencies are pushed to regulate deisels maybe more than necessary because they "look" like they emit worse than other vehicles. Honestly I'd rather see truckers on the road any day doing what they are doing and more regulation on individual vehicle motorists. The vast majority of big rigs are regularly maintained and inspected which does help limit the amount of pollution created. The same can hardly be said for most private car owners.

Ideally every driver would maintain their vehicle and do more than the minimum inspection to limit the impact their vehicle has on the environment and their own health. Unfortunately life is not ideal and the role of government is to step in on such cases and create regulations forcing responsiblity onto the public and private sectors of industry.