THE BATTALION
Page 11
londay, October 29, 2001
peeding toward a bad policy
ity of Houston should not lower speed limit to 55
lo improve the quality of air and meet
Environmental Protection Agency stan
dards, Houston recently committed to an
nbitious, five-year plan that includes lower
:ed limits, cuts in industrial pollutants and
ricter vehicle-exhaust testing.
\ '
I 1
80
//
IT
This plan, hailed by the Environmental
Protection Agency as “the most innovative and
technically advanced air plan ever devised,”
has arrived 3 1 years after the federal Clean
Air Act was enacted. A 15-mile-per-hour
speed limit reduction, the most disturbing
aspect of this plan, and the introduction of
stricter, more expensive annu
al tailpipe emissions tests will
be the first implemented in
May 2002.
Although the existence of
such a plan is greatly needed
in the Houston area, the
reduction of the speed
limit from 70 to 55
miles per hour is an
intrusive policy
that will create
more problems
than it will solve.
/
A00
The theory behind speed limit reductions is
that cars get the most efficient gas mileage at
55 miles per hour; less gas equates to less pol
lutants emitted into the air.
According to the Houston
Chronicle, the five-year plan
is “expected to reduce nitro
gen oxide emissions by 75
percent and volatile organic
compounds by 40 percent by
the year 2007.” However, state
environmental activists doubt
the plan will even come near
achieving national air quality
standards, and at least 13 lawsuits have been
filed challenging various aspects of the plan.
According to Dr. Kenneth Green and Dr.
Lisa Skumatz, this policy “is based on a limit
ed understanding of the nature of emissions to
be reduced and the probability of successful
reduction.”
This uncertainty leads to unreliable environ
mental policy, diverts limited resources and
risks negative, unintended consequences.
.... ^ Green and Skumatz claim that
“mandatory behavioral con
trols such as manda
tory reduc
tions in
the
speed
limit
have
histori
cally
been met
with fail
ure and
resource waste
fulness, and should
be avoided.”
In addition to lower speed
limits, stricter emissions testing and
cuts in industrial pollutants, other provi
sions include requiring cleaner diesel fuel for
both on- and off-road vehicles on and east of
Interstate 35, a ban on excessive idling by
large commercial trucks, a ban on the com
mercial use of gasoline-powered lawn equip
ment between 6 a.m. and noon from April 1 to
Oct. 31 starting in 2005, and a cap on nitrogen
oxide emissions in the region and and allow
ing banking and trading of such emissions
below the cap.
The problem with many of these policies is
the intrusion into Americans’ everyday lives.
The pinnacle of this intrusion is demonstrated
in the speed limit reduction. Houston’s large
commuter population will feel this intrusion
and will not welcome the reduced speed limit
with open arms. As a result, the law will be a
difficult to enforce will not be effective.
Instead of implementing Draconian regula
tory controls which tend to be more disruptive
and expensive, more market-based innovative
approaches such as shuttle-van transit and
vehicle emission pricing (basing vehicle regis
tration fees on the level of emissions from the
vehicle and annual distances driven) should be
considered.
Something must done to bring the Houston
and Galveston area into compliance with
national ozone standards. However, the struc
ture of modern cities does not allow for a suc
cessful implementation of a speed-limit reduc
tion in major metropolitan areas. Today, peo
ple have little option but to live in distant sub
urbs, which leaves them dependent on auto
mobiles and high-speed freeways. Americans
spend approximately 50 percent of their dis
posable income on housing and transportation.
Yet the extra costs of suburban housing and
transportation do not increase our well being.
Instead, they bring significant new environ
mental and social problems such as air pollu
tion, the depletion of fossil fuels, automobile
accidents and congestion. Sensible people
realize this and would be more receptive to an
environmental plan that did not interfere with
such an essential aspect of their existence.
Now is also time for Houston leaders to final
ly realize this.
Jennifer Lozano is a junior
English major.
MAIL CALL
Stranger shows
Aggie spirit
Upon returning to my car in
Zachry lot from the civil engi
neering event with my wife and
son, I came to realize that I had
somehow lost my car keys. After
a good deal of rummaging
through our belongings, we
began to panic and tried to
retrace our steps. Of course, no
keys were found. Luckily for us,
one of my wife's professors was
kind enough to help us.
Dr. Lowery let us into his office
to use the phone to call our
apartment complex. He then
gave us a ride back to our apart
ment so we could get our spare
set of keys and actually gave my
wife a ride back to the car so she
could drive it home. The entire
process took about 45 minutes
out of his night, but he never
complained and was completely
sympathetic to our plight.
When my wife had returned to
the car and had begun her drive
home, she noticed a piece of
paper tucked into the windshield
wiper. It read as follows, "Your
keys are behind the front left
wheel." It seems that in the hus
tle and bustle of getting my fam
ily to the dinner, I had acciden
tally left my keys in the trunk's
keyhole. One conscientious
Aggie took the keys and placed
them where the note stated. If I
had not panicked I would have
actually seen the note and we
would not have had to bother Dr.
Lowery.
Despite the shortfalls of the
night, my faith in Aggies has
been restored. Little things like
this are what make me proud to
call myself an Aggie. This school
is not perfect, no place ever real
ly is, but I do think that A&M has
a step or two on most other
places in the world when it
comes to politeness, morality,
compassion, and all around
"good bull.”
Jay Childers
Class of2001
Do not be un-fair to
the Uncartoonist
If you bring up Microsoft Office
2000 and look for synonyms for
the word "idiot" you will find none.
The same is true with numerous
other words like "dimwit" and
"moron." While they are not nice
words, they do have a place in
writing, and their removal from
the reference marks a loss of util
ity to end users of the program.
They were removed so as not to
offend any users.
Microsoft's action above is an
example of how hypersensitivity,
or at least the perception of it,
can needlessly harm an other
wise fine thing. Recently there
have been a rash complaints
from people who find themselves
offended over comics appearing
in The Battalion.
This whole semester has
shown an unusually high
amount of people being offend
ed by things that they simply
should not have been offended
by. Do people not understand
the concept of a joke anymore?
We're Aggies, we tell each
other Aggie jokes! These jokes
are just as insulting as any car
toon the paper has every run,
usually more. And yet no one
gets offended because every
one knows it's all in good fun.
Why can't readers out there
look upon the Uncartoonist
comics the same way? They
should.
I fully support the drawings of
the Uncartoonist. While I don't
agree with half of what he draws
and don't find two thirds of it
funny, I think that The Battalion
would be much less of a publica
tion without him. Please don't
censor him or, worse, stop pub
lishing his drawings.
Chris Carlin
Class of2003
Aggie Bonfire unlikely to burn again
W ith Texas A&M President Dr. Ray
M. Bowen’s statement last week
end regarding the projected $ 1.5-
million price tag for Bonfire in 2002,
Bonfire’s final days will end with the 12 who
perished in the 1999 Aggie Bonfire collapse.
Some students are under the impression
that it will burn next year, but circum
stances dictate otherwise, and Aggies
should realize that administrators never
promised another Bonfire. Bonfire is not
likely on the horizon for the near future.
For the last two years, the A&M
administration has been telling students
that Bonfire would burn in 2002 under
three conditions. First, the student body
must support a restructured Bonfire con
structed under professional safety and con
struction plans. Second, the University
would have to approve of Bonfire safety,
risk management, design and construction
plans proposed by professional firms.
Lastly, the administration put forth a certi
fication requirement for all students, facul
ty and staff participating in Bonfire plan
ning, construction and management roles.
Unfortunately, they left out an important
factor: money. Bonfire, which has already
cost between $300,000 and $500,000 for
blueprints, is projected to cost $1.5 million
if the University carries out the tradition in
2002. In all likelihood, however, they will
not. Since the beginning stages of planning,
Bowen has made it clear that Bonfire will
only occur if the proper safety precautions
are in place. He also required students and
administrators approve the project.
The safety requirements alone make
Bonfire 2002 an unlikely
event. A&M administra
tion seeks “the non-nego-
tiable standard for all
future Bonfires will be
forever safe through fail
safe design and fail-safe
construction.” A fail-safe
richard design, while necessary
BRAY for Bonfire to become
anything but an embar
rassment to the University, is quite a diffi
cult goal to maintain. There is a saying
among engineers that goes, “Show me a
fool-proof design and I’ll show you that
fool.” Engineers who agree with this saying
would argue that the fail-safe design is an
impossible goal. If University administrators
come to the same conclusion after seeing
the safety plans. Bonfire will be canceled.
Of course, before a safety plan can be
considered, the University needs to con
struct these safety plans and procedures.
Unfortunately, after Marak Safety Services
backed out of contract negotiations Oct. 1,
Bonfire planners are finding this first step
a challenge. While University officials
have said that they are already in negotia
tions with another safety firm, delays such
as this could kill Bonfire 2002 before
administrators or students do.
Another impediment to Bonfire lighting
in 2002 is A&M’s $6.2-million budget
shortfall. With Bowen’s recent announce
ment that A&M is looking into new
sources of funds to combat financial diffi
culties, it could be very difficult for uni
versity relations to explain the annual
expenses of Bonfire. While alumni will
offer financial assistance to help save a
tradition many Aggies hold dear, they are
likely not as eager to open their pocket-
books with the future of Bonfire in doubt.
The obstacles stacked against Bonfire
2002 are high. The University needs to find
a safety firm that needs to draft a fail-safe
design. The administration and the student
body then need to approve the plan, and
students and faculty must be trained under
the new safety regulations before Fall 2002.
The University must find a way to pay
for Bonfire’s expenses. And if any one of
these steps fails — which will almost
inevitably occur — Bonfire will not burn.
Richard Bray is a junior
journalism major.
CARTOON OF THE DAY
TWc DHcPt Kf 6C>N\sf-<g>
The Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be
300 words or less and include the author's name, class and phone
number.
The opinion editor reserves the right to edit letters for length, style
and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 014 Reed
McDonald with a valid student ID. Letters also may be mailed to:
The Battalion — Mail Call
014 Reed McDonald • MS 1111
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
77843-1111
Fax: (979) 845-2647
Mail Call: mailcall@thebatt.com
Email: opinion@thebatt.com
Submissions made to old hotmail.com accounts will not be pub
lished. Attachments are not accepted.