"How does that apparent cheering of your current alias contrast with it's prior #81 comment?"
It doesn't. My point then, and now, is that US air quality issues have already been addressed and corrected by the year 2000. With coal burning gone in favor of natural gas for electrical generation and more efficient vehicles nationwide, our air is already way better than what was previously set as the standard for 'clean air'. That is why LA no longer has level 2 of level 1 SMOG alerts. At this point, you are spending billions of dollars to make clean air even cleaner - it is diminishing returns. For CA, especially LA area, they are uniquely terrible vs. the rest of the nation in air quality but even their air quality has been at an acceptable level since 2000.
"So, it seems that your current alias is cherry-picking data for Los Angeles to try to justify its comment about the whole of California?
#99 | Posted by LampLighter"
I am using LA because anywhere else in CA, say Humboldt County, is because the air quality is already so good there that you cannot even find data to make statistically meaning points. For Humboldt County, they had 0 smog days in year 2000 and 0 smog days in 2023. Only LA, with its uniquely awful smog problems from the 1980's has meaningful data - and that data, used as a proxy, already proves my point.
Your problem seems to be with logic in this case.
"Why the apparent backtracking from that?
#108 | Posted by LampLighter"
Already asked and answered in #103. Read it more slowly this time, maybe it would help your comprehension.