Last post on Oct 08, 2006 at 8:03 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives
What is this discussion about?
Sep 27, 2006 (3:06 pm)
CARB does not have jurisdiction over every pollution source in LA.
I'm not really all that interested in a debate over CARB's usefullness. I'll let a CARB employee or someone from the Cal AG's office entertain that, if they want.
I only wanted to point out that your position isn't accurate.
Are you a California taxpayer? Why do you care about CARB?
Places like Pomona grow. Blocks of two-story apartments are torn down and replaced with blocks of 8-story apartments. Two-bedroom apartments that use to house two people taking the bus, now house three people all with cars. It happens.
#120 of 168 Re: The thing is [boaz47]
Sep 27, 2006 (3:08 pm)
CARB makes it hard for us to add certain turbos, headers, and exhausts to our cars. It's been a widespread excuse for police to pull people over. Many of you will be happy about those regulations.
Our smog check requirements are the leading cause of death among old beaters. For Californian families like mine "drive it until the wheels fall off" doesn't apply. It's "drive it until it fails smog."
That's what I know about CARB from day to day life. Oh and under certain conditions we have "Spare the Air" days in the SF Bay Area, and on days like that you can tell (through your eyes and nose) that our cars have an effect on our air. Few of us are willing to make big sacrifices to reduce that, but I'm glad there are some balancing powers keeping it from getting worse. I'm impressed that the air's as good as it is these days, given the incredible increase in traffic.
#121 of 168 Re: The thing is [alp8]
Sep 27, 2006 (3:24 pm)
I think then truly the essential issues are either being missed or glossed over. Passenger diesel vehicle operations have statistically no effect/affect. So indeed (as you have pointed out) other environmental factors can have more sway over air quality than passenger vehicle diesels. So for example (this is absolutely HUGE) almost the whole North/South length of CA state has "wild fires" as a NATURAL condition. In truth STATE WIDE so called out of control wild fires are NATURAL environmental phenomenon every 5/8 years !!!!! This is almost literally a good definition of hell fire on earth. Indeed not letting nature take this course is UN natural!!??? I think it is not only short sighted but wishful magical thinking to have emissions abatement of already abated diesel passenger vehicles to compensate for the effects/affects of the (totally unabated) natural wild fire conditions!!! So to illustrate the concept. The south and southeast and east has its "hurricane" season. CA has its so called "wild fire"/ fire seasons.
#122 of 168 Re: The thing is [boaz47]
Sep 27, 2006 (3:36 pm)
then what use is CARB?
My question from the start. Not only what have they done that was good. What have they done that has backfired. I can think of three things right off. MTBE, ZEV and the trucking industry. MTBE is well known. The EV1 and other electric vehicles that were mandated then dumped. The most costly may be what they are doing to the trucking industry in CA. By passing stricter laws on trucking companies in CA they promote trucking companies from outside CA. Now we get all these truckers buying cheaper diesel across our borders, making their PU & deliveries in CA then pop back across to fill up with cheap diesel in AZ. That I10 corridor has many stations selling diesel for a lot less than anyone in CA. CA truckers are also burdened with much more expensive particulate filters that out of state trucks are not required to have. If they are going to mandate something they need to do it for any truck that comes into the state. You would not believe some of the trucks coming in from Mexico. CARB has taxed and penalized our trucking industry to the point of collapse.
Since 1993, strict emissions standards put in place by the California Air Resources Board have banned the sale of diesel made at refineries outside the state. Thus, the state has relied solely on so-called CARB diesel.
#123 of 168 Re: The thing is [ruking1]
Sep 27, 2006 (3:43 pm)
so your point is, there are natural sources of pollution so we shouldn't regulate man-made sources?
I don't know that passenger vehicle emissions have no effect. I would guess that is a stretch.
No single source is likely to be as significant as all the vehicles in a basin, though the LA basis does have a port (huge source) as well refineries
I do think that your fundamental argument has merit - that we should not simply assume that all passenger vehicle emission controls are worthwhile
nonetheless, the debate is not entirely a scientific one, and is, of course, a political one. Frankly, that is a good thing. The last thing I want is a world governed by scientists, alone. Sometimes you need to take a broader perspective than the scientific perspective, such as "yeah, this policy WILL clean the air up, a bit, but it will absolutely destroy the economy of the region"
#124 of 168 Re: The thing is [gagrice]
Sep 27, 2006 (3:46 pm)
If they are going to mandate something they need to do it for any truck that comes into the state. You would not believe some of the trucks coming in from Mexico.
well, you can't blame CARB for the inadequacies of the federal Clean Air Act - that problem lies at Congress's feet
same with commerce coming up from Mexico. California can't regulate that, I don't think. Again, blame Congress.
Are you seriously willing to let CARB regulate emissions on cars and trucks that aren't registered in California? I doubt it.
#125 of 168 Re: The thing is [alp8]
Sep 27, 2006 (3:51 pm)
..."so your point is, there are natural sources of pollution so we shouldn't regulate man-made sources? "...
So for the purposes of discussion, on this thread CA diesels, the emissions (unabated) literally dwarf exponentially the diesel passenger vehicle fleets'. For that matter the gasser passenger vehicle fleets. Essentially the natural emissions sources are incalculable in comparison to the 2.9% of the diesel passenger vehicle fleet.
Last I checked, passenger vehicles: both gasser and diesel ARE regulated. So truly your quote is NOT MY point. Since most folks are relatively unfamiliar with diesel, let me just say the 2003 VW Jetta TDI has the EGR emissions system. It also was designed to run on low sulfur diesel, which is only now coming to widespread use and availability. It also can run bio diesel products, i.e., the range of alternative (biodiesel)fuel.
#126 of 168 Re: The thing is [alp8]
Sep 27, 2006 (3:53 pm)
such as "yeah, this policy WILL clean the air up, a bit, but it will absolutely destroy the economy of the region"
On that we fully agree. When does emissions reach the point of diminishing returns? If the exhaust coming from the tailpipe of the Honda Civic GX is cleaner than the air going into the air filter. I think that may be overkill. I can tell you that the air in Los Angeles is cleaner today than it was in the 1960s & 70s. When I went to visit my Grandmother in South Pasadena in the 1970s I could not breathe. It was horrible. Cleaning up the shipping industry at Long Beach and San Pedro will go a long way toward cleaning the air in San Bernardino.
#127 of 168 Re: The thing is [ruking1]
Sep 27, 2006 (4:04 pm)
so, what was your point? that natural sources of pollution outweigh diesel emissions, so diesel emissions should be uncontrolled?
that diesel emissions should be controlled as gasser emissions are?
I'm not trying to be obtuse
#128 of 168 Re: The thing is [alp8]
Sep 27, 2006 (4:05 pm)
California can't regulate that, I don't think
I don't know either. The point being if I make you do something to clean up your truck before you drive it in CA that costs X amount of money. Then a trucker from AZ with a less expensive vehicle and cheaper fuel can beat my price for hauling goods. I believe one of the lawsuits between CARB and the EPA is over trucking jurisdiction. Even though it may not be overall as clean using the EPA standards, it would save us all a lot of money.
I firmly believe that if CA allowed smaller diesel vehicles to be sold in the state, we would have clean small to midsize diesel PU trucks sold in the USA. Many contractors would opt for a 1/2 ton PU with a 30 MPG diesel engine instead of the 3/4 & 1 ton behemoths that are lucky to get 18 MPG. Why buy a gas truck that you are lucky to get 12 MPG with, when a bigger diesel truck gets 16-20 MPG? The overall benefit would be less fuel, less emissions and less green house gas.