C.A.R.B...wrong priorities with car emissions!
 

Geeze, they worry so much about automobile emissions and how to screw the consumer, but it seems they are missing the mark if their goal is to reduce emissions! This morning I watched the trash truck spew a 30 foot plume of black smoke at every stop. I'm am sure my SC doesn't put out that much in a whole year! I assume this is not an oversight on the part of CARB, but that they are getting their pockets lined by the truck unions or something. In any case, it's totally rediculous the amount of pollution these busses, semi's and the like cause.


Rant off

-Brad
80SC

You will be happy to know that Waste Management and others are going to alternative fuel. Diesels are poison, and WM has been given the message in CA and are on a timeline.

How do I know? I'm into waste!

John

Hmph, Smog Nazis. I hate Smog Nazis.

Jdub- I would like to protest you saying diesels are poison. Gallon for Gallon burned diesels are cleaner than gasoline in all aspects except for NOX emissions. NOX emissions are higher at this point as this country doesn't see fit to follow the Europeans and greatly reduce the Sulphur content of diesel (I believe Current standards for USA = 500ppm sulfur and Euro standards are 50ppm)

Lowering the sulphur content will allow for a much cleaner diesel (cleaner than gas)

Once you consider fuel economy in the equation diesels make even more since.

Currently VW is the only automaker to sell diesel cars in this country.

2002 Jetta GLS 2.0 gas engine 5 speed 15,000 miles per year
EPA mileage-24/31
Greenhouse gases-7.1 tons per year

2002 Jetta GLS 1.9 diesel engine 5 speed 15,000 miles per year
EPA Mileage-42/49
Greenhouse gases-4.7 tons per year

2002 Jetta GLS 1.8t gas engine 5 speed 15,000 miles per year
EPA Mileage-24/31
Greenhouse gases- 7.1 tons per year

As you can see the diesel is much cleaner. A little known fact by 50,000 miles most gasoline powered cars produce as much or more NOX than a diesel with 50K miles.

We should encourage the development of diesels and the use of biodiesels that will further reduce emissions.

Maybe one day this country will catch onto the fact that we could have some really wicked (ie fast) diesels in this country and get much better fuel economy.

Rant mode off

I would just like to see the govt cars comply with the same emissions requirements. I believe the govt must have some leeway on certain rules and regulations, but emissions standards on state official vehicles (police, city buses, etc) do not rise to such an exception.

I'm no expert, but as far as I know, the Diesel engines are cleaner than the gasoline engines when it comes to the emissions that cause smog.

That garbage truck may have dumped a bunch of soot out of the stack, but it's particulate (still not good) versus exhaust gases. You can't see the exhaust gases coming out of your tailpipe, so they register less on the 'urgency' scale...

-Wayne

Our (CDF) fire engines must be smogged every 2 years, just like my personnal vehicles.

And you should see the black cloud that comes from the tail pipe when I have to mash on the pedal. Not to mention it gets about 4-6 MPG and it's diesel.

I've heard some rumblings about the diesels being "poison." Do you know if this refers to the particulate matter (black smoke) or the properly burned fuel. . ..when diesels put out the black smoke (particulate matter) it consists of pyrolized (toasted) fuel. This is different from the properly burned fuel exhaust.
But which (or both?) are considered so harmful that school busses are not allowed to run at idle for more than a few minutes?

Hmph, Smog Nazis. I hate Smog Nazis......


Hmmm, nice.

Diesels DO have pollution limits, just not inspections.....they are also phaseing out the less effecient burning older models by attrition and assisted replacement. Problem is Diesels last so long and can be rebuilt so many times.

BTW Public agency vehicles need to be smogged every two years, just like the other members of the public. That includes the local PD, CHP and Fire Departments.

My agency actually assists private firms in the repowering of older dirty diesel powered trucks with more effecient and cleaner running engines and electric power plants.

We subsidize farmers to replace old engines that run water irrigation pumps, fishermen with two strokes to four strokes, gas engines to bigger more effecient diesels, busses to electrics, trash trucks to hydrogen fuel cells.......

We do it all with DMV surcharge funds, grants from CARB and EPA...... all moneys that are passed thru my agency without any commission or charge.....we do it as a public service. The recipient typically pays for the installation and we provide the motor.

Now I don't agree with 100% of what CARB tries to shove down my throat, but a good amount of what they do is helpful to the community. When I disagree I call my local representative and tell them my side and sometimes they change their tune.....I may be a public employee but I still have rights as a citizen.

CARB has been behind a number of bills seeking to repeal the rolling 30 year exemption on smog checks for autos. I am against it.....definitely. I have called my State Senator and my representative on this many times.

My opinion is that a 30 year old that makes it that far should be allowed a few breaks. As long as it does not smoke, burn oil or is unsafe.

Now...being called a Smog Nazi.....THAT offends me. I do not wear black and goose step thru France killing women and children.

Pick another term please.....Air Weenie, Air Dork, Air Cop....."Nazi" is not acceptable.

Mike Z
County Smog Dude
Serving the community since 1987

Diesels do have many attractive features: high mpg, low-end tourque, and built too last as well. A million miles is mid-life for some of them.

The problem is they do create a great deal of soot as they are designed to run on the most basic of fuels, but the newer ones with electronic controls and direct cylinder injection are pretty slick.

Opacity (soot level) tests are probably going be an issue in the future-economy and efficiency don't always go hand in hand (though it eventually will)- and in the mean time the pollutants from lawn mowers etc are probably th enext target.

Who knows what the NOX produced by those high compression engines are, and who cares!! The other half of the world is using coal and slash-and-burn farming. Automotive technology has progressed greatly over the years(apologies to B.G.) and it will probably change drastically over the next couple decades.

There's no way the trucking or rail industry could convert to another type of powerplant without major retrofiting of the fuel distribution network.

There were rumors of super-efficient ceramic engine blocks and diesel bio-mass in the works but that technowlegy is probably a long ways off; After we get levitation;)

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20020904/hl_nm/cancer_exhaust_dc_1

a link to a AP story on how diesel exhaust causes cancer.

That report on diesel is somewhat flawed. I do not dispute diesel exhaust causes cancer. But so does gasoline exhaust.

They claim that the particulate matter that is emitted in Diesel exhaust gets into the lungs and causes all soots of damage. While this may be true the particulate matter from a gasoline engine (yes there is particulates coming out of a gas engine) are much smaller thus not visible in the form of black exhaust but go much deeper into the lung.

Lets face internal combustion engines have problems but diesel is no more evil than any of them. In Europe ~40 to 50% of the cars on the road are diesel. Is their rate of cancer 40 to 50% higher.

In Japan I believe I read ~20% of their cars are diesel. I want to say they have a lower cancer rate than we do.

What does the report prove. Not a whole lot.