California will rule our Emissions Standards

First of all, we're only 1.1 million people and 400,000 vehicles (46% are cars and pickups) balance are grain, farm or cargo rigs. Second, they need Federal backing to enact it all. That's a long shot, since the whole industry is unstable for the foreseeable future.

The only short-term snag could be to scrap pre-1995 cars, if they go to Public government auctions. The rest is down the road, probably before 2012 (next election). Nobody's adding more mechanics, so training the shops will be a tough-sell in this market.

Here's the news bite:
http://www.cbc.ca/canada/manitoba/story/2009/04/02/mb-greenhouse-emissions.html

Here's the reports (righthand menu):
http://www.gov.mb.ca/stem/

The Summary gives a better snapshot. We're the first Province in Canada to make the pro-California model, so you other Canucks should have a look. It's not down to the actual ages, YET. They haven't got to that detail level, so far.

 

This world is becoming more and more communist everyday. Might just as well move to China, before we know it we will be forced to do as we are told and not allowed to think for ourselves. pre-1995 junkers my arse, I will put my '92 up against any 2009+ model and see what they look like in 17 years with 157,000 miles on them.

 

Actually, although the governing party is supposedly Social Democratic in its platform, they strike a balance. EXCEPT on this one. They're more Republican in some cases and more Democrat on others.

The problem is that we're one of the lowest income Provinces in the country and we don't buy new cars very often. We can't use Hydrogen-fuelled cars because they don't work under -30C (Freakin' COLD). Most of our homes are over 100 years old and still have the old screw-type fuses, which would mean about $5,000 to rewire the house to get a recharge plug outside to charge up an electric hybrid. These old houses have the old 2-wire system without grounds. That's why we have so many electrical fires, too.

So that means that a family earning $30,000 on two incomes, in a Province that's half the size of Mexico, would not be able to get out to visit their own countryside.

BUT, since we are so small in population, they need to get more support from other Provinces, and that's where the Mayors get to fight. The Feds won't rush this. The Mayors are broke. They can't issue City Bonds under our system, so they have to live on property taxes and fines. No cars, no fines. No Mortgage payers, no taxes.

My concern is that the bureaocrats will impose the pre-1995 regs just to make a statement. That means that the folks running scrapyards won't have old parts to sell, and we'll be importing them. No taxpaying scrapyard owners (and we have a lot, being in the middle of the country), no city taxes, no income tax revenues to the Province.

Really short-sighted for such a small population. Its a legacy project to nowhere. Its like they want to lose the next election.

 

Oh yeah, and we don't even have a smog count. We have a Pollen Count in the spring and a dust/smoke count when the wheat farmers are prepping their fields. That's it!

 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7989583.stm

Looks like Europe is headed that way too.

 

You wait. It won't be long before they simply outlaw cars when they reach a particular age. This would not surprise me.

 

Ditto that one.....

Sadly, its my generation (gen X'ers) and the generation after mine that have voted in these political "do good'ers".....but they are too dumb to see most of the views are very communist/socialist in nature.

 

I'm not sure dumb is the right word......perhaps, they BELIEVE that America has been wrong and socialism is a better way. But...I really want to avoid politics here.

Even though these people that think that way are WAY wrong.

 

We need another Reagan.....

 

You can use an operating system for a computer from the early 80's. You can plug in a radio from the early 20's and its still valid, you can still drive a 1907 Model T. This idea of planned obsolescence came along as a Free market marketing strategy. Legalized Obsolescence should scare the heck out of a lot industries. Transportation is one our nations' secrets to success. Fuel was the equalizer. If you had the fuel, you could drive the same highways, get to the same office as your CEO, even if Mr. Scrooge made you do the impossible for nothing. The old clunkers kept our families in the fight while we built our families, our communities and our countries.

I'm a green weenie to save money, and if that helps clean up stuff too, that's a plus. But forcing people into small mortgages for a green machine is counterproductive.

Makes more sense to make Oil Cartels illegal, and force industry to do their part and save big energy bucks as well.

 

Maybe I'm a liberal do gooder or something but I don't mind the smog checks except for the fact that they cost money.

The California standards aren't all that strick or acheivable with a properly maintained automobile. I'm only familiar with the standards imposed on 1976-1992 autos as my newest cars are 92's. The emissions standard for my 82 Cougar, 92 Tbird and 92 Ranger are all the same. Each car has to pass a visual inspection certifying that all the equipment required are present. The only functional test of equipment is the EGR valve. They also functionally test the evaporation control system. They pressurize the fuel tank to .5 psi for 30 secounds and check for leaks. Then they do the 2500 rpm check for tailpipe emissions and that's followed by the idle test for emissions. When the throttle is released the emissions (which generally are higher at 2500 rpm) are to recover within idle standards within 30 secounds. If so equipped the car will have to have a functional "check engine" light. It must illuminate when the ignition is turned on but not started and it must go off. It must be off at all times during the engine running tests.

26 states test in the above manner. Only year ranges differ. In California it's all 1976 and newer. New cars are exempt from testing for 6 years. In other states is cars that are newer than 30 years.

In some counties near LA and San Fransisco a smog test on the dynomometer is required. The running test on the dyno will determine more accurately what emissions are being spewed. This test will determine the emissions in all rpm ranges between idle and 2500 rpm in all transmission ranges as well.

I'm not aware of any other state using this method of test.

One interesting note. In Calfornia all hybrids are exempt from testing as they will not idle. January 2010 begins diesel testing. In diesel testing there is no emissions measured at the exhaust. They check for visible smoke and check that all equipment is installed.

The only people that need fear the California standards are the ones who have removed or otherwise disabled the emissions equipment. Another rule is that in order to perform the test the technician may NOT disassemble anything to perform the test. NOTHING. So, one could get away with a carb change and some vehicles are exempt from the evap test because the hoses cannot be clamped without disassembling something under the hood. The technician is not allowed to lay on the ground to gain access to those hoses.

In Georgia they do test hybrids. All hybrids fail. Since they won't idle they issue a failed certificate and charge the owner $25. Then the owner has to go the the motor vehicle department and get a certificate of waiver in order to register their cars. The Georgia government is so stupid that the impose this rediculous nitmare on everyone with a hybrid. I assume to collect the fees.

 

The problem is that those bits of hardware that are the emissions system are for the most part up here rotted out, and are cost prohibitive to replace or maintain, which means the car goes to the junkyard.

And the engines, like our I6, suck in their stock condition. What if you want to turbo it? Looks like they're trying to eliminate our favourite hobby, which is HOT RODDING! An efficient engine, IMHO is one that makes at least 1hp per cubic inch.

 

TBIRD, you know about the Mr. Gasket Advance Curve Kit and how that makes the engine more fuel efficient and brings the HP potential within the more useful RPM range. That has to help the emissions. But the Regulations won't let you do that upgrade.

If you changed your wagon's fuel system to adapt water injection, they wouldn't let you test the vehicle, right? That's another 10 to 15% improvement.

The rules are made for inspectors, not consumers. As long as everything is according to Factory specs, the vehicle qualifies for inspection.

Let me ask you this. Not that you would, but would the regulations allow you to install the Fairmont Inline 4-banger, from the I6? Or would the original ID tag on the vehicle predicate the inspector's response?

I don't mind spending for fuel improvement changes, which, by their nature will reduce emissions. But if the Laws don't consider that we always have better 20/20 vision after we prove the engines and get the bugs out, then there's a serious need to open up the flexibility in those regulations. After all, the reason that these regs were passed, was to help the environment and the public that breathe it. If new developments to older machinery can't be assimilated into the regs, then they become their own purpose and result, not the public.

 

Andy, look at some of the small displacement V4's, hauling far more than 1HP/CI. The rub is that they put them in heavier vehicles and the fuel consumption (and therefore emissions) don't come down. Whats a 145 HP, 2.8L V4 in a 4,000 lb. (or more) car good for? Makes more sense in one of ours, weighing less than 2 tons. TBird's is 3,300 lbs, and ours are under 2,800 lbs.

 

The rules wouldn't allow tbird to swap the I6 for a modern ODB2 compliant modern Mustang engine, would they?