California smog rules coming up

[FloridaCliff]

I will bet a Cold Beer that this has no effect on existing RV, Bus conversions, etc.

I predict you will be Grandfathered in since you make up a minuscule amount of vehicles in the big picture and those who make the rules also own RV's, Bus conversions and will protect them.

I think having read "Chicken Little" as a child, helps in understanding these worries.  

Cliff

[cody]

.

[belfert]

As far as I can tell, the government doesn't make a dime by requiring cleaner diesel engines except perhaps sales tax on engine conversions and motor vehicle sales tax on vehicles bought earlier than planned due to emissions issues.

This is all about cleaning up the air.

[JohnEd]

All of this is just so far off topic.....don't ya just luv it?

Smog story:  A friend was on a rant one day about "charcoal lighter".  This guy was opinionated all the way thru and I was amazed at how infrequently he was correct.  Really, he was spring loaded to the WRONG position.  Given that he thought charcoal lighter was a "stupid thing to regulate", I felt obliged to look into it.  LA made it illegal to sell charcoal lighter that burned in open air and produced high levels of particulate.  Remember how that stuff used to send up a cloud of black smoke when you first lit it off?  Well it turned out that Dow Chemical had a zillion tons of napalm left over from Nam.  The Fed didn't want it and Dow was stuck with huge stocks and what exactly do you do with "old Napalm"?  Dow, being chem wizards, figured a way to make Napalm burn without leaving that nasty gasoline/chemical taste that ruins the subtle flavors of a good hotdog.  Problem was it smoked like all gitout.  No problem though cause who cares about a BBQ fire, right?  Care to venture how many back yards have a BBQ fire going in the back yard at least once during a weekend?  OODELS!  For those of you that haven't spent time in LA, you often couldn't breath without being aware of doing so and having an idea that what you were doing was wrong.  So many people were gasping and dieing of resp. problems that some smart bunny came up with the idea that preventing the dumping of stuff in the atmosphere was in need of being regulated.  "NO durn Gummint Interference" was tried for a long while and the industry was left to self regulate.  That didn't work with air pollution any better than it has with Banking or Savings and Loans or Big Oil or Steel, or nationwide hi way systems, etc.  As usual, the GUMMINT was drug, kicking and fighting and screaming, into the area of REGULATING THE AIR..."Oh, my God" and "can you believe this Mildred"?  Not being able to breath and watching your children hack themselves into underweight will stiffen a mans spine to the point that he will involve the Gummint....against all his instincts and industry spokesman rhetoric.  Not breathing was a strategy used by the Russians to inspire people to lie for the Communist party and we have used it for the same purpose....except that we force the "truth".  Breathing is important and recognized by all humans as being so.

Back to the issue:  It turned out that LA was supplied with Charcoal lighter weekly by train tank cars and they were numbered in the many.  It accounted for oodles of tons of co2 and particulate every day.  Fortunately, the peak consumption was on the weekends and that was out of sync with freeway sources so it evened out the pollution over a week's period and that was a silver lining of sorts and that point was exploited by the Conservatives and industry.  Bless their hearts for always looking for the positive.  The LA city council and LA county council were elected on a platform of "DO SOMETHING ABOUT AIR QUALITY". If the only thing they regulated was charcoal lighter, I would have been disappointed in them but that is not the case.  They stuck their grubby little paws in almost everything and doing everything they could see to do they only succeeded in holding the state of pollution to the same level and that level was unsat.  They cast about to be more strict and regulate more things in a constant effort to clean up the air in the LA basin.  Can't please everybody every time but you have NEVER seen the day that the Auto Industry, Oil industry, Chemical industry or .... has EVER be happy with anything that LA has done.  EVER!

We tried it the other way in so many issues for so long and self regulation is a failure in the long run.  Never fails!  I am not going to tell you that I know what needs to be done.  I am not that stone cold stupid out of my field.  I can tell you that I have sharpened an ear to the rhetoric and have developed a habit of looking to who profits from what by following the money.  Certain remarks set of my alarms:  "Gummint never did nuthin that ever worked" and "we got to throw out ALL the politicians".  The "conservatives" use this mantra cause liberals are usually more popular and represented in Gummint.  "Junk Science", spoken with a guffaw, comes to mind also.  "Well, I don't understand what they have on their mind", an admission of confusion, when followed by a suggestion that the course of action is known by the speaker and we should follow him/her gives me LOGIC whiplash every time.

Oh well!  I feel better now.

John

[JohnEd]

Brian,

What are ya, a communist?   Everybody knows that the polits are making a kill'en out of this reg stuff.   Why else would they do it?   And the people that oppose reg are true patriots simply by definition.   Yeah, you got your nerve bringing up facts and evidence and book learn'n all at the same time.

Be well guy and write more often,

John

[WEC4104]

Living in Nebraska ...   ... Our gas taxes are some of the highest however.

Nebraska's state levied gasoline taxes are currently 27.3 cents a gallon, which is practically smack dab on the national average (27.2 cents).  There are more than a dozen states (mine included) that are over 30 cents per gallon.  For diesel fuel, they are also close to the middle of the pack, with 18 states having higher tax rates.

ref:  http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes/upload/State_MotorFuel_ExciseTax_Notes_4-2009.pdf

[cody]

.

[loosenut]

After my first trip overseas I've always been a big supporter of the EPA.  If one would have met me at the plane when I returned to the country I would have kissed them.

However, it was interesting to contemplate spending thousands of dollars to make my bus's air cleaner.  It give's me insight into the other side of the equation. 

I am in favor of prop 13. I have a friend that has a 100+ acre ranch right in the middle of a big city. It has been in his family since the 1800's. Why should he have to move? Prop 13 has inabled him to keep it.
The state will get there money if it ever sells. My two cents.

Not making a judgment about Prop 13.  Only pointing out that it is a big problem for the budget of CA.  Buffett was replaced immediately when he pointed out that it needed to be changed.  He questioned CA giving welfare to the richest people in the USA.  He didn't last the day.

It is no surprise that the people from Nebraska, Buffett's home state are bragging about their state's finances in this thread.

Mike

[Lin]

Prop 36 limits property tax to a bit over 1% per year of the price of the property the last time it was sold.  This is okay most of the time, but if a property has not sold in decades, it is ridiculous.  Buffet, when questioning Prop 36, used himself as an example saying the it was unfair that he should only be paying a couple of thousand a year for a multimillion dollar property.  I understand the sentimental nature of Airbag's friend's case.  But it can also be said that it is unfair that he should not be taxed at the same standards as the rest of Californians merely because it is inherited property as opposed to self-earned.

Things have a tendency to go from one extreme to another.  Prop 36 was a result of a populist revolt against ridiculously rising property tax rates.  It probably could use some fine tuning.  By the way, CA gets back about 85 cents for every dollar it sends the feds.  Alaska gets back about $1.40, and they don't have the huge illegal immigrant population to provide free services and education for.  I have a place in Austin, and the property tax rates are 3 times what they are in CA, plus they reassess annually.  I think there could be lots of ways that CA could save money, but the environmental stuff is not the problem.

Anyway, my bus does not pollute.  It disinfects, crop dusts, and perfumes as it goes.

[rv_safetyman]

Colorado is one of the states that tends to adopt California regulations.  The front range counties have a diesel emission requirement that ALL diesels must be dyno tested.  That costs $119 and not many places can test a bus.

However, today, I got my classic plates for the bus .  

You have to buy 5 years worth of plate, but you no longer have to have an emission test. My cost was $607.  Colorado does not have any restriction on classic plates as far as driving or usage.   Plus, you get cool plates!!!!!

I now own four vehicles with classic plates

Jim

[Hobie]

Here is a good link for pending California diesel regulations.  Apparently the regulation exempting motor homes has not been finalized.  When it becomes law it will show up in the California Code link below.   The rulemaking calender is the last link which includes agency name/phone contact numbers.  The good news is, if it passes,  bus nuts are exempt!  
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
         http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2008/truckbus08/truckbus08.htm


Scroll down to Appendix A  to find this exemption for Motor Home:

Section 2025. Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides
of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants, and Greenhouse Gases
from In-Use Heavy Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles

(c) Exemptions
This regulation does not apply to:
(11) Motor homes for non-commercial private use.

(45) "Motor Home" means a single vehicular unit designed for human habitation for
recreational or emergency occupancy and built on, or permanently attached to, a
self-propelled motor vehicle chassis, chassis cab, or van, which becomes an
integral part of the completed vehicle.


California Code of Regulations
Title 13 Division 3 Article 4  -  DIESEL PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL MEASURES

http://weblinks.westlaw.com/toc/default.aspx?Abbr=ca-adc&Action=ExpandTree&AP=CAT13D3CH3.5&ItemKey=CAT13D3CH3.5&RP=%2Ftoc%2Fdefault.wl&Service=TOC&RS=WEBL9.05&VR=2.0&SPa=CCR-1000&pbc=4BF3FCBE&fragment#CAT13D3CH3.5


Rulemaking Calender

www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2008calfin.pdf

       ......see page 11

[Dreamscape]

I'm glad we moved from ole SoCal in 06! That's another reason to not go there with the bus, besides the horrible traffic on the I-5, 405, 55 you get the picture!

Sheesh, what next. Although I knew something was brewing when we got the message that our front end loader was going to have to get a special exhaust to cut down on the particulates at the tune of a couple of grand! I left the company so don't know exactly what did happen! I do know the owners weren't too happy with it!

~Paul~

[Chopper Scott]

Living in Nebraska ...   ... Our gas taxes are some of the highest however.

Nebraska's state levied gasoline taxes are currently 27.3 cents a gallon, which is practically smack dab on the national average (27.2 cents).  There are more than a dozen states (mine included) that are over 30 cents per gallon.  For diesel fuel, they are also close to the middle of the pack, with 18 states having higher tax rates.

ref:  http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes/upload/State_MotorFuel_ExciseTax_Notes_4-2009.pdf

Crap! Now what am I gonna complain about!!!  Thanks for that info. I had read however that we were among the top 10 in fuel taxes but I'm not gonna dispute your facts. Later

[BG6]

Well it turned out that Dow Chemical had a zillion tons of napalm left over from Nam.  The Fed didn't want it and Dow was stuck with huge stocks

Got a source for this one?

What I know about napalm and Dow Chemical, it just doesn't ring right. 

First, Dow would make a zillion tons of ANY military stock unless someone had already bought it.

Second, napalm is an additive put into a gasoline or kerosene base, jelled with naptha (soap base) and other ingredients (known as "secret sauce") which are not safe to breathe or to put residual traces into food.  It would cost more to de-toxify a big batch of it than it would cost to write off.  In addition, it is useful to such folks as the Forest Service, movie studios, etc., and is still in production for such users as well as the DOD.

I'm not saying that it isn't possible, but this one sounds a little unlikely.

[JohnEd]

BG6,

I couldn't agree with you more.  It does sound strange and "stranger than fiction is fact".  This went on in 1990 or before a little.  Too long ago for me to be all that confident of the exacts.  The charcoal lighter issue was common discussion back then and the spin was "isn't this environmentalism gone MAD?".  I guess that could be researched at the library with a periodicals subject search. 

Dow was involved in some way and they were looking for an exemption so they could utilize the napalm stockpile.  Just ruminating here but suppose the fed wanted to dispose of the stockpile cause they no longer needed it so they contracted with DOW to dispose of the napalm they had manufactured for a tidy sum.  Then DOW sells the polluting crap with a GUMMINT waver.  That fiction would tie together nicely.  And it is fiction!  Sad that it is so believable in so many circles.

I had no idea what napalm was made from except that it contained gasoline and soap.  The toxicity angle was real news and thank you.   I wonder if it would be arguable that once the charcoal was burning that all the toxicity of the lighter has been consumed in the combustion process?  ALL charcoal lighter is POISONOUS and not a "food grade" substance and I don't need to look that up.  I am taking some licence here with your line of reasoning and I actually agree with your points.  Fact is I don't understand the chemistry of this or any other chem process.

I would appreciate the answer to your healthy and reasonable doubts myself.  I think the questions are:  When did LA/Ca. start regulating the chemistry of charcoal lighter or have they ever done so?  What has been DOW Chemical's involvement in napalm or its disposal. The rub, for me, has been at the conclusion of the research and "proof" the doubter usually pulls a W with the answer "So what?".  At one time I was paid handsomely for my research and professional opinion and I feel wasted on most of those doubters.  Nice to see a wager on the eventual proof/results.  Till then "I am completely confident that I can answer any question you might ask....to my satisfaction". Said in good humor and with all respect to you.

Your fellow traveler,

John