If all the vehicles in the U.S. were smog-tested tomorrow and the ones that failed taken off the road on the spot, the next day, with all these failed vehicles sidelined, there would be NO, repeat NO measurable difference in overall air quality…Smog testing makes no difference in air quality…Why do I make this statement? Because not enough cars would fail the test, even in urban environments, to make a measurable difference…
Our air is MUCH cleaner because our cars are MUCH cleaner when they leave the factory, not because of emissions testing programs that pass 95% of the cars !!!
@db4690 ; I should rephrase; I don’t think $40 is too much for the shop owner, I am sure he has to pay close to half of that to the state and then shop rent/fees/etc. I think the whole system is somewhat of a waste of human time though. I still see older cars smoking all over the place that have passed the smog test. For the new cars with OBDII, I am sure there is a way to hook up your connector to some free standing state machine and get a print out.
Again, as I said, I like the shop owner and I always take all my cars to him for smog tests even if it is not convenient. I grudge is with the whole smog philosophy. The old days of carburated engines are over.
One of my first jobs as a mechanic was at a service station that did “safety” checks. The state mandated fee was $5. The garages and service stations that did these safety checks found out very quickly that they were losing money on the deal. The SOP after that was to simply peel off a sticker and attach it to the windshield and then collect $5. The state discontinued the safety check inspections after a short period of time because of all the complaints.
^^ Yes, as above, it is not an issue now and I don’t think it is from the smog checks.
I grew up in a big city with a lot of pollution. There was actually emissions testing for all cars, but replacement cars were so expensive that nobody would junk a 30 year old car. They would always find a way to pass the test.
Finally the government had to provide more cars at a more affordable price and they also came up with a program to retire older cars. They staggered the retirements, starting from 30 yr+ ones.
" the government had to provide more cars at a more affordable price and they also came up with a program to retire older cars." - Galant
Huh? Exactly what did the government do to provide more cars at an affordable price? And exactly what did they do to retire older cars?
Regarding the regulations, I’m one that believes that as regards car emissions the problem IS solved by the mandates to the manufacturers. However, once a regulatory agency is formed and begins promulgating regulations it continues to grow, thrive, justify a larger and large budget, and gain more and more power in the beltway by continuing to promulgate more and more regulations. This process is doomed to continue unabated until the sun burns out 2.5 billion years from now. If anybody here can name a single federal regulatory agency that has ever withdrawn or abated regulations or ever not followed the aforementioned process, I’ll buy you lunch. With drinks.
Huh? Exactly what did the government do to provide more cars at an affordable price? And exactly what did they do to retire older cars?
The just reduced the tariffs and taxes on the new cars. Before that cars were priced 3 times of what they would be any where else in the world. For example, to Toyota Corolla would cost you ~$45K.
As far as getting rid of old cars, they changed all the license plates for the city and the older cars could not get one. So they would have to be sold to some rural areas or just be junked. Essentially your car was not registered any more because it was old. No exceptions. If you wanted to keep an antique car, you would either have to take it to some rural area, or park it in your garage.
As far as the USA is concerned, I totally agree with Mountainbike. The first rule in management is work expands to equal the time allotted. The more people you have sitting around, the more work they will manufacture to fill their day and of course then need more people to handle the overload. Of course the good news is that the converse also applies. Keep people overloaded and they will find ways to streamline the work or get rid of the unnecessary work. A foreign concept in DC.
Re government agencies growing forever, a good case is the British Colonial Office, founded in 1768. England no longer has any colonies, but the agency continues to this day, renamed many times, but the same one.
Iran is so dramatically different than the U.S. that I cannot pretend to begin to understand your question. Automobile laws, the economy, the entire control structure is different. Nothing that I would think would even apply.
The only thing I can say is that the controls over vehicles that you describe would not work in the U.S., and any politician that tried to pass legislation to do this would be run out of office. The “leaders” in Iran don’t have to worry about that.
I wonder what the environmental angle on farmers burning their fields off would be? While pondering tailpipe emissions, about this time of year many farmers set fire to their fields. Thousands of acres burn off with billowing clouds of smoke going up for thousands of feet or drifting for many miles all depending upon wind strength. Sometimes the rising heat even creates its own cumulus clouds.
On a rise in the road at night it’s actually kind of pretty to see the flames and orange glows for miles. How much crud out of how many car exhaust pipes would it take to equal even one field burning off I have no idea.
Db, it is comparable. Both emit carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. The difference is that the farmers’ burning fields don’t emit oxides of nitrogen and unburned hydrocarbons. At least I don’t think they do. Is there a chemist in the house?