quote Originally posted by Mastermind: Mabe they would have, maybe they wouldn't. The point is you are going after only half of the parties responsible. Where's your outrage toward your republican govenor that made this law your nightmare?

I am outraged. That doesn't change the fact that Democrat Sally Lieber authored the bill. Arnold didn't, and there is no indication he would have.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: I am outraged. That doesn't change the fact that Democrat Sally Lieber authored the bill. Arnold didn't, and there is no indication he would have.

Last I remember....it did not matter who wrote the bill or who signed it !
This is America. Speak up. Organize, fund raise, hold events showing what it would hurt. Debate.

Didn't mean to turn it into a political thread (hint hint)

quote Originally posted by fierobear: I am outraged. That doesn't change the fact that Democrat Sally Lieber authored the bill. Arnold didn't, and there is no indication he would have.

I would ask you, how do you think Arnold is going to reduce the pollution in the State by 50% by 2010, which was his goal from the day he began to campaign for the Govenors race? He was bound to deal with automobile emissions. You can be angry with the lady who wrote the bill, but you seem to be letting Arnie off the hook. The fact is that he did sign the law and will probably do some more stuff that could be even less popular like take on the trucking industry and go after factory/refinery/etc emissions more aggressively. Then again, those people have money to fight and stall any laws in court, so it is more likely that Arnie will be the Terminator of Pollution that creeps into your nightmares, adding more smog equipment and detuning your car for extra slow and safe.

Edited to relfect 50% not 5%

[This message has been edited by Wudman (edited 09-28-2004).]

quote Originally posted by Wudman: I would ask you, how do you think Arnold is going to reduce the pollution in the State by 50% by 2010, which was his goal from the day he began to campaign for the Govenors race? He was bound to deal with automobile emissions. You can be angry with the lady who wrote the bill, but you seem to be letting Arnie off the hook.

I voted for him, and most of what he's been doing has been good. How often do you agree with someone, 100%?

quote The fact is that he did sign the law and will probably do some more stuff that could be even less popular like take on the trucking industry and go after factory/refinery/etc emissions more aggressively. Then again, those people have money to fight and stall any laws in court, so it is more likely that Arnie will be the Terminator of Pollution that creeps into your nightmares, adding more smog equipment and detuning your car for extra slow and safe.

From what I am told, automobiles are NOT the major source of pollution, and never have been. Factories and powerplants are. They should be made to clean up their act. Diesel sources, too.

The first thing which needs to be done is something! What are "you" doing about it ?

Surely there must be opponents to this bill who are organized. SUPPORT THEM !!!!!
My personal curiosity requires me to know who the anti-smog measure opponents are. Can you get me a web site ?

Need to size up the enemy. Who is setting standards? What data are they using ? Is the poor man getting "taxed" again ? Or are they using some sort of percentage as there is a lot of money in California and a lot of new cars? Can you get me a web site for the supporters of this measure ?

This deserves a closer look.

Here in Texas, when they want to pass a new law, we have public hearings reguarding the law. If we atttend, and wish to do so, we can add our two cents worth.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: The first thing which needs to be done is something! What are "you" doing about it ?

I have a friend (also a fiero guy) who is deeply involved doing research on the smog and car situation. We are trying to figure out a way to fight them. The problem is, there is a LOT of money behind the anti-car, pro-smog side. The Sierra Club and the people who make smog equipment are two major players. We are up against MILLIONS of dollars, and a lot of people who have nothing else to do but push smog laws.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: It *is* a political issue.

To me it is an automotive issue. Yeah, politics are involved. Because I want to protect my personal rights. I demand to be treated fair.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: To me it is an automotive issue. Yeah, politics are involved. Because I want to protect my personal rights. I demand to be treated fair.

How else do you fight things like this but by politics?

quote Originally posted by fierobear: I have a friend (also a fiero guy) who is deeply involved doing research on the smog and car situation. We are trying to figure out a way to fight them. The problem is, there is a LOT of money behind the anti-car, pro-smog side. The Sierra Club and the people who make smog equipment are two major players. We are up against MILLIONS of dollars, and a lot of people who have nothing else to do but push smog laws.

The Sierra Club has whooped some a$$ here in Texas also. It's not that these people have nothing better else to do. They get paid for it. I have respect for their goals and ideals but they have sort of made it into a money making "industry".

Get me some web sights, pro and con, allow me to look, and I am sure I will have a better perspective.

quote Originally posted by cliffw:

Smog laws and testing in California has been around since I got my first license in the late 70's. Although I am sure there are public hearings held, these standards are not created by votes of the average citizen. There is the California Air Resources Board, "CARB", which rules with the power of life and breath and is a power unto itself. Way back when air was something you could see at ground level, the EPA told California to clean up your act or face the music in court. Well the air is cleaner from a combination of forcing car manufacturers to clean up their act and making industrial polluters face stringent rules. Cars made for California have met a stricter standard for over three decades. Even back in 1976, when I registered my first car, a 1967 Mustang, I had to retrofit the car with some smog equipment, ($35.00 for a few valves and hoses) since the car was from out of state. That car, was not exempt from being "smogged" and since it didn't have the "air injection" system of a similar model produced for California back iin 1967.

I think for the most part, people in California just wait to see what CARB is going to do to them and then throw up their hands after the fact. The CARB is something like the Inquisition and has little concern for individual inconvienences since everyone seems to have survived at least 37 years of smog standards affecting thier vehicles.

Many of the same people that are upset about the stricter automobile emissions are the same ones who argue that factories and big business should be less regulated when it comes to emissions. Fierobear would have stricter regulations on factory emissions when some folks think that Calforinia has already done irreversable damage to it's business "friendliness" because of extremely difficult application processes and stringent standards to build any kind of industrial complex. Take a look at how many refineries or power plants are going up in the state and the reason for the lack of development is always that it is either two expensive or over regulated by the state and local entities. Then again, no one is building refineries or coal-fired power plants anywhere, yet California gets targeted as some kind of special hell for business polluters.

One thing is for sure and that is California has an incredible amount of cars. There was a time when those that actually counted said there were more cars than people in the state. There was at least one car for every resident of the most populous state in the nation. I will venture that FieroBear does not drive some broken down, rings going to hell, muffler fallen off, catalytic removed for performance, 1976 Chevy Monte Carlo that won't pass muster next April. Those cars need to be retired or repaired. The drivers of those cars will never show up at a CARB office unless they are trying to get a referee to pass their car after a failed smog test. The people in the state have spoken and 81% of them say that emissions are a concern, so again, this will amount to much to do about nothing in the long run.

I've seen a few comments that the problem isn't cars it's factories and powerplants.

Just to address.
1. No new powerplants have been built in CA in over 20 yrs. Too expensive and no one wants to deal with the hassle with too little or no profit.
2. There is little "Heavy" industry left in CA for the same reasons
3. The smog problem is more a problem of population density and geographics. (You put 10 million cars in a bowl and have a calm day with no offshore breeze.. you get smog/heavy air. ) Short of electric cars almost no way around the problem.

That said.. there should have been a rider in the bill for "collectors/classic" cars there is a world of difference between a beat down 75 chevy and a restored 50 merc that only comes out on weekends.

BTW CA ppl anyone have the latest census results? Last I heard there was a pretty heavy migration out of CA already in effect.

Well, Arnold may have just shot his re-election campaign in the foot. I know I wouldn't vote for him after that, if I lived in CA.
The People's Republik of California have always had Draconian smog laws that made little sense. Songman's got it right. If it were about emissions and air quality, just stick a sensor in the tailpipe - but no, it's about the money.

I don’t normally enter political threads but California has been letting the tree hugging, tofu eating, save the planet, homos spout off for decades. You sane people, (all 15 or 20 of you), that live there have let them get away with it for so long what do you expect? Do you realize that much of the rest of the country laughs at the stupidity of you sissified culture?

I propose a wall to separate it from the rest of the lower 47 so that we don't all have to live under the tyranny of such idiots. Lets round up all of the eco**** and move them west where they can make laws for themselves and leave the rest of us alone.

BTW, you almost got a sealed crank case law allowing only dealers and licensed auto mechanics to change your oil.

Ive never had much use for California in the first place myself and have never had the slightest interest in even visiting. Ill be watching ebay for good bargains..........

California used to make it so you didn't have to pass emissions on a car that older than 30 years. This new law says that that 30 year time limit is gone and any car that is 1976 or later will have to pass emissions. If you do the math, you will see that a car that is 1976 is 29 years old and had to pass emissions anyway. A 30 year old car that was exempt under the old law will be a 1975 or earlier model and that will be exempt under the new law.

So what basically happens is that every car that has to pass emissions this year will continue to have to pass emissions. Any car that didn't have to pass emissions will still not have to pass emissions.

quote Originally posted by Uaana: I've seen a few comments that the problem isn't cars it's factories and powerplants. Just to address. 1. No new powerplants have been built in CA in over 20 yrs. Too expensive and no one wants to deal with the hassle with too little or no profit. 2. There is little "Heavy" industry left in CA for the same reasons 3. The smog problem is more a problem of population density and geographics. (You put 10 million cars in a bowl and have a calm day with no offshore breeze.. you get smog/heavy air. ) Short of electric cars almost no way around the problem. That said.. there should have been a rider in the bill for "collectors/classic" cars there is a world of difference between a beat down 75 chevy and a restored 50 merc that only comes out on weekends. BTW CA ppl anyone have the latest census results? Last I heard there was a pretty heavy migration out of CA already in effect.

A calm day with no offshore breeze? When is the last time you have been to Southern California? There is no such thing. Why do you think the air is so bad up here in Bakersfield? The offshore breeze blows the crap up here into the Central Valley and the mountains hold it in...

I can agree that the smog problem is population density... in that the pollution is definitely not a natural thing. People cause it. But look at it this way... With the ever increasing emission controls on cars out here, why is the air not getting any better. It is because cars are not the main problem. They actually talked about trying to put a limit on how far you would be able to drive your car each month out here.... Obviously, we know they have no constitutional right to do something like that, but then they have no constitutional right to make you wear a seatbelt either but they still legislate it.

As I have said many many times, thank God I am still a legal resident of Tennessee!

quote Originally posted by Songman: A calm day with no offshore breeze? When is the last time you have been to Southern California? There is no such thing. Why do you think the air is so bad up here in Bakersfield? The offshore breeze blows the crap up here into the Central Valley and the mountains hold it in... I can agree that the smog problem is population density... in that the pollution is definitely not a natural thing. People cause it. But look at it this way... With the ever increasing emission controls on cars out here, why is the air not getting any better. It is because cars are not the main problem. They actually talked about trying to put a limit on how far you would be able to drive your car each month out here.... Obviously, we know they have no constitutional right to do something like that, but then they have no constitutional right to make you wear a seatbelt either but they still legislate it. As I have said many many times, thank God I am still a legal resident of Tennessee!

**Yup, youre right.. just didn't put it into words correctly - I knew what I was thinking but my fingers couldn't figure it out that early in the morining. BTW same reason Riverside sucks as well..

quote Originally posted by Wudman: Many of the same people that are upset about the stricter automobile emissions are the same ones who argue that factories and big business should be less regulated when it comes to emissions. Fierobear would have stricter regulations on factory emissions when some folks think that Calforinia has already done irreversable damage to it's business "friendliness" because of extremely difficult application processes and stringent standards to build any kind of industrial complex. Take a look at how many refineries or power plants are going up in the state and the reason for the lack of development is always that it is either two expensive or over regulated by the state and local entities. Then again, no one is building refineries or coal-fired power plants anywhere, yet California gets targeted as some kind of special hell for business polluters.

It's not just California. Industry across the country should have to do their part. The EPA has made the cars out to be the bad guy because they can pick on us, the "little guy" car owners, easier, and it deflects the focus from the real culprits, the stationary sources.

California's negative business climate is not just because of the emissions rules. The liberal politics, government red tape, out-of-control environmental lobby and stupid-high real estate prices are all factors. It adds up to bad situation for business.

For example, I'm trying to find a piece of land to develop in or near the Brentwood/Oakley area (near Antioch), about an hour east of San Francisco. There are no significant jobs in the area, and only two roads to commute out of there, both narrow and congested. A piece of commercial land is running $500,000 and acre. If you add all the development costs, permit fees, environmental reviews, etc, it doesn't look like I'll be able to afford to do the development I had planned (might have included a Fiero museum).

The housing prices are in the $350,000-400,000 for a plain tract home. Not much cheaper than here in Hayward, which is in the east bay, less than half the distance from the major job centers. I was considering moving out there, but I don't see any advantage. Almost the same price, and much further from most jobs.

There are a lot of factors that make the business climate here bad.

The single largest contributor to air pollution is kerosene....aircraft jet fuel, in other words.

Why then do the automobile drivers oft he world have to suffer? Because we are easy targets with no lobbyists.

This attempt to punish us yet again is the Sierra Club's justification for their own existence at our expense. The reality is that over the years pollution has decreased, not increased, as a result of technology. Since 1970 the GDP has increased 158%, Average miles criven has increased 143%, Energy consumption is up 45%, population is up 36% and YET pollution has dropped 29%. Continued legislation against auto manufacturers, who are HAMSTRUNG to build cars with widgets and gizmos instead of just making them more efficient, is avoiding the ONE main industry that has not been altered in the last 34 years. The airline industry has raged on largely unregulated and it's TIME to stop pretending that pollution will get better if we find a better Cat or scrubber for cars and power plants. GO AFTER THE AIRLINES!

A study of air quality conducted in 2001 showed one week in which air quality improved over 1000% before slowly returning to normal levels. Anyone care to guess which week that was?

One 747 arriving and departing from JFK airport in New York City produces as much smog as a car driven over 5,600 miles, and as much polluting nitrogen oxides as a car driven nearly 26,500 miles. And one jet lands or takes-off on average every 6 minutes!! While the government has effectively required cars to undergo emissions inspections (with resulting improvements in emissions and efficiency), airplanes have not received the same scrutiny. Meanwhile, air travel is increasing in popularity twice as fast as car travel and is projected to double within the next 20 years.

I'm disappointed in Arnold for endorsing this waste of time, and taxpayer dollars to put a shiny finish on a giant turd.

some interesting reading:

http://www.nrdc.org/air/transportation/qairport.asp#emissions

Everyone can just come to Texas. We have room for ya.

------------------

www.FieroLoki.com

quote Originally posted by Songman: A calm day with no offshore breeze? When is the last time you have been to Southern California? There is no such thing. Why do you think the air is so bad up here in Bakersfield? The offshore breeze blows the crap up here into the Central Valley and the mountains hold it in...

Actually, Songman, your pollution doesn't come from L.A. It can't make it over the Tehachapi mountains. What you get is all the pollution blowing downwind from the central valley.

We do get 'agricultural' pollution coming down the Central Valley... But the Tehachapi mountains are on the East side of us and Los Angeles is on the Southwest side. I have actually sat and watched that crap pouring across the tops of the mountains from L.A. into the valley. You can actually see it moving in! It sucks! The mountains between us and Tehachapi is what keeps it from going on over to them and trapping it with us. That is why Tehachapi is so nice...

Obviously not all of it can clear the mountains of L.A. would be beautiful.. but a lot of it does make it over.

[This message has been edited by Songman (edited 09-28-2004).]

quote Originally posted by RACE: I don’t normally enter political threads but California has been letting the tree hugging, tofu eating, save the planet, homos spout off for decades. You sane people, (all 15 or 20 of you), that live there have let them get away with it for so long what do you expect? Do you realize that much of the rest of the country laughs at the stupidity of you sissified culture?

It's not so much that we *let* them do it. There are a lot of liberals in this state. The enviros have enough of the voting public behind them that it's easy for them to push crap like this through.

quote BTW, you almost got a sealed crank case law allowing only dealers and licensed auto mechanics to change your oil.

Things like that are the auto industry's doing. They don't want you saving money by doing repairs and oil changes yourself.

Bakersfield is another bowl.. The winds blow in every direction around here...

I'm no Willard Scott or Al Roker so I don't know how it works either... All I can tell is what I have seen from living here...

quote Originally posted by Toddster: The single largest contributor to air pollution is kerosene....aircraft jet fuel, in other words.

The link you provided was to an environmental group's website, and I take what they say with a lot of caution. Basically, I don't trust groups like that. Organizations like the Sierra Club use junk science and even make s**t up to further their cause. There was one paragraph that I found kind of strange:

quote Web site quote: Many airports rank among the top 10 industrial air pollution sources in their cities (including airports in Los Angeles, Washington, and Chicago). Nationwide, planes at airports emit about 1 percent of smog-forming gases. But while pollution from other sources is stabilizing or decreasing, the pollution from planes at airports continues to grow due to the tremendous growth in air travel and the lack of controls on airport pollution.

How can the airport be in the top 10 sources when they are producing only 1% of the smog? That doesn't make sense to me.

quote Why then do the automobile drivers oft he world have to suffer? Because we are easy targets with no lobbyists.

BINGO! You hit the nail on the head. Also, they scapegoat cars to deflect attention from the real problems.

quote This attempt to punish us yet again is the Sierra Club's justification for their own existence at our expense. The reality is that over the years pollution has decreased, not increased, as a result of technology. Since 1970 the GDP has increased 158%, Average miles criven has increased 143%, Energy consumption is up 45%, population is up 36% and YET pollution has dropped 29%. Continued legislation against auto manufacturers, who are HAMSTRUNG to build cars with widgets and gizmos instead of just making them more efficient, is avoiding the ONE main industry that has not been altered in the last 34 years. The airline industry has raged on largely unregulated and it's TIME to stop pretending that pollution will get better if we find a better Cat or scrubber for cars and power plants. GO AFTER THE AIRLINES!

Organizations like the Sierra Club have an agenda beyond just the environment. They also are quietly pushing a social agenda, including socialism. They want not only to change the laws on the environment, they are engaging in social engineering.

True, Sierra Club has somehow gotten a 'fee' added on to every new house built in Kern County.. Go figure!

I've said it befor and I'll keep saying it.. Anytime you get a group of people together that think they have the right to tell the rest of us how to live, it is always going to go wrong... Even if they start out with good intentions, somewhere the politics and greed will take the upper hand.

quote Originally posted by Songman: True, Sierra Club has somehow gotten a 'fee' added on to every new house built in Kern County.. Go figure! I've said it befor and I'll keep saying it.. Anytime you get a group of people together that think they have the right to tell the rest of us how to live, it is always going to go wrong... Even if they start out with good intentions, somewhere the politics and greed will take the upper hand.

So the question is...how do we STOP them? Todd, Dale, are you guys up for organizing against them, somehow?

I think I like the idea better of going back to TN or GA! haha... California is too far overrun by politically correct liberals in my opinion. I don't think anyone will ever stop these people.. The sad thing is that there are just as many people working to protect our rights with our cars.. But apparently they don't have the money to compete with the likes of the Sierra Club. Of course, if car groups could get a fee added to your house price it might be different!

The only big thing we have to deal with back home is the so-called 'moral majority' and most people know they are a joke so they are not that big a threat.

...

[This message has been edited by stimpy (edited 09-28-2004).]

I'm not particularly fond of the bill either, but I don't see how some of you are saying automobiles aren't a large contributing factor to pollution

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/sci/A0856790.html

http://www2.nature.nps.gov/air/AQBasics/sources.htm

http://www.tnrcc.state.tx.us/air/aqp/pollsource.html#On-Road

http://www.mapcruzin.com/news/cc072202a.htm

Granted, some of these are obviously pro-environment, but chances are you aren't going ot find stats on the GM website..

quote Originally posted by fierobear: So the question is...how do we STOP them? Todd, Dale, are you guys up for organizing against them, somehow?

Brian actually know more about it than I. I just grabbed the first web site I could Google cause I was short on time but there are lots of sites out there to back up the airline story.

as for cars, I am not opposed to smog regulations but the idea that a hand built custom engine in a custom car that is so finely tuned you can play music to it and gets driven 2500 miles per year has to be held to the same smog standards as some Detroit daily driver is ridiculous.

Thank God I don't live in California

That'd be enough to convince me to leave the state.

------------------
Nick www.naskie18.com AIM: Naskie182010

quote Originally posted by fierobear: How else do you fight things like this but by politics?

I did a little looking last night.
http://arbis.arb.ca.gov/homepage.htm
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/aftermkt/devices/amquery.php
(sorry it would not come on as a hyper-link. Instructions please)

The Sierra Club fights with lawsuits. Also by backing pro-Sierra club candidates. It will take research. If the politicians circumvent even one step of the process it is invalid. Have to start nitpicking them and cost them money. Need to work with an organized group as it is too much for one man especially since he may duplicate efforts already done.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: The Sierra Club fights with lawsuits. Also by backing pro-Sierra club candidates. It will take research. If the politicians circumvent even one step of the process it is invalid. Have to start nitpicking them and cost them money. Need to work with an organized group as it is too much for one man especially since he may duplicate efforts already done.

I've been having discussions with a friend of mine about doing just that. One big problem is, it takes a lot of money to fund the effort.

Yeah, the Sierra Club loves their lawsuits. The problem with that is, in effect, they are legislating through the courts. If they want something done or stopped, they sue, win, and it's just as good for them has having a law passed.

quote Originally posted by Uaana: 1. No new powerplants have been built in CA in over 20 yrs. Too expensive and no one wants to deal with the hassle with too little or no profit. 3. The smog problem is more a problem of population density and geographics. (You put 10 million cars in a bowl and have a calm day with no offshore breeze.. you get smog/heavy air. ) Short of electric cars almost no way around the problem.

If the electricity used by those electric cars is generated by fossil-fueled power plants, you're just moving the pollution and not solving the problem. Even switching to hydrogen-powered fuel cell cars wouldn't fix the problem, because the prime source of hydrogen is natural gas, and it takes power to crack the hydrogen out of the methane molecules.

Ed

I'm in. I may be a registered Democrat, but I'm not stupid. These laws are ridiculous. All that matters is what comes out of the tail pipe. If its within acceptable levels, nothing else should matter. Who's doing the researching? Count me in to help however I can. I'd take more of an initiative myself, but I don't have the resources to even get started, much less sustain an opposition.

I say we go to the votors. This is a government "by the people" right? Its time the people tell the government what to do for a change. I didn't hear anyone from the local or state government ask for my opinion when they wrote this law. I'm not being represented. Forget trying to take on the state goverment, I say we go for a ballot initiative. Get people all over the state to go out and get signatures, put up flyers, hold meetings, rallys, whatever to get the voting public on our side. We bypass the legislature and Arnie and get it on the statewide election ballot next year and have the people decide.

I'm not against smog laws period, but theres got to be some common sense. We need to rollback everything except a basic tail pipe check. No other vehicular smog regulations except what comes out the tail pipe.

What a joke.

You have TONS of tractor trailers on the roads 24 HOURS A DAY pouring black smoke into the air...

and they are worried about an automobile that the majority of owners put many hours of labor into to make the engine run as good as possible, but only drive it once an awhile.

Almost laughable.

quote Originally posted by Toddster: Why then do the automobile drivers oft he world have to suffer? Because we are easy targets with no lobbyists.

That's crap and you know it. The automobile industry is totally opposed and they buy a lot of lobbyists. Gotta rank right up there with the NRA.

I am not for this law by any means. CARB is a bunch of misguided air nazis with a compleat lack of common sense. America is obsessed with suv's and the loophole in the pollution laws let such vehicles get a pass as a light truck. 99% of such vehicles are not being used for any kind of work purpose yet are alowedd to have more emissions and spew more pollutant's than any modern car.

If you haven't noticed lately the roads are overrun with these vehicles and small cars have become the vast minority.