EPA approves California auto emissions standard

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Obama administration on Tuesday approved California's long-standing bid to set its own tough standards for vehicle emissions, a decision in tune with a national plan to boost fuel efficiency and reduce greenhouse gases linked to climate change.
These standards are immediately effective for California and for 13 other states and Washington D.C., which have adopted the same standards, officials at the Environmental Protection Agency said.

By granting this request, the Environmental Protection Agency said it recognized California's need for a tight emissions program that included limits on climate-warming gases.

National standards match California's goal for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by 2016. The EPA waiver allows the state to enforce standards for 2009-2011, before the federal targets take effect, but manufacturers should have little difficulty making the goals.

California also has a host of other vehicle regulations, from car windows that reflect more sun to cut air conditioning loads to checks on tire pressure.
In a brief statement, EPA said this decision marked a return to the "traditional legal interpretation of the Clean Air Act," an apparent swipe at the Bush administration, which balked at granting this waiver and at imposing any mandatory economy-wide limits on climate-warming emissions.
The announcement came just four days after legislation aimed at curbing climate change was narrowly approved by the House of Representatives, and more than a month after Obama ordered the struggling auto industry to cut emissions and improve gas mileage on May 19.

"LAW AND SCIENCE"

"This decision puts the law and science first. After review of the scientific findings, and another comprehensive round of public engagement, I have decided this is the appropriate course under the law," EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in a statement.

California first requested the normally routine Clean Air Act waiver from EPA in 2005. The request was denied by the Bush administration in 2008.
Shortly after taking office in January, Obama directed EPA to revisit the denial.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California hailed the EPA decision: "After being asleep at the wheel for over two decades, the federal government has finally stepped up and granted California its nation-leading tailpipe emissions waiver." Schwarzenegger said this would spur his state's emerging green economy, create new jobs and "bring Californians the cars they want while reducing greenhouse gas emissions."

Governors from the other affected states offered similar plaudits, such as New York Gov. David Paterson's statement: "The decision is living proof that there is new leadership in Washington."

The American Petroleum Institute, a key oil industry interest group, was critical: "Using the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases would impose costly requirements for hundreds of thousands of businesses, large and small, as well as schools, offices and buildings across the United States."

Environmentalists were jubilant. David Doniger of the Natural Resources Defense Council said in a blog:
"These national standards will be a win for everyone. We'll have cleaner cars that cut dangerous global warming pollution nationwide ... The car makers will get the practical national uniformity they've been craving. And we'll help them get back to health by making cars that fit the market in a world of higher oil prices and global warming."

Yup, because Calf. is doing so well financially... we all should follow in their footsteps...

Sigh....

How do you become 24 BILLION dollars in debt.... spend.. spend.... spend....

quote Originally posted by jaskispyder: Yup, because Calf. is doing so well financially... we all should follow in their footsteps... Sigh.... How do you become 24 BILLION dollars in debt.... spend.. spend.... spend....

I didn't mark this thread "political", so I'll stick with the car-aspect. Needless to say, this almost certainly will involve a lot more cost, bureaucracy, taxes, and so on.

Just what are their "rules"?

I mean right now we don't even have emissions testing.
How does it apply to modifications, or classic cars?

What is scary is that people don't know enough about what CARB is trying to do nor science to care what they are doing. CARB is trying to regulate CO2 emissions. In a "perfect" combustion the emissions are H2O, CO2 and Nitrogen. By regulating CO2 emission you are in effect regulating horsepower, displacement and ultimately the size of the vehicle that can be powered by such an engine. The greenies are trying to force a lifestyle on the nation and most people don't have any idea this is happening because they all bought into the Global Warming hoax.

Im glad I dont live in that state.

quote Originally posted by Fosgatecavy98: Im glad I dont live in that state.

I have heard it will be all states before long.

Any truth to that?

quote Originally posted by Fosgatecavy98: Im glad I dont live in that state.

"National standards match California's goal for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by 2016"

The current administration has been accepting California's standards for the entire country. Soon, you won't have to live in California to have to deal with our Nazi emission standards.

I'm sure junkyards are jumping for joy over this. All the more reason to keep older vehicles running as long as possible.

quote Originally posted by fierobear: "National standards match California's goal for cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by 2016" The current administration has been accepting California's standards for the entire country. Soon, you won't have to live in California to have to deal with our Nazi emission standards.

"Nazi"? Really?

If I wanted to live under California standards/regulations I would move to California...............

------------------
Dealing with failure is easy: work hard to improve. Success is also easy to handle: you've solved the wrong problem, work hard to improve.

quote Originally posted by DRA: If I wanted to live under California standards/regulations I would move to California...............

Oh, don't worry. For your convenience, the Democrats are bringing California to YOU!

quote Originally posted by fierobear: Oh, don't worry. For your convenience, the Democrats are bringing California to YOU!

I guess rather than bothering with venting concerns to the Federal Goverment people need to start working on the lower levels of govement, starting with their own community and State. Until likeminded people pull together to be heard the special interest (small vocal groups) will decide what direction we are all heading. It's way past time the average Joe and Jane got involved in their goverment.

We had them in Connecticut. The state spent Millions of Dollars to set up the state run testing stations and ended up closing them a few years later. They then took a couple of years to set up private testing stations. The reason they closed down was because of all the cheating and bribing going on. The new system they implemented uses cameras and other security measures to prevent this. The private testing stations had to foot most of the bill to have this implemented and the equipment installed. They also were only allowed to charge a fixed fee for the test. Many of the service stations, that originally signed up and hired people to run the test, opted out and lost a lot of money. The state is the one making the most out of this deal and everyone had to take their car in every couple of years, unless it was under 5 years old.

quote Originally posted by avengador1: We had them in Connecticut. The state spent Millions of Dollars to set up the state run testing stations and ended up closing them a few years later. They then took a couple of years to set up private testing stations. The reason they closed down was because of all the cheating and bribing going on. The new system they implemented uses cameras and other security measures to prevent this. The private testing stations had to foot most of the bill to have this implemented and the equipment installed. They also were only allowed to charge a fixed fee for the test. Many of the service stations, that originally signed up and hired people to run the test, opted out and lost a lot of money. The state is the one making the most out of this deal and everyone had to take their car in every couple of years, unless it was under 5 years old.

Basically the same here, used to be able to go to a full service station to get your headlights aimed and such. Now ask someone to do something as simple as aim headlights and they just shrug. The cost of the testing stations, bribes, the buddy system (good ole boys club), made it unsustainable. I guess they still have testing in some counties, around Atlanta I think, but nothing like that locally.

quote Originally posted by DRA: If I wanted to live under California standards/regulations I would move to California...............

Agreed. There is a reason our government moves slow, it takes time to go through all the vetting process to ensure things are what the voting public wants. Not sure if this will be the straw that broke the camels back but, I'm predicting one hell of a swing in the mood of the country once all the weight of the last 5 or 6 months takes effect. Many wanted change, change is what you'll have left when it all said and done.

Ron

..

[This message has been edited by PaulJK (edited 01-23-2010).]

If the rest of the country also adopts CA's engine swap guidelines, no more 3.8 or V-8 Fieros allowed on the road.
You can sneak by a 3.4PR as long as you keep you lips zipped.

quote Originally posted by partfiero: If the rest of the country also adopts CA's engine swap guidelines, no more 3.8 or V-8 Fieros allowed on the road. You can sneak by a 3.4PR as long as you keep you lips zipped.

Really? That's odd, I could have sworn that I had a CARB approved L67 swapped Fiero. And I don't think Rickady88 will have any problem with his LS swap passed like he did his Shorstar swap. There are plenty of legal swaps in California. Just because you can't hook up a junkyard truck motor to your TH125 and then slap a carburator on it and call it done, that isn't necssarily a bad thing.

Anyhow, if you could keep your technical misinformation to the Tech forum, that would be great.

[This message has been edited by WhiteDevil88 (edited 07-03-2009).]

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: Really? That's odd, I could have sworn that I had a CARB approved L67 swapped Fiero.

What did you have to do to get that CARB approved L67 swapped Fiero?

I would just have to put it in and drive it. As long as the basic inspection (brakes, wipers, no cracks in the windshield, lights, and decent tires) is passed I can put anything I want in my Fiero. The same inspection I would need for any vehicle, swapped or not.

In Arkansas 15 minutes south of me I wouldn't even have to get an inspection.

Brad

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: Really? That's odd, I could have sworn that I had a CARB approved L67 swapped Fiero. And I don't think Rickady88 will have any problem with his LS swap passed like he did his Shorstar swap. There are plenty of legal swaps in California. Just because you can't hook up a junkyard truck motor to your TH125 and then slap a carburator on it and call it done, that isn't necssarily a bad thing. Anyhow, if you could keep your technical misinformation to the Tech forum, that would be great.

Before you post your smart ass remarks you should do your homework.
There are specific laws about what engines can be swapped.
And this has everything to do with this thread.

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: Really? That's odd, I could have sworn that I had a CARB approved L67 swapped Fiero. And I don't think Rickady88 will have any problem with his LS swap passed like he did his Shorstar swap. There are plenty of legal swaps in California. Just because you can't hook up a junkyard truck motor to your TH125 and then slap a carburator on it and call it done, that isn't necssarily a bad thing. Anyhow, if you could keep your technical misinformation to the Tech forum, that would be great.

I fully admit could be wrong as i don't live there ( thank god ), but i thought any swaps you did had to be of an engine that was available that year for that car, with a california engine and not an 'import'?

[This message has been edited by User00013170 (edited 07-03-2009).]

quote Originally posted by User00013170: I fully admit could be wrong as i don't live there ( thank god ), but i thought any swaps you did had to be of an engine that was available that year for that car, with a california engine and not an 'import'?

That would suck. Available for that year, kind of defeats the purpose of helping the environment, aren't they of the opinion that newer engines are less pollutant? Silly rules.

quote Originally posted by partfiero: Before you post your smart ass remarks you should do your homework. There are specific laws about what engines can be swapped. And this has everything to do with this thread.

That is ****in hilarious. You are the one posting from the warm comfort of your ass, posting inaccurate information, and I am the one who needs to do my homework? OK, smart guy, educate me about those "specific laws" that prevent any "3.8 or V8 swaps" in California.

Brad, all that needed to be done was plug it up to a sniffer at the referee station. A visual check makes sure that all emission controls for that engine are in place. You have to use the entire powerplant (engine and transmission) that came out of the donor. The OBD2 system was installed using the ECM from the donor. This was done in 1998 with a very new L67. There have been lterally scores of legal motor swaps done since that received CARB approval. Sure, it isn't the easiest state to do a motor swap done in, but it isn't impossible yet.

You can swap some later engines in the same line, however ALL smog components must remain in tact including O2 sensors.
It the new engine had two then the swapped car must have two.
I remember when the FOCOA was trying to get the 4.3PR approved they went through hell because of the laws.

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: Brad, all that needed to be done was plug it up to a sniffer at the referee station. A visual check makes sure that all emission controls for that engine are in place. You have to use the entire powerplant (engine and transmission) that came out of the donor. The OBD2 system was installed using the ECM from the donor. This was done in 1998 with a very new L67. There have been lterally scores of legal motor swaps done since that received CARB approval. Sure, it isn't the easiest state to do a motor swap done in, but it isn't impossible yet.

I think without "talking out my butt" that I can safely say that I do not want that. I want to mate whatever transmission to whatever engine to whatever car I want. I don't want to have to research to see if I can "legally" put a TDI mated to a 6 speed manual in my Fiero. I just want to do it.

It's not a good thing that it isn't impossible, it's bad. It should be no problem to put whatever in the car that you want to. If the powers that be want to smog check the car, then fine. If it passes the sniffer than there should be no problems.

Brad

quote Originally posted by partfiero: You can swap some later engines in the same line, however ALL smog components must remain in tact including O2 sensors. It the new engine had two then the swapped car must have two. I remember when the FOCOA was trying to get the 4.3PR approved they went through hell because of the laws.

What 4.3 pushrod engine came mounted transversely in a passenger car? They were trying to use a truck engine. See above. That won't work, no matter how many sensors you use.

I thought you were going to show how it is impossible to do any 3800 or V8 swaps in "Nazi" California. So far I am disappointed.

hmmm might be time to start looking into another country..

quote Originally posted by DRA: I guess rather than bothering with venting concerns to the Federal Goverment people need to start working on the lower levels of govement, starting with their own community and State. Until likeminded people pull together to be heard the special interest (small vocal groups) will decide what direction we are all heading. It's way past time the average Joe and Jane got involved in their goverment.

That is a very good point. I live in Cooper City. It's a very VERY small city that consists of like 5 square miles in suburban Fort Lauderdale. We supposedly have the best schools, and some of the nicest homes. It's not ultra-wealthy by any means, but moderate to upper middle class (for the area).

Never the less, we WERE running a slight surplus several years ago, but lately under the leadership of the new mayor, we've been running a deficit. It really has nothing to do with down-turn in economic times because the utlities department brings in a surplus, as do some of the other facilities that they run. We use Broward Sherrifs Office which (if you can believe) is a private company of police officers. They won the contract and now the BSO corporation saves us substantial money. But the mayor somehow manages to spend spend spend.

They were busted a couple of years ago for having lavish dinners, talking about politics, etc... all while in the company of eachother and under the city's taxpayer money. We have sunshine laws which require that any business talk among comissioners, etc... must be performed in an open forum where they can be recorded by public officials.
Anyway, pretty much EVERY SINGLE person in the local government even at this smallest level, is horrendously corrupt

Out of the blue, one guy ran for a comissioner's position, and ousted a guy that's been there for 10 years. He is CONSTANTLY at odds with everyone else there. They hate him. He publishes a weekly letter letting everyone know what is hitting the budget, what is the latest bit of news... and the other comissioner and the rest of the cabinet work to circumvent him all the time. As a matter of fact, they call emergency meetings (where they vote on things) every time he goes on a business trip. (which is only 4 or 5 times a year).

They have a Town Hall that was built in the late 80s. It's decent, it's more than enough for what they need, and they don't technically NEED to expand for ANY reason. When he went off on a business trip, they voted to build a NEW Town Hall costing around 18 some odd million dollars. (for some stupid reason)... completely against everyone else in the town.

Very frustrating. The guy who fights them all the time (the lone comissioner) he's so fed up that he's talked about leaving and not running again because of the frustration but everyone keeps begging him to run (third time now).

------------------
Todd,
2006 Pontiac Solstice
2004 Volkswagen Beetle Convt. (Wife's)
2002 Ford Crown Victoria LX
1987 Pontiac Fiero SE / V6
1981 EZ-GO Xi875-A "Miami Dolphins" Medical Cart
1973 Volkswagen Type-2 Transporter
1973 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme 350

is it coming to MD? will it make historic cars need to go through emissions?

quote Originally posted by grkboy707: is it coming to MD? will it make historic cars need to go through emissions?

I can't say what Maryland will do. If you are asking about CA, any vehicle from MY 1975 and earlier is exempt from emissions testing. I could drop a blown dragster Hemi in my 1975 Dodge Dart and will be just groovy with the man.

1975 and older?!!? thats crazy!!!!! MD has historics being 20 years and older! you can do whatever you want to do to any fiero in md!

quote Originally posted by WhiteDevil88: "Nazi"? Really?

"Nazi" is short in German for "national socialist," so yeah, I think Nazi applies pretty well. I just moved out of CA, and that whole state is pretty much a write-off.

California's CARB system eliminates automotive freedom completely. You are at the mercy of the government for EVERYthing you do to your car... All that to reduce greenhouse gasses... Just pure BS designed to control people and make money.

They whine about their 24B shortfall, then happily spend 26B a year on healthcare, welfare, schooling, and social programs for people in the country illegally. Why? Because it guarantees them their next illegal vote.

Seriously. I am glad that you have moved away. I wish anyone who chose to move here would pack up and leave. And that includes illegal aliens.

Anyhow, I hope that you can find your Libertarian paradise where Government stays out of your business. Let me know where it is, if the weather doesn't suck I might consider it. You feel strongly (CAPS LOCK EVERYWHERE!!!) that I have "missed the point". I get it. You should be able to do WTF you want to do. If you want to drive some busted out hooptie with a junkyard swap on the highway, why should you be prevented AT GUNPOINT from running over mailboxes with bald tires and no brakes?

Rules and laws of society are for pussies! Let's Go:Somalia!

[This message has been edited by WhiteDevil88 (edited 07-03-2009).]

I think something everyone has overlooked is that this is about California emissions standards.

emissions standards for new cars built, not for older cars.

Now I may be wrong, and I was, once, I think, but if it is just for new cars and just for emissions standards it may not be as bad as everyone has made it.

First of all it is JUST EMISSION STANDARS AND JUST FOR NEW CARS BUILT AFTER 2010 OR WHATEVER THE DATE IS, NOT THE REST OF THE CRAP THAT CAL TRYS TO DO.

And as far as those states that don’t have any safety inspections at all. Have any of you ever lived in those states?
I have TN they have no safety inspection what so ever. Ever see what they drive in those states?
It is scary, bald tires, cracked windshields, no lights, and more or less.

I for one don’t mind the safety inspections.

And by the way many states already follow Cal emission standards for new cars sold in their state, Maine is one of those and there are many others.

Now I don’t agree with Cals rules about older cars and what I can put in for an engine and other things but to those who think this is going to be a clusterfk.

Think before you post, read and listen.

Steve

------------------
Technology is great when it works,
and one big pain in the ass when it doesn't.
Detroit iron rules all the rest are just toys.

[This message has been edited by 84fiero123 (edited 07-03-2009).]

Even if it is for new cars, why? I actually support safety inspections, as that directly affects me and mine.

quote Originally posted by twofatguys: I think without "talking out my butt" that I can safely say that I do not want that. I want to mate whatever transmission to whatever engine to whatever car I want. I don't want to have to research to see if I can "legally" put a TDI mated to a 6 speed manual in my Fiero. I just want to do it. It's not a good thing that it isn't impossible, it's bad. It should be no problem to put whatever in the car that you want to. If the powers that be want to smog check the car, then fine. If it passes the sniffer than there should be no problems. Brad

If California's engine swap standards were about emissions, visual inspections wouldn't matter. Transmissions wouldn't matter. Carbs wouldn't matter. It's either about emissions or it isn't. Who the hell CARES what is in the engine bay, if it passes tailpipe emissions, right? The California smog laws are obviously about more than emissions. THAT'S WHAT "Nazi" emissions are about.