Packard Forum Index » General

Quote:

Not so much jets because airline service in most parts of the valley sucks so not that many to deal with. Diesel trucks on the other hand are a major source. You take your life in your hand navigating route 99 with the almost bumper to bumper truck volume. The various entities are trying to regulate and require retrofits and newer models for any trucks in the valley.

I know something has occurred in truck regulation but haven't really kept track of just what or when. Won't get into the benefit vs cost problem but there is a huge pushback on both sides. I believe some farming operations have been exempted which has greatly upset some other commercial operations that were not. Never a dull moment in the Golden State is there.

I understand that the EPA is giving up on its pursuit of having E85 as the fuel standard and are going towards the low sulpher (sp.?) gasoline used in California. Don't know if this is good or bad, but think E85 is a bad solution. E10 is bad enough.

Years ago I worked at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory. At that time some counties in the San Francisco Bay Area were requiring vehicles to pass a more stringent pollution test than other counties. This was because the air quality was worse. The reason it was worse was because of all the commute traffic from the central valley. These vehicles were registered in other counties and were not required to pass the more demanding test, even though they were the ones contributing mostly to the higher pollution.

(o{}o)

HH,,

nope,,,

Quote:

And now it has gone full circle with most if not all of the valley and inland areas having to pass a stringent smog test every two years while some parts of the state are exempt because they have "clean" air.

JW,

from what I read about coal,,where our gas used to come from,,

it is low in sulpher,

But the NUT in the W H ,,wants to get rid of coal..........

hh,

I have to take my 1990 camry to a STAR,,smog station now..my uncle bought it new ans when he died we too it over,,

it is the newest car I own,,,,, its a v6 wag,,which I rebuilt in 2000,,, trans went a 153 thou,,

pulled it all out, found out had a burned valve,,

I think I have about 100 thou on rebuild,, my first 4 cam rebuild.. ft wheel drive..

don't think it is going to pass this time, needs another cat converter. the org converter did not pass the flow test one year,,had Toyota test it, so I got an after market one which is on there now,

but does not have as much honey comb as org..

I wanted to have the 400 going ,,but that's not going be happening..

my 79 Datsun pick up is good this year,, I am 2 owner, I got it for 200 bucks,, its rusted bad,,,was a plumbing truck, its my hauler.. I had to rebuild it when I got it.

The argument that vehicle inspections reduce emissions is bxllshxt. Very few cars that fail the test are used for long distance commuting because they are so old. The whole thing is a handout to garages that certify the customer has been soaked to the limit of the law. And another way government discriminates against moderate income people.

I don't understand why people put up with such nonsense. Back in the 30's they rioted.

I agree Tim,,