If CARB has their way, we'll be walking in California.

[WDRacing]

You don't build a pyramid from the point down.

GTFO...no wonder I can build a camp fire.

[audtatious]

Werd.....Here's a couple of "facts" that are interesting....

1. The American Automobile Association (AAA) has reported, in many of our major cities, cars and light trucks are no longer the primary or even secondary cause of summertime ozone ‘smog.’

2. It would take 20 of today's new cars to generate the same amount of air pollution as one mid-1960s model car. In another 10 years, thanks to new automotive and fuel technologies, it will take 33 cars to produce the air pollution emissions of one mid-1960s model (following current EPA guidelines)

3. One major air pollutant, lead, is nearly gone from our air. Since the mid-1970s, levels of airborne lead are down 96 percent

4. In the 1950s, smog levels in Southern California were worse than they are today in Mexico City, where current US standards for smog are violated every day of the year.

On top of #4, the smog that can still be seen is 40% from foreign countries with the primary countries being China and Mexico

Another point. Environmentalists say that running your cars A/C less will help lower air pollution. What does the AC create (unless it's leaking)? Concensation which turns to what? Yep, water vapor.

[rn79870]

So, shift from one to another when both are contributors to GW in order to make people feel better about themselves? Water Vapor is THE #1 contributor to the greenhouse effect. Sure, we would have less CO2 at the expense of more water vapor. The media and environmentalists are all pushing this crap as another effort to fix MMGW (which is not proven in the first place) and when the "sheeple" see things like "zero emissions" they assume it will help end what us horrible humans have done to mother earth in the last 200 years.

From a pollution perspective to lower brown outs and such and to give us an alternative to petrolium? Sure, I'm all for it as long as they don't make the damn cars ugly as fawk like the damn Prius nor that Honda.

Okay. Let's do this to rid the atmosphere of Water Vapor. 1st. we'll drain all the swimming pools. Then we'll forbid farmers to water their fields. Then we'll drain the oceans, and finally, we'll outlaw rain. Then we'll have to dehydrate our bodies, because I've heard they are mostly water too, and we exhale that nasty stuff too. That water is nasty stuff.

Alternate power sources for California? Look, the truth is that California is second only to Enron when it comes to screwing up the power grid. Maybe CARB needs to look at that too.

[rn79870]

One thing at a time is brilliant.

...but START with the WORST offenders.

Start with the easiest one to fix. Then go to the second easiest.

[AZhitman]

On top of #4, the smog that can still be seen is 40% from foreign countries with the primary countries being China and Mexico.

Which brings me to my next point.

Rather than waiting for China to "do what it will" as rn said, why not pressure them some? Hell, we're exerting our influence in other countries already, why not?

My fellow Americans, China is jeopardizing our health and must be dealt with.

QUIT FREAKING BLAMING me. I pay for the EPA and its employees to exist. I pay for the roads, I bought my car, I contributed to the public coffers, and I am responsible with the environment.

Let's go after the BIG OFFENDER, Quanxingxiang Manufacturing, in BigTokyoCity, dumping tons of "shankyouvedymuch" in the river while they crank out faux Prada purses and cheap potmetal strut bars painted with watered-down lead-based paint.

[AZhitman]

Start with the easiest one to fix. Then go to the second easiest.

Ahhh. Shouldn't that say, "Pick on the little guy first"?

Finally, we get the truth... Maybe Brian was right.

Only a true lib would take the path of least resistance, the easy way out, and pick on the defenseless first.

[audtatious]

Okay. Let's do this to rid the atmosphere of Water Vapor. 1st. we'll drain all the swimming pools. Then we'll forbid farmers to water their fields. Then we'll drain the oceans, and finally, we'll outlaw rain. Then we'll have to dehydrate our bodies, because I've heard they are mostly water too, and we exhale that nasty stuff too. That water is nasty stuff.

Alternate power sources for California? Look, the truth is that California is second only to Enron when it comes to screwing up the power grid. Maybe CARB needs to look at that too.

WTF are you talking about? I'm simply saying the sheeple will assume they are helping to lower MMGW when in the fact they are not. Are they helping the environment by lowering pollution? Absolutely.

No, California is going to have their finger on your home AC system and will turn it off to limit brownouts. Next up they will determine that you can't set your AC below a set level (say 72).

Nanny state

[WDRacing]

Well, if the ends justify the means, we can NUKE China, Mexico and every country made up primarily of sand. Now hear me out...

China has lots of steel we can take, destroying them would benefit us economically and ecologically. Mexico is just a polluter with nothing to offer of any real use. So we can destroy them utterly without even feeling bad. Then we'd have more coastline to live on. And we all know the middle east has all of OUR oil. I say ours because as the United States, we are entitled to take what we want. Why stop there...lets make the entire planet the United States of Fvcking AYE America. We can even let CARB push the damn buttons

Because the ends justify the means right?

[rn79870]

A lot of this debate depends on whether MMGW is even REAL.

I'll keep my opinion to myself, but go do a little research and see how many GHG's a volcanic eruption creates.

Mother Nature does more "damage" in a couple burps than the entire human race has done since the Industrial Age began.

Some humans are so self-centered they can only think of "time" from their own selfish perspective. The Earth was here LONG before Al Gore, and it'll be around LONG after he's gone.

By MMGW I'm assuming you're referring to wind power. That is beyond me.

Yes AZhitmen, the earth was here a long time before Al Gore. And it will be here a long time after he's gone. But like a good tenant, I want to leave the place at least as good as it was when I moved in. You're seriously not arguing against that? And if we have to clean a little of the mess past tenants left, so be it.

Sure, one volcano can cause a problem. Key word, CAN. Vehicle emissions do, key word DO.

Heck, if you want to argue the possibilities, worry about the affect of a large asteroid smashing into the Earth. That will make a Hill of a mess. So we're doomed, lets do nothing.

[AZhitman]

Works for me, but Fred Thompson isn't in the running anymore. Dammit.

[audtatious]

That would be an Enron moment. Take it all over and then bankrupt it

[rn79870]

Werd.....Here's a couple of "facts" that are interesting....

1. The American Automobile Association (AAA) has reported, in many of our major cities, cars and light trucks are no longer the primary or even secondary cause of summertime ozone ‘smog.’

2. It would take 20 of today's new cars to generate the same amount of air pollution as one mid-1960s model car. In another 10 years, thanks to new automotive and fuel technologies, it will take 33 cars to produce the air pollution emissions of one mid-1960s model (following current EPA guidelines)

3. One major air pollutant, lead, is nearly gone from our air. Since the mid-1970s, levels of airborne lead are down 96 percent

4. In the 1950s, smog levels in Southern California were worse than they are today in Mexico City, where current US standards for smog are violated every day of the year.

On top of #4, the smog that can still be seen is 40% from foreign countries with the primary countries being China and Mexico

Another point. Environmentalists say that running your cars A/C less will help lower air pollution. What does the AC create (unless it's leaking)? Concensation which turns to what? Yep, water vapor.

Your points 1 through 4 are exactally what I've been trying to say. Something is working. And, we know what that something is.

I believe that the A/C issue involves an increases fuel consumption for a vehicle using the A/C, and the A/C requires additional power from the power grid to run at home.

Thanks for the post.

[rn79870]

Well, if the ends justify the means, we can NUKE China, Mexico and every country made up primarily of sand. Now hear me out...

China has lots of steel we can take, destroying them would benefit us economically and ecologically. Mexico is just a polluter with nothing to offer of any real use. So we can destroy them utterly without even feeling bad. Then we'd have more coastline to live on. And we all know the middle east has all of OUR oil. I say ours because as the United States, we are entitled to take what we want. Why stop there...lets make the entire planet the United States of Fvcking AYE America. We can even let CARB push the damn buttons

Because the ends justify the means right?

Spoken like a true Texan. Why use a .22 when you got a perfectly good .44.

[audtatious]

Your points 1 through 4 are exactally what I've been trying to say. Something is working. And, we know what that something is.

Which shows the current standards set are working without focusing on cars and light trucks as much. My point has been to go fix the higher contributors first instead of forcing new regs (which have a back-lash effect) on cars and light trucks. Simply utilizing the pollution levels in CA and blaming them on the cars and trucks that are used in the state is total BS as well since 40% of the total itself is from other countries and auto's are not the sole polluter of the 60% that is left over.

I believe that the A/C issue involves an increases fuel consumption for a vehicle using the A/C, and the A/C requires additional power from the power grid to run at home.

I'm aware. Thought I would throw in a softball for ya

[AZhitman]

I believe that the A/C issue involves an increases fuel consumption for a vehicle using the A/C, and the A/C requires additional power from the power grid to run at home.

I think you're right.

I also think Matt's being a bit "tongue-in-cheek" about H20.

[WDRacing]

Spoken like a true Texan. Why use a .22 when you got a perfectly good .44.

I'm from Boston, my wife is active duty military which is why we're here. Together the both of us have secured your right to be ignorant to anything that's been said in this thread. I don't mean your stupid, I mean you choose to ignore the facts that blatantly stare you in the face. You seem perfectly content to stroll through life with a set of horse blinders on. Thinking that your doing some good by killing one flea every week when all you have to do is give the damn dog a bath.

But keep fighting the good fight...someday the rest of us will fix everything for you.

Have fun debating...I'm out.

WD

[audtatious]

I think you're right.

I also think Matt's being a bit "tongue-in-cheek" about H20.

Of course he is right. I popped up a grapefruit on purpose there.

Regardless, if we are talking about greenhouse gasses and the environment then my point about water vapor is completely valid. People would look at that Honda and see that is is a zero emission vehicle and will assume it will help cure MMGW. That is not the case at all. It will positively impact air pollution in other ways of course. Those vehicles are definately a valid solution to increasing air quality when compared to fossil fuel burning vehicles.

[AZhitman]

1) By MMGW I'm assuming you're referring to wind power. That is beyond me.

2) But like a good tenant, I want to leave the place at least as good as it was when I moved in.

3) Sure, one volcano can cause a problem. Key word, CAN. Vehicle emissions do, key word DO.

1) MMGW = Man Made Global Warming.

2) I want to leave it in better shape as well. But I want to do it in an intelligent and logical manner, not a knee-jerk emotionally-driven one.

I hate sky-is-falling policymakers and emotional fearmongerers like Algore (who's a major contributor to GW since he lives in a bigass house and remains on "the grid"). For shame. Hypocritical jackass, he is.

3) No, volcanoes DO cause problems. Not "can". DO. Proven. Factual. Reality.

Vehicle emissions do as well, but to what extent? Anyone thinking they can answer that intelligently is either full of crap or smarter than our best scientists. The point is, we're spending billions to clean up an unconfirmed, ill-defined and unquantified "problem" while ignoring others.

[rn79870]

Which shows the current standards set are working without focusing on cars and light trucks as much. My point has been to go fix the higher contributors first instead of forcing new regs (which have a back-lash effect) on cars and light trucks. Simply utilizing the pollution levels in CA and blaming them on the cars and trucks that are used in the state is total BS as well since 40% of the total itself is from other countries and auto's are not the sole polluter of the 60% that is left over.

It is more a matter of fixing the things that are easiest to fix. Cars are a major contributor. Cars can be fixed by passing legislation requiring cleaner more efficient products.

Sure industry pollutes, and those issues are being addressed. Aviation is being addressed. Diesel pollution is being addressed. Heck, it's even illegal for me to leave my dog's poop on the sidewalk, (that ends up polluting our oceans)It is okay for a Coyote to poop on the same sidewalk though. How is that fair? Should I stop cleaning up after my dog because more Coyote poop is on the sidewalk than Chihuahua/Pomeranian/whatever poop is? The Coyote poop is larger, etc. One less turd is one less turd, it's a start.

[rn79870]

I'm from Boston, my wife is active duty military which is why we're here. Together the both of us have secured your right to be ignorant to anything that's been said in this thread. I don't mean your stupid, I mean you choose to ignore the facts that blatantly stare you in the face. You seem perfectly content to stroll through life with a set of horse blinders on. Thinking that your doing some good by killing one flea every week when all you have to do is give the damn dog a bath.

You've missed one very important thing...

Werd.....Here's a couple of "facts" that are interesting.... 1. The American Automobile Association (AAA) has reported, in many of our major cities, cars and light trucks are no longer the primary or even secondary cause of summertime ozone ‘smog.’ 2. It would take 20 of today's new cars to generate the same amount of air pollution as one mid-1960s model car. In another 10 years, thanks to new automotive and fuel technologies, it will take 33 cars to produce the air pollution emissions of one mid-1960s model (following current EPA guidelines) 3. One major air pollutant, lead, is nearly gone from our air. Since the mid-1970s, levels of airborne lead are down 96 percent

If you don't want to believe me, maybe you can believe him. Now, tell me who is ignoring facts.

Sorry to see you go, thanks for your participation.

[AZhitman]

Start with the easiest one to fix. Then go to the second easiest.

Now that you've applied this tactic to debate, Brian's gone.

So, let's go back and cover some of what we've missed in the past page.

I think what's happening here is our good friend Bob is rethinking his entire worldview and wondering how he could have been so misled... He's intelligent, well-educated, well-spoken... how did they confuse him so?

[WDRacing]

You've missed one very important thing...

If you don't want to believe me, maybe you can believe him. Now, tell me who is ignoring facts.

Sorry to see you go, thanks for your participation.

Oh I'm not gone..I'm just regrouping.

[audtatious]

Start with the easiest one to fix. Then go to the second easiest.

The easiest thing to do is to make automobiles too expensive to maintain past the warranty phase which will mean less people will be able to afford them. Regardless of the horrible outcome that would be to the country it would make the environmental whacko's happy as a lark.

When cars all start looking like a Prius and we are limited in selection due to environmental regulations, I will simply find me a 60's-70's car and spend my $40k replacing everything in it to make it an appropriate DD and tell the EPA to EAD

[rn79870]

Now that you've applied this tactic to debate, Brian's gone.

So, let's go back and cover some of what we've missed in the past page.

I think what's happening here is our good friend Bob is rethinking his entire worldview and wondering how he could have been so misled... He's intelligent, well-educated, well-spoken... how did they confuse him so?

I hope Brian is okay. His departure didn't involve the paramedics did it?I enjoyed discussing the issues with him, I'd hate to think something bad happened. (You're an okay dude Brian.)

You know AZ, you are not that far from an AARB, little brother to CARB. When that day happens, I plan on writing the editor of the Arizona Republic News and praising the foresight of the Arizona legislature.

I'm sure we missed a lot as this thread progressed. Ducking bullets took too much of my time. There were even a few that came close.

[rn79870]

The easiest thing to do is to make automobiles too expensive to maintain past the warranty phase which will mean less people will be able to afford them. Regardless of the horrible outcome that would be to the country it would make the environmental whacko's happy as a lark.

When cars all start looking like a Prius and we are limited in selection due to environmental regulations, I will simply find me a 60's-70's car and spend my $40k replacing everything in it to make it an appropriate DD and tell the EPA to EAD

You think that is far fetched? Look at Japan's regulations. I underatand they are more strict. I'd quote what I've heard, but I'm trying to keep to the facts here.

[audtatious]

I'm sure we missed a lot as this thread progressed. Ducking bullets took too much of my time. There were even a few that came close.

Not necessarily. It simply proves that some people do not care of others POV's regardless of whether they make sense or not. To you, it is pollution and the "look" thus you don't care what regulations do to others nor their cost as long as it will make some miniscule impact to what you like. To environmentalists/alarmists, they simply care about their perceived issues and do not care about impact of change; they just want their issues resolved at all cost. Both are similar.

From our POV, we want things better but do not intend to cut off our foot in the process. We simply want to do what is smart instead of what is emotionally appealing to some groups.

[Sentientbydesign]

I'm perplexed.

How does running your a/c create magical condesation which magically turns into water vapor?

That condensation is of...water vapor!!! Oh yay! I got one!

If that condensation goes and evaporates when the A/C warms up, then you haven't created jack ****.

Just converted water (gas) to water (liquid) to water (gas). Big deal.

Please don't reference the FCX, because I'm well aware that it creates large amounts of water vapor and that's completely different than the A/C.

Also, why not do a multi-path intercooler with a collection capabilities. Then you can take your water (liquid) and do something with it...Sell it to pepsi to make aquafina!!!

Maybe the easiest problems to fix are truly the smallest (in numbers). How many diesel big-rigs are there by comparison to commuter cars?

Why doesn't CARB regulate so that car manufacturers have a floor to build up from?

No passenger vehicle regardless of size can get less than 15 MPG city. REAL MPG, not that damned EPA

Look at me, I just killed half of GM's lineup and Lexus, Nissan, Mercedes, BMW...etc can't make 500 HP cars anymore...Or can they?

Let's charge GT-R owners a premium for filling up at the pump. Instead of paying per gallon, you now pay on a sliding scale where your car's MPG determine's your fuel price.

You may not like my suggestions, but give them an unbiased consideration before you knock them.

[AZhitman]

Brian will be OK, he's probably pissed that he wasted time in an intellectual debate when there's so much good p0rn on the Internet.

I'll fight tooth and nail against any AZ Legislator who tries to follow the CA lead.

Open it up for public debate, put it on prime-time television and let me dismantle their rhetoric like a chop-shop employee with a plasma cutter and air tools.

I've been on TV before, I'm perfectly comfortable in front of a camera. LOL

[AZhitman]

SBD makes a good point, and let's toss in this absurd tidbit contributed by my liberal tree-hugging activist sister:

"Why do they make cars that go faster than 75mph? After all there's no place you can drive legally above that speed in the U.S"...

[rn79870]

Not necessarily. It simply proves that some people do not care of others POV's regardless of whether they make sense or not. To you, it is pollution and the "look" thus you don't care what regulations do to others nor their cost as long as it will make some miniscule impact to what you like. To environmentalists/alarmists, they simply care about their perceived issues and do not care about impact of change; they just want their issues resolved at all cost. Both are similar.

From our POV, we want things better but do not intend to cut off our foot in the process. We simply want to do what is smart instead of what is emotionally appealing to some groups.

You, who did more to prove my point than I did with the post...

Werd.....Here's a couple of "facts" that are interesting.... 1. The American Automobile Association (AAA) has reported, in many of our major cities, cars and light trucks are no longer the primary or even secondary cause of summertime ozone ‘smog.’ 2. It would take 20 of today's new cars to generate the same amount of air pollution as one mid-1960s model car. In another 10 years, thanks to new automotive and fuel technologies, it will take 33 cars to produce the air pollution emissions of one mid-1960s model (following current EPA guidelines) 3. One major air pollutant, lead, is nearly gone from our air. Since the mid-1970s, levels of airborne lead are down 96 percent

Yet you summarize the above as providing a minuscule impact? That's far from minuscule in my book. pretty impressive in my book.

Do I care about what it did to the little guy? Sure, I do. But I'm sure our great grand kids will be far happier with clean air/water than they will with whether or not we had a CARB (un)approved fart can on our cars.This is simply an example of putting the needs of society ahead of the needs of a select group.

The common undercurrent here is that it is financially motivated, or motivated by greed. Some say it is a knee jerk reaction to a problem. Everyone is complaining, but no one is offering a solution other than ground all the aircraft and nuking China.

I'm not a fan of big government. I used to spend all my spare time surfing when I was a puppy. Then the government closed some beaches and sectioned off others. That sucked. Then I started racing a 400Husqvarna in the desert. The government (BLM) stepped in and closed off some and sectioned the remainder of the desert. I moved to flying. Guess what the FAA did. Yep, TCA's and small VFR corridores.

It just happens that clean running cars and clean air go hand in hand. That's why I support it.