Idea/Proposal for Smog Laws

[spooled240]

So we all know the deal with modified cars and smog, but what if the government allowed people to pay an extra premium on registration to be have lower smog requirements? What I had in mind was a smog program that allow people to swap engines, install aftermarket turbochargers and still be smog-legal as long as their tail pipe emissions meet a certain standard.

I know the government(especially CA's) is very strict on smog, but I feel like if there is enough of an incentive for them to start something like this then it could gather some momentum.

Think about it:


The government would make millions of dollars off this extra registration fee (possibly rolling it into other "green" initiatives if the tree hugger start screaming)



More car enthusiasts would buy aftermarket parts with confidence helping the economy



Air quality could in fact improve considering many people will try and opt in to this program instead of "riding dirty" with their catless exhaust...and we all know how many people don't run cats on their modified cars.


Discuss!

[racepar1]

It is basically pointless to have this discussion. No politician in their right mind would even think of considering backing anything like this.

I would NEVER agree with paying more to pollute all you want. The car should be smogged EVERYWHERE in this country. It should have to at least pass the emissions test and a visual to verify that all necessary smog equipment is there. If anything I think there should be a waiver system, with an absurdly complicated application process, to let you get by without the CARB laws regarding aftermarket parts. A smart, resourceful person can make an SR pass emissions just like any other engine. It would probably require a second cat at the most to bring NOX down. I DO NOT think that the average jackass should be eligable for ANY waiver of such laws. ONLY professionals/experts should be able to apply. You should have to pass testing to prove that you have a comprehensive understanding of how smog is controlled. It should require a backround check. I'm talking about making it so complicated that no 240 retards can make it happen.

[Davidmic747]

Had the same idea.

[oni jake]

No.

People will just pay the extra $200 or whatever to pass smog instead of spending $2000 on engine repairs. We'll take a step backwards in air quality.

[!Zar!]

Such an immature boy racer thought of approach.

Make millions of dollars? Pulling numbers out of the air are we?

Roll new measures into effect to curtail the effects of increased emissions due to boy racers who are too poor for daily drivers? If you all can't afford a second car, what makes you think you can afford increased smog prices?


hahahaha

[KiLLeR2001]

This is a worse idea than moving to Florida.

[racepar1]

Such an immature boy racer thought of approach.

Make millions of dollars? Pulling numbers out of the air are we?

Roll new measures into effect to curtail the effects of increased emissions due to boy racers who are too poor for daily drivers? If you all can't afford a second car, what makes you think you can afford increased smog prices?


hahahaha

Enough with your logic and reason, that shit is dumb...

This is a worse idea than moving to Florida.

And THAT'S coming from someone that lives IN Florida...

:eek:

[zerodameaon]

I am thinking there should be no smog equipment enforcement, you just need to pass current emissions sniff test and if you do wtf does it matter if you have a RB/SR/KAT/LSx/etc. Pollution is pollution regardless of what motor it comes out of. Kinda like Oregon and Washington do. But I guess they make a shit load of money enforcing emissions equipment laws so that will never happen.

Shit if you think they would ever consider your idea, you are on crack, even SEMA would not consider backing that. For fuck sake they just started making diesel guys get smogs. Granted that whole thing is kinda fucked and really up to the tech on the status of pass or fail.

[spooled240]

It is basically pointless to have this discussion. No politician in their right mind would even think of considering backing anything like this.

I would NEVER agree with paying more to pollute all you want. The car should be smogged EVERYWHERE in this country. It should have to at least pass the emissions test and a visual to verify that all necessary smog equipment is there. If anything I think there should be a waiver system, with an absurdly complicated application process, to let you get by without the CARB laws regarding aftermarket parts. A smart, resourceful person can make an SR pass emissions just like any other engine. It would probably require a second cat at the most to bring NOX down. I DO NOT think that the average jackass should be eligable for ANY waiver of such laws. ONLY professionals/experts should be able to apply. You should have to pass testing to prove that you have a comprehensive understanding of how smog is controlled. It should require a backround check. I'm talking about making it so complicated that no 240 retards can make it happen.

I agree that it will take some knowledge to get an engine that was never offered here to pass emmissions, but I don't think it will be rocket science like you described it.

Such an immature boy racer thought of approach.

Make millions of dollars? Pulling numbers out of the air are we?

Roll new measures into effect to curtail the effects of increased emissions due to boy racers who are too poor for daily drivers? If you all can't afford a second car, what makes you think you can afford increased smog prices?


hahahaha

wow you really brought a strong argument here.. and for the record I have a second car that's I daily, but that doesn't change the fact that my first car isn't smog legal. Politics aside, I think many older people would be interested in this program if it were enacted.

[dluevanos01]

Such an immature boy racer thought of approach.

Make millions of dollars? Pulling numbers out of the air are we?

Roll new measures into effect to curtail the effects of increased emissions due to boy racers who are too poor for daily drivers? If you all can't afford a second car, what makes you think you can afford increased smog prices?


hahahaha

Paying $200 for "smog check" every two years does not equal paying for a daily driver, and yes you could argue that instead of buying more car parts instead of a daily is stupid, which it is but some just can't afford it.


OP: reason why nothing like this would ever go through is that no politician would stand behind it like, Racepar1 said. Another thing that would be needed is lobbying, which cost A LOT of money, and 240 owners/ "tuners" can't simply cope with it. Big corporations/firms do it because it is cheaper for them to lobbyist to bring attention to other forms of pollution or they can simply pay a pigouvian tax, than paying to change their production process to produce less pollution.

[racepar1]

I agree that it will take some knowledge to get an engine that was never offered here to pass emmissions, but I don't think it will be rocket science like you described it.

It's not about it being rocket science. It's about keeping the fucking dumbasses from blowing a shitload of pollution into the air. If you take the time to go through a whole long process like that to get your waiver then you're NOT going to abuse it. You're going to respect the rules and follow them, at least you're more likely to.

If you set-up a system like you described every little dumbfuck dickwad is going to use it and abuse the privelages that they are granted. THAT'S the problem...

Why do 240 guys make it out like smog is the hugest issue in the world??? We are not special and NOBODY in the ENITIRE US govenrment gives evan 1/4 of a fuck about our little SR20's. I do agree that enthusiasts are usually made-out to be the scapegoats and that shit is fucked up. Like stated above though if you're not goint to bust out your checkbook to make this happen, pay lobbyists, fund some political shit, etc... you're just blowing hot air as usual.

[240sxfan6882]

That will never fly. Although Smog checks are a PITA, and a source of income for the state with the fees, we would all end up paying the price in the end, and not to mention our future generations.
Our air quality is now better than it was in the 70s, although we have an assload more cars. Why? Because of tighter emissions.

I don't think I would be pleased to be breathing in more smog because some people can't see beyond having a fast car.

[spooled240]

^You're missing the point. The idea pay into a program that waives the underhood visual inspection, but require an emissions test strictly by a tailpipe sniffer.

Paying $200 for "smog check" every two years does not equal paying for a daily driver, and yes you could argue that instead of buying more car parts instead of a daily is stupid, which it is but some just can't afford it.


OP: reason why nothing like this would ever go through is that no politician would stand behind it like, Racepar1 said. Another thing that would be needed is lobbying, which cost A LOT of money, and 240 owners/ "tuners" can't simply cope with it. Big corporations/firms do it because it is cheaper for them to lobbyist to bring attention to other forms of pollution or they can simply pay a pigouvian tax, than paying to change their production process to produce less pollution.

I figured it was a stretch, but worth a discussion.

[FaLKoN240]

They should just change the laws to sniffer only laws.

[racepar1]

^You're missing the point. The idea pay into a program that waives the underhood visual inspection, but require an emissions test strictly by a tailpipe sniffer.



I figured it was a stretch, but worth a discussion.

You're missing OUR point. ANY system that you can come up with WILL be abused by people for personal gain. It will cost 10x as much as a program like that would collect to enforce the rules of said program. On top of those issues NOBODY with any political "clout" will back you, EVER. Besides that it would cost way too much money and take way too much time without some SERIOUS corporate backing. Beyond that even it would likely increase air pollution, at least to a small extent. Those are some pretty damn serious drawbacks/shortcomings...

[Matej]

They should at least make the laws equal for everyone. Classic cars, motorcycles, boats, lawn movers, etc. I do not see why they should be exempt from emission, noise, or whatever other silly laws the average driver has to deal with.
I think the original poster's idea would be more reasonable if the owners had to prove that they only drive the car less than a certain amount of kilometers each year. A car with no emissions equipment and open dump pipes that sits in a garage all year produces less pollution than any new car that gets driven every day.

When one looks at the big picture, it is a lot more wasteful and bad for the environment to buy a new car every other year, no matter how 'clean,' than it is to keep the same car on the road for twenty years.
I think auto manufactures need to cut back on new car production to lessen the waste of resources, and try to keep their cars on the road as long as possible, by offering newer engines and upgrades for their older models to make them compliant with modern standards.

[spooled240]

You're missing OUR point. ANY system that you can come up with WILL be abused by people for personal gain. It will cost 10x as much as a program like that would collect to enforce the rules of said program. On top of those issues NOBODY with any political "clout" will back you, EVER. Besides that it would cost way too much money and take way too much time without some SERIOUS corporate backing. Beyond that even it would likely increase air pollution, at least to a small extent. Those are some pretty damn serious drawbacks/shortcomings...

I didn't say this program I described was perfect. Like any system, there are provisions that can be implemented for control. As an alternative to the mileage restriction, requiring more frequent smog checks could help prevent people from abusing their privileges.

[lude4life13]

IF there was ever an option to do this i'd be so down as opposed to going under the table. I would have absolutely no problem putting in the extra cash to get all the emissions together so that I could legally and happily drive around any swapped car.

Even though it would never happen, I do understand what you are saying, and think it'd be awesome!

[milto0n]

Didn't read the thread but I wrote a policy paper on air pollution recently. Try to follow along as you might get lost:
The reason smog is such a problem in california, but more specifically southern cali, is because how several of the nations top polluting cities are in California (Bakersfield, Merced, Fresno, Los Angeles, Modesto just to name a few!!!) As you might imagine, these pollutants are air based VOC's (volatile organic compounds), ozone (O3), and other fun stuff like oxides of nitrogen (NOx), hydrocarbons (HC), and carbon monoxide (CO). These concentrations are expressed the most on hot, sunny, summer days. Decades ago, there were no set standards of air pollution until the implementation of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and it's later revisions although in the 50's the Air Pollution Control Act provided some federally funded research on the subject for the first time. Anywho, fast forward to more current times, the Bush Administration approved a revision in the set standard for ozone (over an 8 hour period) to be 75 ppb (parts per billion) as opposed to the 85 ppb that was the previous standard. Fast forward to now, the EPA filed a lawsuit against the Obama Administration because they rejected a proposal to drop the standard another 10ppb in 2010. The EPA wanted to impose stricter standards because they do not feel as though these standards are considered safe. They factor in the number of asthma attacks prevented, days of work lost, years of life lost, and premature deaths when drawing these conclusions.
Interesting stuff you say? Indeed it is. Many counties in California fail to meet this standard on a given day and, because of our habitual pollution (for reasons I will outline momentarily), we have our beloved smog control system. Mind you, transportation accounts for 28 PERECENT of all greenhouse gas emissions (not just ozone, but some). This includes ships, planes, trucks, trains, and of course cars. Total emissions from cars is roughly 10 PERCENT give or take.
Why should we car about air pollution in the troposphere? Well aside from the whole global warming thing, air pollution has adverse effects on the health of those in high polluting areas, but particularly children. Children spend more time outside playing than adults increasing their exposure duration and also have a faster rate of respiration to compensate for their underdeveloped lungs (that are of course even more susceptible to harm!) The poor children are innocent victims in this all.
How does this effect California? Well, let's bring it all back. The cities that I mentioned earlier are in "poorly" designed geographical areas. By this I mean they trap smog and don't let it go anywhere. Assuming humans didn't live on the earth, the ozone concentration on a given day would be around 20-30 ppb. Ozone concentration in San Francisco is like 50-60 ppb (don't remember but it's low) making it one of the cleanest cities airwise. LA, on a hot day can reach anywhere between 100-120 ppb of ozone. This again is in part because of its geographic "bowl shape" design. Central valley and inland areas also suffer in the same manner. Remember how I said pollution concentrations are worst on hot sunny days? Well guess where it is hot and sunny... that's right the Central Valley, San Fernando Valley, LA, and all those other places. Now lastly, consider the population density of most of those places. How many people are driving around in "Carmaggedon?" Cars automatically get the negative reputation just because there are so many of them.
This is why smog control is so strict. Because we live in a polluted place, cars have to suffer. Make it harder for people to pass smog to make it a cleaner place to live. Now here is the kicker. How do you go about about regulating gross polluting cities? Do you just fine them for everyday they pollute past 75ppb? Well it's not exactly that simple. I actually can't speak on that. Well anyways, I still drive no EGR straight pipe turbo. Calling it a day folks.

[spooled240]

^Interesting. I wonder how many car enthusiast with modified cars account for that 10%..probably less than 1%.

IF there was ever an option to do this i'd be so down as opposed to going under the table. I would have absolutely no problem putting in the extra cash to get all the emissions together so that I could legally and happily drive around any swapped car.

Even though it would never happen, I do understand what you are saying, and think it'd be awesome!

Yeah, I would no problem having a working EGR and two high flow cats(one upstream and one downstream) on say a 350hp s14 if it were street legal.

[dluevanos01]

You're missing OUR point. ANY system that you can come up with WILL be abused by people for personal gain. It will cost 10x as much as a program like that would collect to enforce the rules of said program. On top of those issues NOBODY with any political "clout" will back you, EVER. Besides that it would cost way too much money and take way too much time without some SERIOUS corporate backing. Beyond that even it would likely increase air pollution, at least to a small extent. Those are some pretty damn serious drawbacks/shortcomings...

What he said...

^Interesting. I wonder how many car enthusiast with modified cars account for that 10%..probably less than 1%.


Yeah, I would no problem having a working EGR and two high flow cats(one upstream and one downstream) on say a 350hp s14 if it were street legal.

I agree with both of you on the fact that people with modifies cars aren't the biggest pollutants in California and that a sniffer only test would be awesome, but the fact that the government sells rights to companies who's production pollutes the air or taxes them on the amount of pollution that they create would mean that in order for them to try an change the laws there would have to be an incentive to (more profit) from it. Not to mention the cost that it would be involved in lobbying. I'm not saying this is impossible but I don't see it happening since people from the 70's and 80's who experience stage 3 smog alerts would completely reject any type of reform to "reduce" smog laws.

Didn't read the thread but I wrote a policy paper on air pollution recently. Try to follow along as you might get lost:
The reason smog is such a problem in california, but more specifically southern cali, is because how several of the nations top polluting cities are in California (Bakersfield, Merced, Fresno, Los Angeles, Modesto just to name a few!!!) As you might imagine, these pollutants are air based VOC's (volatile organic compounds), ozone (O3), and other fun stuff like oxides of nitrogen (NOx), hydrocarbons (HC), and carbon monoxide (CO). These concentrations are expressed the most on hot, sunny, summer days. Decades ago, there were no set standards of air pollution until the implementation of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and it's later revisions although in the 50's the Air Pollution Control Act provided some federally funded research on the subject for the first time. Anywho, fast forward to more current times, the Bush Administration approved a revision in the set standard for ozone (over an 8 hour period) to be 75 ppb (parts per billion) as opposed to the 85 ppb that was the previous standard. Fast forward to now, the EPA filed a lawsuit against the Obama Administration because they rejected a proposal to drop the standard another 10ppb in 2010. The EPA wanted to impose stricter standards because they do not feel as though these standards are considered safe. They factor in the number of asthma attacks prevented, days of work lost, years of life lost, and premature deaths when drawing these conclusions.
Interesting stuff you say? Indeed it is. Many counties in California fail to meet this standard on a given day and, because of our habitual pollution (for reasons I will outline momentarily), we have our beloved smog control system. Mind you, transportation accounts for 28 PERECENT of all greenhouse gas emissions (not just ozone, but some). This includes ships, planes, trucks, trains, and of course cars. Total emissions from cars is roughly 10 PERCENT give or take.
Why should we car about air pollution in the troposphere? Well aside from the whole global warming thing, air pollution has adverse effects on the health of those in high polluting areas, but particularly children. Children spend more time outside playing than adults increasing their exposure duration and also have a faster rate of respiration to compensate for their underdeveloped lungs (that are of course even more susceptible to harm!) The poor children are innocent victims in this all.
How does this effect California? Well, let's bring it all back. The cities that I mentioned earlier are in "poorly" designed geographical areas. By this I mean they trap smog and don't let it go anywhere. Assuming humans didn't live on the earth, the ozone concentration on a given day would be around 20-30 ppb. Ozone concentration in San Francisco is like 50-60 ppb (don't remember but it's low) making it one of the cleanest cities airwise. LA, on a hot day can reach anywhere between 100-120 ppb of ozone. This again is in part because of its geographic "bowl shape" design. Central valley and inland areas also suffer in the same manner. Remember how I said pollution concentrations are worst on hot sunny days? Well guess where it is hot and sunny... that's right the Central Valley, San Fernando Valley, LA, and all those other places. Now lastly, consider the population density of most of those places. How many people are driving around in "Carmaggedon?" Cars automatically get the negative reputation just because there are so many of them.
This is why smog control is so strict. Because we live in a polluted place, cars have to suffer. Make it harder for people to pass smog to make it a cleaner place to live. Now here is the kicker. How do you go about about regulating gross polluting cities? Do you just fine them for everyday they pollute past 75ppb? Well it's not exactly that simple. I actually can't speak on that. Well anyways, I still drive no EGR straight pipe turbo. Calling it a day folks.

Will read this tomorrow, looks like great information but I'm too tired aha

[BossHogg]

I would move. World is a big place. This seems to only be a problem for cali people.. Here we only have smog for 1995 and newer. RB25, test pipe, no pre muffler, no smog. Just safety.