new WA emissions laws

[mbtoloczko]

Hey Folks, did any of you happen to notice that the WA State legislature just passed new emissions laws? Check out the text of the bills:

http://www.leg.wa.gov/wsladm/billinf...1397&year=2005

http://www.leg.wa.gov/wsladm/billinf...5397&year=2005

http://www.aiada.org/article.asp?id=37657

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ssions14m.html

Does anyone have any idea how these are going to apply to the SVX? I read through the bills, and I can't figure it out. I see some info about it applying to MY09+ cars, but what about pre-MY09?

[SVXRide]

Originally Posted by mbtoloczko

Hey Folks, did any of you happen to notice that the WA State legislature just passed new emissions laws? Check out the text of the bills:

http://www.leg.wa.gov/wsladm/billinf...1397&year=2005

http://www.leg.wa.gov/wsladm/billinf...5397&year=2005

http://www.aiada.org/article.asp?id=37657

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...ssions14m.html

Does anyone have any idea how these are going to apply to the SVX? I read through the bills, and I can't figure it out. I see some info about it applying to MY09+ cars, but what about pre-MY09?

Move...move now!!!
-Bill

[mbtoloczko]

I heard MD is not far behind, so I guess I can't go there.

As a concerned resident of this planet and Authorized Emissions Specialist in three states I would like to say a few things on this subject.

First of all, I wouldn’t be too worried about the stricter emissions laws unless you drive an SUV or V8 powered vehicle. ECU Tune customers may be in warmer water than the rest of us but the USDM SVX is an extremely clean car emission wise. Currently, WA only measures Co2, CO and HC particles in exhaust. This new bill would specifically target NOX and o2; a simple upgrade to actual 5 gas analyzers (used in ANY AES certified shop). Basically what I'm getting at is that owners of SVX's shouldn't be too worried since our cars are actually very clean emission wise. Now, if you have holes in your exhaust and leaky fuel injectors then you may want to consider giving the car some needed and possibly required TLC. Those are just two examples however there are countless causes of high emissions. I tested both my teal and pearl SVX's w/ a calibrated 5 gas tester and both passed w/o functioning catalytic converters w/ flying colors. However I doubt I would have passed w/ the newer proposed limits in place at that time.

When running properly w/ WORKING catalytic converters the SVX should be able to pass even the strictest emissions w/o conflict. The worst thing I can see happening is that more people will complain that the state is forcing them to get their cars tuned up since a better running car puts out fewer emissions. You can still buy your way around the emissions check by spending $150 at an AES certified shop and showing improvement. Personally, I see this as being an easy way past the emissions check stations w/o sacrificing HP or my beloved SVX.

The times are changing and I personally advocate the stricter emissions laws. Even though WA has some of the cleanest air in the country I think that this bill will set precedence for states w/ worse air quality. I was very disappointed w/ this year’s lack of snow in the mountains and not looking forward to the forecasted drought WA is to see this summer. I know there are many opinions on global warming and its causes but I honestly think that if we won't start treating this planet we live on better, she's going to wipe us clean.

[mbtoloczko]

Do you know if WA is going to implement emissions checks across the state or continue to only check emissions in "problem" areas?

I was actually wondering the same thing since some areas in WA currently do not require emissions checks at all. I would anticipate the stricter levels are going to be enforced at any emissions check station allready in place. If the state decides to make emissions testing a state requirement I think the change will be well noted on the news and fair warning will be given while the test facilities are installed. I'll ask tomorrow and see if my instructor has any insight on this subject.

Emmissions standards are a joke, and a waste of time, money, and resources.

The minimum emissions standards that any passenger vehicle in Washington has to conform to is already extremely clean. Most ULEV vehicles emit exhaust that is generally cleaner then the surrounding air, at least in urban areas. Tightening emissions rules to, and to paraphrase a quote in one of the articles "force automakers to sell cleaner cars" is a case of spending quite a bit of effort to make the cleanest cars on the road cleaner.

If lawmakers really cared about air quality, they wouldn't force CARB-level emissions standards on new cars, and they wouldn't create a hassle for hundreds of thousands of car owners who only have to spend $150 to get an exemption of failing emissions. If they really cared, they would take the money wasted by coming up with all these new rules, laws, regulations, and they would simply start buying people new cars, starting with this guy down the street who has a 1978 Chrysler Cordoba that looks like a ground borne skywriting machine and, at half-throttle, hangs a cloud of smoke that would hide James Bond, his car, his mistress, and his martini.

It's not new cars, or ten year old cars, or the cars coming out in 2009 that are the problem. It's the thousands of clunkers that are owned by people who can't afford anything better. Start buying those people Honda Civics, or Ford Foci, or Chevy Cobalts, or Toyota Echoes, and current emissions standards would be good for the next two or three decades.

[ensteele]

I don't live in the city limits, so don't have to worry about the test. I don't know if this will change though.

[UberRoo]

Everything that comes out of our pipes is classified as toxic, even oxygen. You can't win. Somebody decided what ratios are acceptable and called it a day. What comes out isn't as important as how much comes out. Some cars would get better mileage if the emission requirements were not so strict. Sure, the ratio of "nasty" byproducts would be "better," but the total output would be substantially lower because less fuel would be consumed. The current regulations are a joke.

I wish I had actual figures on hand and sources to cite, but from everything I've read, the crap that comes out of our tail pipes is an extremely small fraction of the stuff which the earth belches out. I recall reading somewhere that the earth releases more CO2 in one day than all industrial processes do in an entire year, including automobiles. Not to long ago people believed that the sun orbited around the earth. Even today we seem to think we're the center of the universe. Why do we still believe that a bunch of weak human beings can really have a substantial impact on anything?

Does anybody know what trees are made out of? Think about it. Are they made of dirt? Water? Do you know? Don't read any further until you think you know. There's an amazing process that takes place when you burn wood. When it burns, you create CO2. Burning wood (or gasoline) is nothing more than combining oxygen with carbon. The tree is carbon. Where does that carbon come from? The air. That's right, trees are made out of air. Remember photosynthesis? It's that process that trees use to turn CO2 into oxygen? Photosynthesis separates the oxygen from the carbon. The oxygen is released into the air, and the carbon becomes a tree. All that energy from the sun is effectively stored in the tree. When you burn the tree, you release that stored energy. Pretty amazing, huh? Trees thrive on CO2. Burning trees creates more CO2. Now that's the circle of life.

Gasoline is basically just trees and other plants that have be sitting around for a long time. So what happens when you burn gasoline? You create CO2. It's really not so bad because all the plant life is just gonna turn it back into more plants again. The way I see it, the tree-huggers should be burning all the oil they can. Burn some gas, save a tree.

[mbtoloczko]

Originally Posted by SEA Sleeper

I was actually wondering the same thing since some areas in WA currently do not require emissions checks at all. I would anticipate the stricter levels are going to be enforced at any emissions check station allready in place. If the state decides to make emissions testing a state requirement I think the change will be well noted on the news and fair warning will be given while the test facilities are installed. I'll ask tomorrow and see if my instructor has any insight on this subject.

Any news as to whether the new emissions laws will be applied to the existing emissions control areas only?

Originally Posted by mbtoloczko

Any news as to whether the new emissions laws will be applied to the existing emissions control areas only?

This has become a topic of conversation here in class but we have determined that we can only speculate untill 2009. I read a little deeper into the passed bill and it basically states that '09 production year and newer are subject to stricter emissions ratings off the dealership lot. It also states that WA will basically be mirroring CA's emissions standards and laws and changing them "from time to time" based on how CA decides. A good point that my instructor brought up is that most OBDII (96+ model year) vehicles are 50 state compliant allready and that the implimentation of this bill wouln't cause much grief for thier owners. We also speculated that WA will start using and enforcing limits on all 5 gases when a vehicle is checked. As stated in an earlier post, WA currently only enforces the measure of CO and HC, using Co2 as a test comfirmation. By taking and enforcing readings of all 5 gases, older vehicles will have to be in better running condition to meet the minimums for NOX and O2 as well.

So basically I don't have an answer to your question but I doubt that this will become a state wide standard at all. The proposed standards will be implimented in current emissions control areas first w/ others to be opened in the years following if at all. I hope I have shed some useful light on this subject for all interested.

Originally Posted by UberRoo

Everything ....... Even today we seem to think we're the center of the universe. Why do we still believe that a bunch of weak human beings can really have a substantial impact on anything? ..........

I think the question that most environmentalists are asking is "how are we going to lessen or compensate for the impact we have allready made on this planet?" We have proved powerful enough to disturb many balances on this planet. I see most of your points as valid, but to say that we're too weak to have an impact is just a negligent statement im my opinion. I'd say it's alot like passing th buck or admitting defeat. Would'nt you agree that we are responcible for the upkeep and care for the place we live? I know that when it comes to this subject opinions and emotions may run high, but I honestly think that it's our obligation to be responcible for the effect we have on this planet and to plan on ways to lessen our impact for those who live here long after us.

Washington can only use Federal standards or CARB standards. Currently, four states (MA, VT, ME, and NY) have adopted CARB standards. The other 45 states cannot switch from Federal to CARB standards until 2008 at the earliest. Washington cannot have it's own emissions standards; only California can create standards that are different then Federal, so if we switch in 2009, we will suffer all the exact same laws and silliness California currently labors under.

Even so, the proposed new standards may fail by the time 2009 comes around - the only states that were eligible to adopt CARB standards were in an area called the Ozone Transport Region - 19 states in the upper Mideast and Northeast. Those states were eligible based on Federal studies showing that they stood to suffer from the same types of high air pollution as California. I could be wrong, but I've never seen anything that says the Pacific northwest is anywhere near that bad - we don't have the population density, or the proximity to dirtier states like those back east have.

It's still a waste of time - it does nothing to promote the replacement of the true gross polluters on the road.

[UberRoo]

Originally Posted by SEA Sleeper

- Would'nt you agree that we are responcible for the upkeep and care for the place we live? -

No. Show me the contract that says that. No other species on earth is liable for their actions, why should we be? Locust destroy thousands of acres, moths kill billions of trees, plankton kill hundreds of thousands of tons of fish. There are many examples of one species destroying the habitat for other species. Why do we think we're so special? Why are we obligated to be saviors of the world? Yes, we have an impact on the world, but a very, very small one. We put up a parking lot, and bury a dozen gophers. How many buried gophers is too many? What's the cut-off point?

There's a book out there called Environmental Overkill. I suggest that anyone with strong environmental opinions read it. Most environmentalists are terribly under informed, or worse, misinformed. The popular news media is primarily responsible for that, but every individual should verify the facts. "Logging is killing the Northwest Spotted Owls!" No, there is no such thing as a "Northwest Spotted Owl." The Spotted Owl that lives in southern Mexico is the same damn owl that lives in Alaska. In both Alaska and Mexico, these owls are pests. People exterminate them because there are too many. I wonder how a Spotted Owl omelette would taste?

Probably a lot like Baby Seal Crepes. Without the eggy flavor.