What is the difference between a Federal emissions complaint vehicle and a California emissions complaint vehicle? I have an 02 Silverado that has CARB complaint emissions (truck was shipped to HI from CA). What would be different on a Federal complaint emissions Chevy truck?
CARB vs. Federal emissions standards
- Thread starter wirelessF
- Start date
- Status
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
The whole California Emissions (CARB) is a complete racket. Why ANY state is allowed to over ride Federal standards is just wrong.
How so?
I can see it being wrong if they were overriding it by saying your car can emit cyanide and one ounce of smog per mile driven. But in no way is it wrong to increase standards. They're trying to get others to follow them. Are you saying that it's wrong to make the Earth cleaner? Should we use oil to water our plants now?
The whole California Emissions (CARB) is a complete racket. Why ANY state is allowed to over ride Federal standards is just wrong.
How so?
I can see it being wrong if they were overriding it by saying your car can emit cyanide and one ounce of smog per mile driven. But in no way is it wrong to increase standards. They're trying to get others to follow them. Are you saying that it's wrong to make the Earth cleaner? Should we use oil to water our plants now?
a few years ago i think saw a show on TV showing a new car in Cal, i think in L.A. that kicked out cleaner air than the air going in. am i remembering right?
I'll agree with the racket part as I live in California. I'm for clean air, but CARB is out of control like a horse running with the bit in its teeth. I bought a new Chevy Silverado in 2010 at a Chevy dealer in Las Vegas and I had to have a brand new truck smogged when I brought it into California just because I bought it in Nevada. I call that a racket.
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
The whole California Emissions (CARB) is a complete racket. Why ANY state is allowed to over ride Federal standards is just wrong.
According to wikipedia, they are allowed to regulate emissions because they did it BEFORE the feds established guidelines. Their standards are more strict; are you suggesting states can't regulate things "more" than what the federal gov't mandates?
Many other states have adopted CARB, including CT IIRC.
The whole California Emissions (CARB) is a complete racket. Why ANY state is allowed to over ride Federal standards is just wrong.
According to wikipedia, they are allowed to regulate emissions because they did it BEFORE the feds established guidelines. Their standards are more strict; are you suggesting states can't regulate things "more" than what the federal gov't mandates?
Many other states have adopted CARB, including CT IIRC.
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: morris
a few years ago i think saw a show on TV showing a new car in Cal, i think in L.A. that kicked out cleaner air than the air going in. am i remembering right?
Possibly on the worst of worst days for pollution. It's more likely that a PZEV car in say an industrial area of China would put out "cleaner" air but it would probably kill you faster than the outside air, it's got fewer pollutants but I'm guessing they're more dangerous.
a few years ago i think saw a show on TV showing a new car in Cal, i think in L.A. that kicked out cleaner air than the air going in. am i remembering right?
Possibly on the worst of worst days for pollution. It's more likely that a PZEV car in say an industrial area of China would put out "cleaner" air but it would probably kill you faster than the outside air, it's got fewer pollutants but I'm guessing they're more dangerous.
Originally Posted By: morris
a few years ago i think saw a show on TV showing a new car in Cal, i think in L.A. that kicked out cleaner air than the air going in. am i remembering right?
I believe this applies to any light-duty vehicle that is rated SULEV II and/or PZEV, especially when driven in a smog-filled area.
PA is a 'border' CARB state, (borders NY) so we get both the SULEV/CARB versions and the regular LEV/ULEV/BinX versions of vehicles. See lots of Subarus here with PZEV plastered on the rear.
If I can ever afford a brand-new car again it will likely be ULEV II: clean enough to feel green but without the added expense/complexity and potential mpg hit of PZEV.
a few years ago i think saw a show on TV showing a new car in Cal, i think in L.A. that kicked out cleaner air than the air going in. am i remembering right?
I believe this applies to any light-duty vehicle that is rated SULEV II and/or PZEV, especially when driven in a smog-filled area.
PA is a 'border' CARB state, (borders NY) so we get both the SULEV/CARB versions and the regular LEV/ULEV/BinX versions of vehicles. See lots of Subarus here with PZEV plastered on the rear.
If I can ever afford a brand-new car again it will likely be ULEV II: clean enough to feel green but without the added expense/complexity and potential mpg hit of PZEV.
There's the fake PhD Hien T. Tran, author of a PM2.5 study that brought about regulation of diesel particulates.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/16/an...dal/#more-65743
But, CARB hired their own people to verify "Dr" Tran's research was perfectly valid and closed the case.
Research existed to show diesel particulates did not cause increased deaths, but was ignored.
The whole board is appointed, not elected, so it does not represent the public's interests, i.e. a democracy.
, I'm surprised you were allowed to bring a new car into California. I've read a new vehicle has to have 10,000 miles on it, to prevent people from circumventing CARB's regulations. While that's inconvenient for automobiles, it's horrible for motorcycles and scooters, that take a lot longer to accumulate mileage.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/06/16/an...dal/#more-65743
But, CARB hired their own people to verify "Dr" Tran's research was perfectly valid and closed the case.
Research existed to show diesel particulates did not cause increased deaths, but was ignored.
The whole board is appointed, not elected, so it does not represent the public's interests, i.e. a democracy.
, I'm surprised you were allowed to bring a new car into California. I've read a new vehicle has to have 10,000 miles on it, to prevent people from circumventing CARB's regulations. While that's inconvenient for automobiles, it's horrible for motorcycles and scooters, that take a lot longer to accumulate mileage.
Originally Posted By: GMBoy
The whole California Emissions (CARB) is a complete racket. Why ANY state is allowed to over ride Federal standards is just wrong.
States have rights, too. The Federals are way over reaching already.
Note that the catalytic converters on all cars sold in the States are the same for each model no matter where they are delivered. Plus many cars are California CARB compliant even though they may not be labeled unless actually headed there.
The whole California Emissions (CARB) is a complete racket. Why ANY state is allowed to over ride Federal standards is just wrong.
States have rights, too. The Federals are way over reaching already.
Note that the catalytic converters on all cars sold in the States are the same for each model no matter where they are delivered. Plus many cars are California CARB compliant even though they may not be labeled unless actually headed there.
Originally Posted By: SteveSRT8
GMBoy said:
I might be willing to give CA a pass on having tighter specs simply because of their enviromental issues: smog forms there for a reason (or more likely, sticks around for a reason). That said, part of the reason for Federal specifications is get some amount of uniformity. It's no so bad to have CARB vehicles vs fourty-something vehicles (used to be CARB vs 49 state, then it was 45 state--no idea how many CARB states there now) but it'd be horrendous if every state had different laws/requirements.
Originally Posted By: morris
a few years ago i think saw a show on TV showing a new car in Cal, i think in L.A. that kicked out cleaner air than the air going in. am i remembering right?
I found this but IDK if it went beyond prototype.
I've often mused, since NOx are the big issue in the LA basin, and if the "cure" is over-fueling, why a car can't be made that knows if it's somewhere smoggy and switches programming to CARB mode only when necessary. (rhetorical question!)
a few years ago i think saw a show on TV showing a new car in Cal, i think in L.A. that kicked out cleaner air than the air going in. am i remembering right?
I found this but IDK if it went beyond prototype.
I've often mused, since NOx are the big issue in the LA basin, and if the "cure" is over-fueling, why a car can't be made that knows if it's somewhere smoggy and switches programming to CARB mode only when necessary. (rhetorical question!)
I love how the valley where Los Angeles is was referred to by Native Americans several hundred years ago as "The Valley of Smoke".
Naturally stagnant conditions and hydrocarbons from pine trees made this happen.
Gov't regs can sure help, but also can sure be oppressive and silly. CARB is often on the 'wrong' side of the total picture.
Naturally stagnant conditions and hydrocarbons from pine trees made this happen.
Gov't regs can sure help, but also can sure be oppressive and silly. CARB is often on the 'wrong' side of the total picture.
I'd hate it if I have to buy CARB-complaint cats for this truck if the cats need to be replaced.
I know the CARB-complaint versions of the 99-06 Toyota Tundras have three cats vs fed-complaint tundras with two cats.
I know the CARB-complaint versions of the 99-06 Toyota Tundras have three cats vs fed-complaint tundras with two cats.
I worked in Ca for a dozen years and dealt with CARB often and the description of them as a racket is 100% on the money ! Arbitrary and unreasonable describe them well .
You don't need expensive "CARB" parts on a "CARB" vehicle registered outside of CA. SOME help for those who are hooked into buying a CARB car in a state that doesn't require it. Outfits like Rockauto will tell you what non-Carb parts will work on a car "built to" CARB specs. Some parts are HALF price. Bless Florida, NO enviroweenie requirement at all. Just a safety check.
If there was any way to distinguish the water vapor (clearly the greatest "greenhouse gas" by a MASSIVE margin) that comes out the tailpipe of an evil internal combustion engine from the water vapor that evaporates off a pond or puddle...
CARB would somehow find a way to measure and regulate it!
And it would just co$t a whole lot more for everyone involved, excepting the huge bureaucracy, of course.
Cheers!
p.s. At some point in time it stops being reasonable to "improve" the emission regulations from 99.5% to 99.6%: it's called the law of diminishing returns, BTW.
CARB would somehow find a way to measure and regulate it!
And it would just co$t a whole lot more for everyone involved, excepting the huge bureaucracy, of course.
Cheers!
p.s. At some point in time it stops being reasonable to "improve" the emission regulations from 99.5% to 99.6%: it's called the law of diminishing returns, BTW.
Originally Posted By: Norm Olt
If there was any way to distinguish the water vapor (clearly the greatest "greenhouse gas" by a MASSIVE margin) that comes out the tailpipe of an evil internal combustion engine from the water vapor that evaporates off a pond or puddle...
CARB would somehow find a way to measure and regulate it!
And it would just co$t a whole lot more for everyone involved, excepting the huge bureaucracy, of course.
Cheers!
p.s. At some point in time it stops being reasonable to "improve" the emission regulations from 99.5% to 99.6%: it's called the law of diminishing returns, BTW.
GREAT point Norm. Since our newer vehicles practically spew flowers and rainbows already I have always felt it would be far more effective to get the gross polluters under control.
If there was any way to distinguish the water vapor (clearly the greatest "greenhouse gas" by a MASSIVE margin) that comes out the tailpipe of an evil internal combustion engine from the water vapor that evaporates off a pond or puddle...
CARB would somehow find a way to measure and regulate it!
And it would just co$t a whole lot more for everyone involved, excepting the huge bureaucracy, of course.
Cheers!
p.s. At some point in time it stops being reasonable to "improve" the emission regulations from 99.5% to 99.6%: it's called the law of diminishing returns, BTW.
GREAT point Norm. Since our newer vehicles practically spew flowers and rainbows already I have always felt it would be far more effective to get the gross polluters under control.
- Status
