Shpuld be announced next week and move is stated to target 2027-2032 vehicles with strict regulations with the continued push by the government for EV. Per WSJ.
EPA to Propose Tougher Tailpipe-Emissions Standards
- Thread starter linuxology
- Start date
- Status
No specifics were given. Look for the announcement next week.
The government has shown it doesn't care if the consumer pays more for their regulations.
And where is the "no spin" cost/benefit analysis for all the changes since the 90s.
- Joined
- Mar 10, 2021
- Messages
- 151
None of this is being done for the good of the planet.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2022
- Messages
- 768
Nah.....those unicorn emissions free EVs will save us all. Just plug it into the magical outlet in the garage every night and hope it doesn't burn your house down...I mean you'll get 300 miles of emission free driving. You can even idle the car in the garage.
Sunshine and
Sunshine and
We are so far into the region of diminishing marginal returns for the costs of incremental automotive emissions decreases...but as someone stated, it is '..not for the planet...'
We are Borg. You will be assimilated.
- Joined
- Mar 19, 2022
- Messages
- 768
None of it is for the planet.
We past the tipping point for real economy about 25 years ago....maybe even longer.
We are now into tin cans and plastic transmissions.
My 1982 VW 1.7 gas Jetta would consistently get 38mpg. Bosch Jetronic mechanical fuel injection, I loved it. That was 41 years ago....how far have we come?
We past the tipping point for real economy about 25 years ago....maybe even longer.
We are now into tin cans and plastic transmissions.
My 1982 VW 1.7 gas Jetta would consistently get 38mpg. Bosch Jetronic mechanical fuel injection, I loved it. That was 41 years ago....how far have we come?
All cars from the past 25 years are essentially zero-emitting already
The purpose isn't to clean the air but to disenfranchise. Anyone with an IQ above room temperature who expends 1-2 minutes analyzing the consequences of this legislation will realize this. I suspect the concern is moot, though, because of future trends in the devolution of political power.
I wonder what this will mean?
Will everything have to be SULEV, or we're going straight to PZEV across the board?
To all the bellyaching and boomer bitching I see further up the thread, I assume you were all complaining when
Time stops for no one, and clean air is important
I do agree with the concerns of planned obsolescence, at least in my part of the country, cars rust out before they expire emissions wise
I want to track down a shop that still has a gas analyzer/rolling road setup, I'm curious how some of my vehicles are doing emissions wise, compared to the standards when they were new
NY deleted the dynamometer/gas analyzer part of the inspection in 2011, everything pre 1996 gets a visual emissions and safety
Will everything have to be SULEV, or we're going straight to PZEV across the board?
To all the bellyaching and boomer bitching I see further up the thread, I assume you were all complaining when
- The PCV valve came into use in in 1961
- The EVAP canisters of 1971
- The catalytic converter/HEI setups of 1974
- The OBD setups of 1988 (OBD2 in 1996)
Time stops for no one, and clean air is important
I do agree with the concerns of planned obsolescence, at least in my part of the country, cars rust out before they expire emissions wise
I want to track down a shop that still has a gas analyzer/rolling road setup, I'm curious how some of my vehicles are doing emissions wise, compared to the standards when they were new
NY deleted the dynamometer/gas analyzer part of the inspection in 2011, everything pre 1996 gets a visual emissions and safety
Tack another $10K on the price of a new car. One more step toward the elimination of private transportation.
Even prior to that. My 1984 Cavalier has a check engine light capable of blinking out codes, and an ALCL data stream capable of sending sensor readings.
Every emissions testing station in Northern Virginia still has one (they are private shops). I've read that they get used when a vehicle fails the roadside emissions test (Virginia DEQ is probably aware of all the ways to cheat an OBD-II only test--the emissions testing systems have cameras to take pictures of both the operator AND vehicle under test as well), and I've been told that the system will sometimes have them do a dyno test on a vehicle in addition to the OBD-II test.
If cars were running solely on straight ethanol E100, there would still be some pollution, but the emissions would be significantly reduced compared to gasoline-powered vehicles. Ethanol is a renewable fuel that can be produced from various sources such as corn, sugarcane, and other agricultural products, and it has lower emissions of harmful pollutants such as carbon monoxide, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds than gasoline.
However, catalytic converters would still be necessary to further reduce emissions of pollutants such as nitrogen oxides (NOx). NOx is a harmful pollutant that contributes to smog and acid rain, and it is produced when the temperature inside the engine exceeds 2500 degrees Fahrenheit. Catalytic converters help to reduce NOx emissions by converting the NOx to nitrogen and oxygen gases that are harmless to the environment.
Therefore, even if cars were running on straight ethanol E100, catalytic converters would still be necessary to reduce NOx emissions and meet the emissions standards set by regulatory agencies. However, the use of E100 as a fuel would significantly reduce the overall emissions of harmful pollutants from cars.
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
