[rescue] RE: Small schools...

[Patrick Giagnocavo]

On Fri, Jun 22, 2001 at 04:44:13AM -0700, James Lockwood wrote:
> On Thu, 21 Jun 2001, Joshua D. Boyd wrote:
> 
> [offtopic discussion about vehicle emission systems]
> 
> > I don't think that California does that.  I don't know about Philly (which
> > is much closer).
> 
> California bases the minimum required emissions standards that a motor
> vehicle must pass on the date of manufacture.  A vehicle is not in general
> required to pass more stringent standards that those which were in effect
> at the time of manufacture.
> 
> Keep in mind, however, that the limits for the tests are close to an order
> of magnitude higher than the limits imposed on the original manufacturers.
> If your vehicle fails an emissions test (even in California), it is either
> really out of whack or has been modified.

Keep in mind, too, that the purpose of e-testing (emissions tests where you
have to get a sticker on your windshield) have very little to do with
concern for the environment and a lot to do with YARG (yet another revenue
generator) for the local gov't.  Plus it lets local politicos have another
source of easy jobs that they can hand out to constituents or special
interest groups.  

Of course, the politico's own late model cars -- are exempt from etesting.

By their own admission, for every 10 etests only one car will fail.  So if
the etest is $50 per, they are taxing us $500 to catch ONE violator.  And
the problem still isn't solved at that point.

./patrick