Attention PA Drivers

[Black and Blue Landscaper]

PA wants to follow in California's foot steps and require stricter laws on emissions. I say nay. It's not like we have a crap load of cars here most of this state is populated by people on buggies. WTF?

"The cost of the vehicle might go up, but it will be benefical at the gas pump." BullSh*t!

"We would have to make the cars smaller, with less horsepower. The more expensive cars would be that much harder to sell." Exactly

I understand highly populated states should work on this, but we aint one of them. The most of the polution would be from the major cities or someone from Jersey. And as far as cost. I find it interested that there are no mentions as to what exactly mechanics would have to do or what might be repaired or added. Again i think its a crock. If they are worried about localized area, major cities and what not then just have the locals deal with it, but dont make everyone pay for it. Bast*rds.

New Emission Law

[Black and Blue Landscaper]

P.S. those quotes were paraphrased

[Guest YellowJacket894]

Can't dealers in California, etc., just select an Emissions Override option on certain vehicles? (I think they can on, say, a Colorado with an I-5.)

[Hudson]

Can't dealers in California, etc., just select an Emissions Override option on certain vehicles? (I think they can on, say, a Colorado with an I-5.)

No. California, New York, Massachusetts, and the rest of these states cannot "select an Emissions Overide option." All vehicles sold to the public in these states must have "California emissions."

As for Pennsylvania...it IS one of the more populous states in the country. The current regulations will not raise the price of a new car. I think these regulations should be standard across all 50 states and if a few more states get off their rears and agree to the California standards, perhaps the federal government will wake up.

[Sixty8panther]

I can't stand the Mass Emissions law!

It's NOT about emissions it's about economic descrimination.

Well Mr. Jones, your 1985 Pontiac Grand Am seems like it's

still a fine car btu you'll have to spend $1200 to hjave it

meet emissions, otherwise you can buy a new(er) car....

[Black and Blue Landscaper]

I can't stand the Mass Emissions law!

It's NOT about emissions it's about economic descrimination.

Well Mr. Jones, your 1985 Pontiac Grand Am seems like it's

still a fine car btu you'll have to spend $1200 to hjave it

meet emissions, otherwise you can buy a new(er) car....

195733[/snapback]

Exactly!

Edited September 20, 2006 by Black and Blue Landscaper

[Hudson]

Exactly!

But apparently you haven't read enough about PENNSYLVANIA's law. They want to dumb down or eliminate the emissions testing altogether in PA. The new law would only require the purchase of a new vehicle with CA emissions. After that, there's the possibility of NO emissions testing ever. The statement was that most cars pass now and with improved emissions requirements of new cars, even MORE would pass...thus making emissions testing expensive and redundant.

Currently in PA, the law states that you need to put $400 (I believe that's the limit) into fixing the emissions system before you can get an exemption. And most of the state has NO emissions testing at the moment.

Edited September 20, 2006 by Hudson

[Drew Dowdell]

Only Philadelphia County and Allegheny County <Pittsburgh> have emissions testing.

[Camino LS6]

Only Philadelphia County and Allegheny County <Pittsburgh> have emissions testing.

195783[/snapback]

Not correct.

Testing is required around 3 major metro areas: Philadelphia,Pittsburgh, and Harrisburg. The testing is done not only in those cities, but in surrounding counties.

For example, I am required to have my cars tested here in Chester County. I am near, but not in, Philadelphia County.

[Drew Dowdell]

Not correct.

Testing is required around 3 major metro areas: Philadelphia,Pittsburgh, and Harrisburg. The testing is done not only in those cities, but in surrounding counties.

For example, I am required to have my cars tested here in Chester County. I am near, but not in, Philadelphia County.

195789[/snapback]

I must admit I don't know what happens on the eastern side of the state, but out my way, only Allegheny has testing.

[Camino LS6]

The history of this testing in PA is one of mis-management, incompetence, half-measures, and expensive mandates which are then repealed after the fact. Any new proposals on this front promise to be just as ill-advised and detrimental. Adopting any of California's standards and practices is a fool's errand and shows pure laziness on the part of the PA legislature. Every state is different and a system thoughtfully crafted to match the needs and mindset of Pensylvanians is what's required, not the simple importation of a set of regulations from another locale.

[Camino LS6]

After reading the story the link leads to, I have concluded that this is not only bad for PA, but also for the automakers and the nation. Terrible idea. I hate California's influence on the rest of us.

[lakefire]

Move to south carolina. We don't even have inspections. Run your truck w/ straight exhaust, no cat. converters.

[Hudson]

After reading the story the link leads to, I have concluded that this is not only bad for PA, but also for the automakers and the nation. Terrible idea. I hate California's influence on the rest of us.

Why is this bad? You're against cleaner air?

And Pennsylvania isn't adopting everything California does. They're actually only planning to get the cars and possibly doing away with the testing altogether. I like that idea: cleaner new cars for no additional cost and less money out of my pocket for annual inspections. What could be so bad?

[loki]

here in missouri, no emissions, but atleast inspections every 2 years... every year is wasteful for the vast, vast majority, other than for beaters that the person doesn't pay attention to.

If this happened, wouldn't things like the benz bluetec, not be here? while this cali-everyone law would make "cleaner" cars and push the manufacturers harder to be "greener"... it would make some cars more more expensive, and possibly kill competition, if a company couldn't meet regs for the big $ making cars/trucks/suvs

[76ChevyTrucker]

Here in Bama, we don't have emissions testing, which blew a friend of mine away that moved from Louisianna, which does have emissions testing.

[ocnblu]

We have emissions testing here in Lancaster County.

Too bad they don't require emissions testing on Amish horses. Every time they raise their tail... pee yew

[mightymouse]

Really sorry, sincerely, about that bull&#036;h&#33;.... In MI, the state doesn't have money to test offending cars, so it' a free for all. Any engine in any car! No cats needed, no roadworthiness inspections.

Good and bad- you wouldn't believe some of the &#036;h&#33;boxes on the road in the Detroit area!

I'm looking for a Big Block and plan 3" exhaust. I like Michigan.

Edited September 21, 2006 by mightymouse

[Robert Hall]

We have emissions testing (every 2 years) here in Denver, though I don't think it's uniform across all of Colorado. I have no problem with adopting the California standards on new cars....cleaner air is healthier and a good thing!! (obviously)

As far as old cars go, you keep them maintained, it shouldn't be a problem---my '87 Mustang GT passes emissions inspections every 2 years (still has the original catalytic converters)...

Edited September 21, 2006 by moltar

[Satty]

here in missouri, no emissions, but atleast inspections every 2 years...  every year is wasteful for the vast, vast majority, other than for beaters that the person doesn't pay attention to. 

195927[/snapback]

According to the DOR website, StL and KC require emissions testing, all the more reason for me to stay around Springgy. I agree the 2 year registration is far better (in theory*) than one year.

*I say in theory because I've yet to have a car more than 13 months so I cannot say from personal experience that its better.

[the_yellow_dart]

Ontario introduced this new "Drive Clean" program... then as soon as they got enough clunkers off the road, and brought enough income to the shops in Ontario, it got cancelled.

[Sixty8panther]

I hate California's influence on the rest of us.

195825[/snapback]

So very true.

[Hudson]

I hate California's influence on the rest of us.

So very true.

Yes...cleaning the air is just contaminating our way of life.

[daves87rs]

Really sorry, sincerely, about that bull&#036;h&#33;.... In MI, the state doesn't have money to test offending cars, so it' a free for all. Any engine in any car! No cats needed, no roadworthiness inspections.

Good and bad- you wouldn't believe some of the &#036;h&#33;boxes on the road in the Detroit area!

I'm looking for a Big Block and plan 3" exhaust.  I like Michigan.

196082[/snapback]

Yeah, no joke.

I have a person in my complex with a old crown vic, and that thing smokes like

crazy...and it has been smoking for months!

[lakefire]

Yes...cleaning the air is just contaminating our way of life.

196223[/snapback]

If they want cleaner air then they shoudl have mandatory nuclear power plants.

[Camino LS6]

Why is this bad? You're against cleaner air?

And Pennsylvania isn't adopting everything California does. They're actually only planning to get the cars and possibly doing away with the testing altogether. I like that idea: cleaner new cars for no additional cost and less money out of my pocket for annual inspections. What could be so bad?

195833[/snapback]

Follow the link and read the entire article and maybe you'll be able to divine my objections. I'm not against cleaner air, just draconian regulations adopted intact from a state I don't live in which has a historically heavy-handed approach regarding automobiles. I want my legislature to get up off their lazy backsides and craft their own regulations instead of signing-on to whatever standards CA imposes from here on in instead of taking on the industrial polluters in this state who currently get a free ride on the backs of the auto industry.

They are taking the easy way out without considering the implications (as usual).

[Camino LS6]

Yes...cleaning the air is just contaminating our way of life.

196223[/snapback]

No, California is contaminating my way of life.

If I wanted to live by their rules, I'd move there.

[Croc]

Well CA kinda has to have strict emissions controls since the topography (especially in and around LA) is such that air comes in and is dumped there with no way of really dissipating. Smog comes in (often from Mexico or Southeast Asia via windcurrents) and is just dumped on LA, which is a big basin. Since smog sinks and not rises, getting it out is difficult. Hence, CA wants to add as little smog to the air as possible since it just sits there and sits there.

Since the 1970s when LA air was at its worst, air quality has improved dramatically, no doubt a result of the drastic emmisions controls.

I personally have no problem with the PA legislation since I see nothing against cleaner air. Also, the legislation really has no effect on the people, except saving them money from eliminating emmisions inspections. I don't think the CA emmissions law will survive as it is a bit ridiculous...but even if it does, so what? Prices are going to go up by 3k in about 5 years anyway so why not?

Sorry, but clean air is definitely an issue with me, though I think PA should ALSO impose restrictions on their industry. Going for cars and not the industry is stupid and hypocritical.

[Camino LS6]

PA doesn't have CA's smog problem.

PA should deal with this independently and not bind itself to CA lawmaking.

Our only real problem areas are the inner cites, and those would be better solved by decent public transportation among other things.

[Croc]

PA doesn't have CA's smog problem.

PA should deal with this independently and not bind itself to CA lawmaking.

Our only real problem areas are the inner cites, and those would be better solved by decent public transportation among other things.

196341[/snapback]

PA has a smog problem though, as the article stated that it is on track to lose Federal highway dollars due to poor air quality.

I guess I just don't understand why you are so against it since it will not affect you negatively?

[Camino LS6]

PA has a smog problem though, as the article stated that it is on track to lose Federal highway dollars due to poor air quality.

I guess I just don't understand why you are so against it since it will not affect you negatively?

196345[/snapback]

Read the article more closely,Croc and you'll see what has me angry about it.

Additionally, I would oppose slapping any legislation from another state onto our books without it being tailored to PA. Especially when it would connect us permanently to that state's future standards. This would forever tie us to whatever silliness C.A.R.B. comes up with in the future. No thanks.

[Croc]

I read it twice, and I'm not seeing it. If you can sign legislation to stick with CA, legislation can later be amended/repealed if there is a problem with it.

The only negative impact I saw was that prices may go up.

The thing about towing less is BS and hauling fewer people is BS too. They said the same thing in the 1970s and interior packaging was just improved. Lighter materials will be used, and even if hp goes down a little, the lighter materials will more than make up for any "performance loss." So those arguments I don't buy.

What else am I missing?

[Black and Blue Landscaper]

guys i am with camino on this one

and as far as cleaner air, maybe just maybe pollution will get humans off their lazy butts about moving foward as far as proggress into the future. then gimme some smog and such. people need to &#036;h&#33; or get off the pot not just try to stay in the same ol rut cuz it is comfortable.

stupid humans...

[Cory Wolfe]

Move to south carolina.  We don't even have inspections.  Run your truck w/ straight exhaust, no cat. converters.

195826[/snapback]

Sounds... Smelly, but intriguing in a way. I hate having yearly inspections.

As for the Emissions law, from what Hudson has said, I don't really see a problem with it.

[Hudson]

...I want my legislature to get up off their lazy backsides and craft their own regulations instead of signing-on to whatever standards CA imposes from here on in instead of taking on the industrial polluters in this state who currently get a free ride on the backs of the auto industry.

They are taking the easy way out without considering the implications (as usual).

They can't. The federal government allows only TWO sets of emissions regulations: Federal and California. If each state had their own, do you have any idea how expensive that would be to produce vehicles?

And the implications seem like a positive to me.

Edited September 22, 2006 by Hudson

[Robert Hall]

They can't. The federal government allows only TWO sets of emissions regulations: Federal and California. If each state had their own, do you have any idea how expensive that would be to produce vehicles?

And the implications seem like a positive to me.

196599[/snapback]

It would make more sense (and easier and cheaper for the automakers) if the US could standardize on a single, uniform set of regulations for all states...

[Camino LS6]

They can't. The federal government allows only TWO sets of emissions regulations: Federal and California. If each state had their own, do you have any idea how expensive that would be to produce vehicles?

And the implications seem like a positive to me.

196599[/snapback]

They can't affect auto manufacturers but they can draft legislation to address air quality in the state and design their own emissions testing program. They can also address other sources of pollution in the state. As I said before they are simply lazy.

[Hudson]

They can't affect auto manufacturers but they can draft legislation to address air quality in the state and design their own emissions testing program. They can also address other sources of pollution in the state. As I said before they are simply lazy.

They did design their own testing program...three times. And they absolutely should focus on other sources, but it's not laziness as much as it is the fear of seeming "unfriendly" to business. If the Pennsylvania legislature decided to clean up factories in the Commonwealth, new companies would think twice about relocating to Pennsylvania. But people aren't going to move out if they change the car emissions standards or testing.

[Camino LS6]

They did design their own testing program...three times. And they absolutely should focus on other sources, but it's not laziness as much as it is the fear of seeming "unfriendly" to business. If the Pennsylvania legislature decided to clean up factories in the Commonwealth, new companies would think twice about relocating to Pennsylvania. But people aren't going to move out if they change the car emissions standards or testing.

196620[/snapback]

OK, then they are spineless rather than just lazy. Once again the automobile is a scapegoat. I'm so sick of people f-ing with my "pursuit of happiness"

I may just leave this state, especially if our "leaders" continue to use California as a template. I won't live in "California East" any more than I would live in the original. Been there, might visit again, will never live there under any circumstances.

[Hudson]

I honestly don't see the problem.

[Camino LS6]

I see this as ceding our decision-making to C.A.R.B. and once we do that, it's over.

The issue will never be re-visited and whatever CA does from now on we will be stuck with. Once regulations are in place, they are rarely ever lifted. I don't trust PA government to look after my interests and I certainly don't trust CA to do so.

This is just one more reason that my home state feels less like home, and one more reason to look elsewhere.

[Camino LS6]

Quote from article:

But if California prevails in a pending legal fight with automakers over proposed reductions in greenhouse gases for 2009 models, that change automatically would be imposed in Pennsylvania.

Those standards are expected to increase new-vehicle prices, although officials disagree about how much, and automakers say the greenhouse-gas standard would also force them to produce smaller cars with less horsepower

The above is what I most object to.

[Camino LS6]

I just called my representative to register my feelings on this idea.

If you live here, I suggest you do the same.

[Hudson]

I just called my representative to register my feelings on this idea.

If you live here, I suggest you do the same.

Sounds like a plan. I would register a "yea" if I did. Edited September 22, 2006 by Hudson

[CARBIZ]

Guys, guys, the world has not come to an end! Drop by Mexico City or Sao Paulo if you want to visit the future! Pennsylvania may not SEEM to have a problem with air pollution, but that is only masked by the fact that the prevailing winds blow it away into EVERYBODY ELSE'S BACK YARD!

Standing by a street corner on relatively windless days in Sao Paulo and it would make you gag! Yet more than half the people in that city use transit and they still have a huge problem.

Travel to any Latin American country where they have absolutely NO laws about safety, emissions or the condition of the vehicle and you will see what total freedom from government regulation will bring you.

Or have you never taken a taxi in a small town anywhere south of the Mexican border?

Having mandatory emission tests is the lesser of two evils, trust me. Would you rather air pollution get so bad that there is a general public outrcry to ban vehicular traffic down town, as has happened in some European cities?

[Camino LS6]

Guys, guys, the world has not come to an end!  Drop by Mexico City or Sao Paulo if you want to visit the future!  Pennsylvania may not SEEM to have a problem with air pollution, but that is only masked by the fact that the prevailing winds blow it away into EVERYBODY ELSE'S BACK YARD! 

  Standing by a street corner on relatively windless days in Sao Paulo and it would make you gag!  Yet more than half the people in that city use transit and they still have a huge problem.

  Travel to any Latin American country where they have absolutely NO laws about safety, emissions or the condition of the vehicle and you will see what total freedom from government regulation will bring you.

Or have you never taken a taxi in a small town anywhere south of the Mexican border?

  Having mandatory emission tests is the lesser of two evils, trust me.  Would you rather air pollution get so bad that there is a general public outrcry to ban vehicular traffic down town, as has happened in some European cities?

196681[/snapback]

I am not suggesting anything like that. We currently have emissions testing and I'm not objecting to that. I am opposing hitching our wagon to California's legislative whims.

[Black and Blue Landscaper]

And for me it becomes a monitary issue. I have enough expensenses and if they decided to make it even harder for me to pass emissions and inspection i would go to jail. it is not the end of september and my inspection was due in may...i do not need the government to tell me to spend more money, but they wont tell companies to raise wages with the increase of minimum wage. if i make 8 bucks an hour and minimum wage goes from 5 to 6 dollars an hour i do not see that pay increase, although minimum wage reflects the cost of living. If the government wants to make it more expensive to live here they should make it more affordable...if you can follow that.

And i dont care who you are anyone and everyone can make sense of that.

[Hudson]

And for me it becomes a monitary issue.  I have enough expensenses and if they decided to make it even harder for me to pass emissions and inspection i would go to jail.  it is not the end of september and my inspection was due in may...i do not need the government to tell me to spend more money, but they wont tell companies to raise wages with the increase of minimum wage.  if i make 8 bucks an hour and minimum wage goes from 5 to 6 dollars an hour i do not see that pay increase, although minimum wage reflects the cost of living.  If the government wants to make it more expensive to live here they should make it more affordable...if you can follow that.

And i dont care who you are anyone and everyone can make sense of that.

Has anyone read the proposed law? One amendment to the proposition is the ELIMINATE emissions testing in Pennsylvania.

[Camino LS6]

It's all about money - not clean air.

[Hudson]

It's definitely about money....federal money for highways. Pennsylvania has regions that were designated as being polluted and the commonwealth had to do something. They decided to put in emissions testing. A decade later, they've decided to make new cars cleaner in place of the emissions testing that, apparently, wasn't doing much good.

I see this as less money out of my pocket...which is a good thing.