The banner above is an advertisment - if it asks you to download software, please ignore.
Site News - 3/26 M Car Covers (by State of Nine) | 12/12 Make Amazon Pay Saabnet!
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2001 14:24:16 GMT
From: Nutmegger<Nutmeggernopsamunkmail.com>
Subject: Re: UK Fuel Grade


Walt Kienzle says... >The Federal law that started this testing identified 12 regions (or so, I >don't recall the exact number) across the country that are considered high >pollution areas where the vehicles registered in that area need to be tested >or highway funds would be withheld. That is about what I figured, holding onto the funds to get compliance. The Chicago area and the St. Louis area >are the only areas in Illinois that fall into those regions. That amounts >to about 8 counties out of 102 in Illinois covered by the law. Are they equating high pollution areas with population? >MOT is national automobile test for safety and emissions in the UK. I >mentioned that because this thread started with questions about usage in the >UK. OK. >The state legislature in Illinois doesn't really want to deal with any of >this and didn't until they were forced into it by the federal government in >the mid 80's. That is just so typical. >This also holds true for nearly every state outside of New >England except for California. Our state doesn't see too bad about it and California.... Well, they really did not have a choice in the matter. The smog levels are terrible in certain areas. >> The ozone layer has not seen any benefit, the holes in it have increased >too >> much too soon. > >I thought holes in the ozone were because of CFC's (hair spray and the "big >hair" of the 70s probably caused the ozone hole ;-)LOL) Hehe, you forgot about underarm spray! We have to smell like BO for the sake of the environment. >and had nothing to >do with HC (smog), NOx (acid rain), and CO (greenhouse effect, which could >take the place of a missing ozone layer ;-) LOL) that come out of exhaust >pipes. Are you telling me I've been misinformed all these years! :) Like I believe everything I read..... >> What about semis? > >I'm glad you asked, because I forgot to mention another class of exemption. >Semis (assuming they are diesel) and all other Diesel vehicles are >unconditionally exempt from this emissions testing. Which creates a funny >situation. It sure does. I have nothing against them either. I look around in my house and realize that practically everything has been on a semi at one time or another. They move the US. >I know people with old Cadillacs and Oldsmobiles that were >originally equipped with the 5.7L GM diesel (piece of junk) and had them >converted to gasoline (engine replacement) because of all the mechanical >problems. Why would someone go to all that trouble? Just sell it and get a new vehicle with the motor you want. >They neglected to tell anyone about the conversion and maintain >their diesel engine emissions testing exemption. The state sends them their >exemption sticker in the mail without them having to visit the testing >office or do anything extra on their part. Cripes.... I hear all kinds of stories here about how people cheat to get their car to pass emissions. > >> > >> >I also agree with your claim that there has to be a standard. But when >the >> >standard they are using allows others to put out 30 times the amount of >> >hydrocarbons than what they measure from my car, I contend that is not >much >> >of a standard. >> >> How do you know that? > >Very simple. The testing station tests the car's emissions. The testing >equipment quantifies the amount of emissions the car puts out. The readings >get printed out on the testing form and also show what the limits are. This >way, if the car doesn't pass, you know what pollutant level is being >exceeded and that will give you an idea of what to repair. You also see - >as I did - how much cleaner your car is than the standard requires. At the >end of the test, the motorist gets to take the printout home because it acts >as a reciept for having taken the test and also contains the inspection >sticker (which is voided if the car fails to pass). Yes, I have all mine but how do you know what others are? > >> That does not seem right to me, neither does it to go by geography because >cars >> & people move around. > >True, but that brings up another exemption I forgot to mention! If you >certify that the car is more than 100 miles away, or that it is a corporate >vehicle that isn't used in the area where it is registered, you can also >apply for an exemption. Heh, no comment, no wonder why you feel the way you do. >If the car is temporarily out of the area, you have >to specify when it will be back (if at all) so testing can take place then. >You can also file for an exemption if the car is broken. All this is in >keeping with the federal law that requires this testing. The fact that my >car is mostly driven outside of the "high pollution" area is irrelevent to >the requirements of the law. BTW, Nutmegger, where do you live? I'm in Connecticut. ~J~ Remove "Junk" to reply

Return to Main Index
StateOfNine.com
SaabClub.com
Jak Stoll Performance
M Car Covers
Ad Available

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2024 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.
For usage guidelines, see the Mission & Privacy Notice.
[Contact | Site Map | Saabnet.com on Facebook | Saabnet.com on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]