Date: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 23:33:14 -0600
From: "Walt Kienzle" <wkienzlenopsam.com>
Subject: Re: UK Fuel Grade


Replies are in the body of the message below. "Nutmegger" <Nutmeggernopsamunkmail.com> wrote in message news:gUDL7.35558$xS6.60204nopsamnewsranger.com... > Walt Kienzle says... > > > >Thank you, but I still feel discriminated against, since 90% of the rest of > >Illinois, where I live, do not need to subject their vehicles to this > >emissions test, or any other type of test. > > Why is that? 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. 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. > > >There is no equivalent to the MOT here. > > I'm not familiar with MOT, what is it. In our state every vehicle is subject to > emissions testing unless it is over 20 years old and then it gets a waiver. 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. > > >For pollution, the same pretty much holds true for the rest of > >the US, because the test is only for something like 12 regions that are > >considered "high pollution areas". > > That is just plain stupid. The state legislators should know better. 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. This also holds true for nearly every state outside of New England except for California. [snip] > >These tests have only > >been around since 1986 and air pollution levels have been dropping since the > >1970s, long before these tests were mandated. > > 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) 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. > > Cars more than 20 years old > >(the most polluting models) are exempt, cars less than 4 years old are > >exempt, and 95% of the US is exempt by geography. > > What is with this geography thing? I never realized that before, they go by the > amount of people per square mile or something? > It should just be federal, instead of the screwed up system they have now. Explained above. The 12 regions are where the EPA determined that there is/was too much pollution. And that is the federal standard. That is probably why it is all screwed up. > > >Of all the cars in the > >US, nearly everyone is exempt and are free to run their cars spewing any > >level of pollution they want. > > 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. 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. 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. > > > >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). > 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. 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? Walt Kienzle 1991 9000T

Return to Main Index

The content on this site may not be republished without permission. Copyright © 1988-2018 - The Saab Network - saabnet.com.
For usage guidelines, see the Saabnet.com Mission and Purpose Page.
[Contact | Site Map | Saabnet.com on Facebook | Saabnet.com on Twitter | Shop Amazon via TSN | Site Donations]