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: Fri, 23 Nov 2001 13:06:17 -0600
From: "Walt Kienzle" <wkienzlenopsam.com>
Subject: Re: UK Fuel Grade


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. There is no equivalent to the MOT here. 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". It doesn't matter that the air is generally cleaner where I live than most "rainforests" (from a hydrocarbon or CO2 standpoint) and that only one hot summer day where some measured threshold is surpassed qualifies us for a high pollution area. If the powers that be truly wanted to reduce pollution, NOx emissions would be tested too. They are not. So apparently, acid rain is an acceptable pollution. As you say, everyone should do their part to reduce pollution, but most people are exempted from these annoying tests that generally don't find anything. That sounds like discrimination to me. To answer your question: "If everyone thought the same way as you did, what would the future hold?" Most likely it would be exactly what we have now. These tests have only been around since 1986 and air pollution levels have been dropping since the 1970s, long before these tests were mandated. 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. 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. 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. The standard should be lowered you say? By law, this standard can't be changed because it was set by the government for the model year when the car was produced. My point is that tests (particularly the ones we have here) don't reduce pollution and are the result of a feel-good, do-nothing philosophy of policymaking. More efficient traffic patterns and reduced use of vehicles are more effective in reducing pollution. And this once again assumes that most of the pollution comes from vehicles, which isn't necessarily true. Walt Kienzle "Nutmegger" <nutmeggernopsameja.com> wrote in message news:3e7970be.0111230711.797da51enopsaming.google.com... > "Walt Kienzle" wrote > > I still feel discriminated against, because the pollution is most likely > > coming from other people stuck in traffic (assuming that most of the > > pollution is coming from passenger cars at all). > > Walt, you shouldn't feel discriminated against, but rather EVERYONE > who drives has to do their part to help the pollution problem in this > world. I mean, the burning of fossil fuels has contributed more than > it's fair share to our ozone problems. > > >Since my cars are kept in > > proper tune and always pass, it is just a waste of time to me. > > There has to be a standard, most people just don't care what their > emissions does to the environment. If everyone thought the same way > as you did, what would the future hold? > > I think of the greater good for all when I go for my testing. > My Saab always passed with flying colors too, so at least I know I am > doing my part.

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]