RE: [Chrysler300] Gas Chemistry

[<smopar@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

 Federal law requires California to achieve healthful air quality by 2010.  That is what drives the ARB.  MTBE was a result of a federal oxygenate requirement for gasoline.  ARB has petitioned the EPA repeatedly to drop the oxygenate requirement because we don't need it in our gasoline since ARB data shows it doesn't help.  Thank the midwest ethanol contingent and their political clout for the waiver being denied multiple times.  And MTBE would not have been the groundwater problem that it became if fueling station gasoline tanks didn't leak.  As for electric cars, they were a course that was pursued as a small requirement in the late 90's as a result of GM's Impact, which many thought was a good vehicle.  But batteries didn't develop as was hoped, so the requirement was basically substituted with one for near zero emission vehicles.  These are called PZEVs (partial zero emission vehicles).  Their emissions are the same as would be discharged from a natural gas powerplant in California to recharge an electric vehicle, or virtually zero emissions.  They also have zero gasoline evaporative emissions.  Most importantly, they have a 15yr/150,000 mile warranty such that anything that turns on the check engine light is fixed by the manufacturer at no charge.  To me, that is a great achievement.  There are many of these cars on dealers lots today, such as Dodge Stratus, Ford Focus, Toyota Camry, Honda Accord and many more models.  By 2010, about 40% of the California fleet will be PZEVs.  You can't get these cars in any other state that hasn't adopted the California program.  And they are priced normally.  All the easy solutions to cleaning up the air are long gone, and many people in the more populated areas of the state do still have chronic health problems linked to air pollution.  Maybe you are healthy, but many are not.  Be thankful.  One of the largest sources of smog forming emissions is still the heavy duty trucks and busses out there.  Cleaning up diesel emissions is really tough, but substantial progress is being made such that really large emission reductions will be achieved with the ARB's new 2007 and 2010 standards for those vehicles.  Stationary sources are much less of the total emissions and are already controlled stringently.  Measures are decided based on cost-effectiveness as a major criterion.  At this time, there are no further measures planned on lowering emissions for the new light duty vehicle fleet because they are so clean.  ARB also developed On-Board Diagnostic (OBD)systems to help repair new cars and their electronics and to replace the old smog check test for 1996 and newer vehicles.  ARB testing shows it is a superior system to the old dyno test for catching emission problems and only requires connecting a scan tool to evaluate the system.  Credit the Bureau of Automotive Repair and the service station industry for thwarting our efforts to replace the current dyno test with a really cheap check of the OBD system for 1996 and newer cars.  In time, we hopefully will prevail.  At least newer cars less than 6 years old will now be exempt from smog check because they just don't fail in that timeframe.  Both organizations fought that one hard and lost.  
I personally am grateful that there is still an exemption for all cars 1975 and older in California since I have so many cars in the 1957-1973 period.  Some states still require these older cars to continue to go through a smog check type program indefinitely.  The rolling exemption was eliminated because even though the older cars are driven relatively less and collector cars hardly at all, there are enough of them around that pollute greatly compared to a new car, even when operating as designed.  For example, NOx (nitrogen oxide) emissions from a new PZEV are .02 grams/mile.  When I tested my 1970 Chrysler at Chrysler's emission test facility where I worked over 20 years ago, it registered 7.0 grams/mile NOx on the same test.  If you do the math, 350 new PZEVs would be needed to put out the same emissions as my 1970 Chrysler, which was operating normally (based on in use data from older cars, my 1970 Chrysler was typical).  For hydrocarbons, the new PZEVs put out .01 grams/mile HC while my 1970 Chrysler put out 5.0 grams/mile.  Thus it takes 500 PZEVs to put out the same amount of HC as my 1970 Chrysler from a cold start.  The point is that an emission inventory was done that showed despite the fewer miles driven by older cars, in total they put out a large chunk of emissions compared to other possible emission reduction measures.  I do not believe cars older than 1975 will ever be brought back into smog check in California because of the influence of the collector car hobbyists, so I do believe it is wise to keep up the pressure from a collector standpoint.  I still think the rolling exemption made sense since as the collector cars get older, they really don't contribute much - it is the junkers that just keep going in California even at 30 years old that are the root cause of the old car problem.  I was hoping someone from the collector car lobby would have introduced a measure that exempted collector cars, but I guess it is too hard to identify them reliably for such a measure to work.
I believe it has been essential to get the new vehicles down to near zero emissions to help get us closer to attainment - that way a lot less pressure is put on our collector cars than otherwise would be the case, and for the last 24 years I have been doing that at CARB.  There are other automotive enthusiasts at CARB, even my boss (he has a 1957 fuel injection Corvette).  There is a lot of misinformation out there and a lot of anger, which is regrettable.  Not everything CARB does will succeed, but it does keep trying and it has been successful in cleaning up the air, which is particularly noticeable in the metropolitan areas where I live (it may not be noticed as much in Danville).  Electric cars didn't work, but the newer hybrids coming are an outgrowth of that technology and fuel cells powered by hydrogen in the future will also rely on the same basic electric vehicle architecture.  And PZEVs are a real buy in my opinion, given the warranty.  
ARB has pressures on it by the federal government and environmentalists, as well as the public.  ARB decisions are made in open forums in a deliberative process.  It is my belief that ARB Board members are very capable and make decisions in the interest of public health and do everthing possible to consider the interests of the collector car hobbyists as well.  Everything is a balance.  The bottom line, we are not yet achieving healthful air quality as judged by the EPA, and are forced to continue to develop clean air measures that are cost-effective.  And we have a long way to go, unfortunately, to achieve that standard.   Public opinion in every poll I have seen in California says air quality is still not good enough, and in a democracy, that is what gets attention.  And if you think the agency just wants to prolong itself, most of the salaries for staff are about 30% below the average for similar classifications in private industry.  Most stay there because they believe they are making a positve difference.  It is the reason I stay there.  And I love the old car hobby as much as any of you.  
Steve Albu


---- Bob Jasinski <rpjasin@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: 
> 
> Steve and list,
> 
> I live in California I see Ray's post as being very germane to the interests of this board. You've really struck a nerve here, and as a California car hobbyist I can readily tell you I support Ray's position.  Yes, the air is cleaner and that is a very good thing, but if it was left up to CARB and the Sierra Club, we would all be driving electric cars and bicycles, and living in high density apartments.  CARB is a government bureaucracy that must constantly find new ways to generate revenue for itself by forcing the liberal environmentalist agenda down our throats, whether it makes sense or not.
> 
> Take a look at the MTBE scandal.  CARB, with the full support of the Sierra Club, pushed through the requirement for adding MTBE to California gas while the conservatives, (yes there are some in CA) supported by experts, (Dr. Bill Wattinberg for one) advised against it, citing studies done in other states on MTBE negative effects.  The tree huggers knew better of course, and MTBE became a requirement, polluting the groundwater as a result.  It has now been removed from the gas, now that "they" know better.
> 
> California smog laws are draconian and getting worse. What happened to our promised-by-law 25 year rolling exception for older cars that would have exempted them from smog testing?  Well, it was changed to a 30 year exemption, and just 3 months ago, under pressure from CARB and the Sierra Club, the 30 year rolling exemption was eliminated entirely!  From now on, any car built from 1976 on will have to be smogged, forever, period! No exceptions. Even if you drive the car 10 miles a year! The worst part of it, is that you can never do any modifications to the engine of the car ever. No non-stock carburetor changes, air cleaners, nothing. It must stay stock, forever.
> 
> Case in point.  I owned a very low mileage 1979 MGB that I enjoyed immensely, and I was looking forward to the day that I could get rid of the crappy factory Zenith carb that is difficult to keep in tune, and inadequate for the demands of the engine.  I was planning on installing the Weber upgrade kit that included a new intake manifold, Weber carb and header pipe.  I was anxious to get more reliability, better mileage, and more performance.  That has all changed now because of CARB and the Sierra Club pressure to eliminate the rolling 30 year exemption. Oh, and guess what...I only drove the car about 1,000 miles a year.  I'm sure my little MGB was a major contributor to global warming, and the we know whats-best-for-everyone mentality of the Sierra club members are happy that my MGB will no longer be polluting California's air, because I sold it on eBay to a collector in St. Louis.  One other point...my last smog test with the MGB was a CARB Dyno required test, not the static tests it always managed to pass before, and the price doubled to $90 as well.
> 
> This topic is of importance to this list.  It is important because if we as car collectors are not vigilant, and if CARB, the Sierra Club, and other tree huggers have their way, our right to drive our 300s freely as we please will be taken away and our cars turned into static displays, being trailered to car shows.
> 
> The car collector has NO friends within CARB and the Sierra Club.  As far as I'm concerned, they are the enemy and the sooner we all realize it, the better off we will be.
> 
> Bob Jasinski
> Danville, CA (Near the Blackhawk museum, with many beautiful static car displays) 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> To send a message to this group, send an email to:
> Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> 
> For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm 
> Yahoo! Groups Links
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Help save the life of a child.  Support St. Jude Children's Research Hospital's
'Thanks & Giving.'
http://us.click.yahoo.com/6iY7fA/5WnJAA/Y3ZIAA/8LmulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

To send a message to this group, send an email to:
Chrysler300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

For list server instructions, go to http://www.chrysler300club.com/yahoolist/inst.htm 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Chrysler300/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    Chrysler300-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/