> I will never believe that so very few ``special`` cars can
> release so much polutants that it make a slight difference in your air quality
> problems.
Absolutely. And those day dreaming bureaucrats have already given saction to
those special cars.
Called historics and streetrods and such, and you're exempt. Only if you are
determined to make
your special car a non special daily beater do you fall in the grouping of all
the other daily
beaters. And go through the same hoops as they.
> Politicians, governments and those so call experts making those
> stupid regulations all have an easy pray (older/special interest cars) and are
> then able to show their bureaucrats boss that they have acheived something.
Give me a break! There is no government group out there preying on special
interest
cars. There's a few fringe civilian groups, and various individuals, but no
government
group is doing it. This is a load of garbage, right up there beside animal
rights
trash and the great kiddi porn kidnaping of the 80's.
> The air polution problem will not be resolved or reduced in scope by imposing
> cars 15 years and older to be clean.(emission wise).
Targeting cars specifically that way would not. That isn't happening though.
Cars at large are being targeting. There's nothing out there saying old cars
have to be clean and new ones don't. They all are required to be cleanish. In
fact,
old ones are *not* required to be as clean as new ones. The standards are
much, much
lower for older cars then they are for newer cars. And often those older
special
cars are allowed to not be clean at all! Provided they are treated as special
cars,
and not daily drivers.
>The day those Governments
> really attack the problems ( large factories, steel mills, coal generating
> plants and the like) would most certainly have more direct impact that getting
> rid of all 15 years and older cars on the road.
You mean like New Source Performance Standards? Nox RACT on power plants?
Prevention of
Serious Degredation demonstrations?
> But these corporation are
> almost untouchable due to the fact that they are contributors to some election
> funds somewhere, have very strong lobbies and have the money to fight
> developping regulation.
Oh, I guess those things aren't happening then. Sorry, here I thought I was
involved in
permitting those facilities in that manner. Must have been mistaken when we've
prevented
construction of facilities for failing to demonstrate ability to meet the
emission standards
required of them. They lobbied us and got in.
While it is true that corporate deep pockets make a hell of a sway when it
comes to writing
laws, they are not simply above consideration and untouchable by government.
We've touched
a hell of a lot of them.
> I still prefer our clean air in Canada and my 1974 MGB without an air pump, a
> catalist or any smog equipment even if it produces some polution.
You've got a much lower population density there in Canada then we have here in
the US.
Especially in areas like California or Maryland. Of course your air pollution
is lower
there! Move all the folks living here in Maryland into your town and your air
is gonna
stink like hell. Especially if you ignore all the folks being there and try to
pretend
that it isn't contributing to pollution.
Yes, one person burning wood for a campfire isn't a problem. A nation as large
and dense
the US trying to keep warm by burning wood *is* a hell of a problem!
> By the way, when is breathing going to be regulated in U.S.A.?
Ever seen our OSHA laws?
|