Partial Zero Emissions Vehicle Are Real!

Car makers can and do make vehicles that are almost zero emissions. The extra cost is estimated at $400 with the car makers only charging $150 for the Zero Emission components.

So why can't you get one? Well, the cars are limited to California and some NE states only, because those states have laws requiring them. If you want one and don't live in one of those states, it could cost you up to $27,500 in fines.

For the record, they do not get better gas milage. They simply filter almost all of the bad byproducts of a combustion engine better.

http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contentid=4024974

So, I ask you.... Does our government really care about the environment? Does the world really care about the environment? If we can do this now, what the hell aren't we doing it on every vehicle sold?

I usually don't agree with California's rulings, but this time I think they are dead on and wonder when the rest of the country will wake up and smell the fresh air......

In before the liberal comment!!!

But let me point out the few states it's legal in are all typically Democrat leaning states.

I had a similar dissappointment when I bought my new car last year. In every other country my car was offered with the better/ more effecient world diesel engine, in the US you can't get that engine.

I have a PZEV Honda Accord. I didn't realize that the sale of them was limited to CA and New England though. That's just plain stupid.

Sarge wrote:
I have a PZEV Honda Accord. I didn't realize that the sale of them was limited to CA and New England though. That's just plain stupid.

And New York... remember New York isn't New England.

Bubbaspanky wrote:
In before the liberal comment!!!

Ha, not from me. The thread will get locked, or better yet, deleted!

Ok, in typical fashion, there has been mandatory emission tests here for the last couple of decades. Everything passes, and I mean everything. 70-80's junkers smoking down the road all have their up to date emission stickers. Buses, trucks, motocycles, and all diesel engines are exempt. But I get to pay $50 a car each year for a 30 second test. Give me a break!

Pa loves to follow Ca's laws. I'm sure I'll be forced to buy this on the next new car.

In other news, Norwegian scientists are now alarmed that their moose and elk population are putting out too much greenhouse emissions. They say a moose is polluting about the same as driving 15k miles a year. Maybe they will round them up and jam a catalytic converter up their arse, hehe.

lexx wrote:
Ha, not from me. The thread will get locked, or better yet, deleted!

The deletion was a mistake on my part. I thought I was deleting the shadow thread after it had been moved by Doc.

I fully expect that there will be extreme differences of opinion on these forums, and I respect those that can articulate a position and back it up with something other than "it's the liberals fault" or name calling. So, as I have said before, don't insult people or demean their position because it is different from yours, and threads won't get locked.

Sarge wrote:
The deletion was a mistake on my part.

That was the best thing that could've happened - I should have deleted it on purpose. It was bound to end badly, and it was FAST approaching that end.

I hate it when the family argues. It makes me all sicky and nauseous.

I don't mind the arguing as it makes me question things, and think through my beliefs more thoroughly. All of which is good for your brain, the forums, and the nation as a whole. Well, maybe getting a bit ahead of myself there.

My main view on improving things like this is simply, "eh, Why not?". But knowing the earth is doomed, as I do, I say we focus more on the human population's survival than we do the survival of the environment we live in. But in the meantine, nothing wrong with doing what we can in the way of not damaging the planet further.

Sarge, can you test your Honda for us and report back?

I would imagine a funnel connected to the tail pipe run through a hose to an oxygen mask would be a good test. Tell us if it's breathable.... 😈

On a more serious note, I am appalled that this idea isn't gaining ground. I hate forcing things on people, but how is this a bad thing? You know as well as I do that they can tack on $400 next year and no one will blink because it's expected that the price of vehicles will always go up.

sure, I'll get right on testing that.....


What may be happening, but I haven't looked around to try and confirm, is something similar to what happened to me in when I moved from Hawaii to California back in the late 90's. We shipped our almost new Nissan Altima to CA, and had to have an emissions test when we registered it. I had to pay a $400 fee to the DMV because although it easily met all the emissions standards, it did not have the sticker or plate on the engine or something that said it was manufactured to meet CA emissions standards. All vehicles manufactured for sale in CA (and now New England and New York) have to have that label. Long story short is that the car was exactly the same as the Altimas sold in CA and met the standards whether it had the label or not. It is likely that all of the 4 cylinder Accords are PZEVs if you test them, labeled or not, because I would think Honda is smart enough not to manufacture two vehicles that are exactly the same except for the emissions package. However I could be wrong about that, like I said I haven't tried to check up on any of it.

Btw, the $400 was later refunded after the State lost a class action lawsuit challenging the legality of the fee 😀

Edit: After re-reading the article you posted I could be wrong given what the law says.

Sarge wrote:
The deletion was a mistake on my part. I thought I was deleting the shadow thread after it had been moved by Doc.

I fully expect that there will be extreme differences of opinion on these forums, and I respect those that can articulate a position and back it up with something other than "it's the liberals fault" or name calling. So, as I have said before, don't insult people or demean their position because it is different from yours, and threads won't get locked.

Since you went there...
Yes but there were no personal attacks at all. Just because we use the "L" word is no reason to lock something.
I am sorry if you consider yourself the "L" word but that is not my fault. I was not attacking YOU! This pissed me off. Censorship is censorship.

If you close a thread because you did not like a word, that is not right.

If you close one because of personal attacks and people generally getting out of line, this is the Admin's right and I agree with you.

Since we are "going there",

Merriam-Webster Dictionary wrote:censor[2,transitive verb]

Main Entry:
2censor
Function:
transitive verb
Inflected Form(s):
cen·sored; cen·sor·ing Listen to the pronunciation of censoring \ˈsen(t)-sə-riŋ, ˈsen(t)s-riŋ\
Date:
1882

: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news>; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>

Closing a thread is not censorship as it in no way alters or hides the content of anyones post. I closed those other threads because at the time it seemed appropriate and they were going nowhere but downhill in terms of tone and content. Deletion of a thread is censorship, and I already said that it was an error on my part or the forum software.

Maybe I over reacted in closing those threads. At the time I certainly didn't think so but you can feel free to open them back up if you'd like - you have the ability to do that.

Sarge wrote:
Since we are "going there",
Closing a thread is not censorship as it in no way alters or hides the content of anyones post. I closed those other threads because at the time it seemed appropriate and they were going nowhere but downhill in terms of tone and content. Deletion of a thread is censorship, and I already said that it was an error on my part or the forum software.

Maybe I over reacted in closing those threads. At the time I certainly didn't think so but you can feel free to open them back up if you'd like - you have the ability to do that.

I admit you are right if you look at it that way. Closing is not censoring in the conventional sense.

As for re-opening them, naaa. Too many other new things to argue about 😉

It is all water under the bridge as far as I am concerned. I am over it.

And I thought I was going to have something interesting to read today... Pfft... fine.. will find my drama somewhere else ;p

2 cents...

As long as people are not resorting to name calling and getting all pissy, it is of my opinion to let people go at it... Any time politics or religion get brought up in forums, people will normally rise up to throw in what they have to say and with those two topics, someone will not like what is said...

The important thing for any forum poster is to be mature about it and also be open minded to allow people to speak their minds without being flamed for it...

So really... You wanna ask me about my stand on religion or politics??? BRING IT!!! 😏

ephil wrote:
So really... You wanna ask me about my stand on religion or politics??? BRING IT!!! 😏

O be quiet we all know you are a Buddist Commie.

I thought he was a Hindu Socialist......

Atomm wrote:
I thought he was a Hindu Socialist......

Dang it I get those mixed up everytime