I know there have been other threads on this subject, but I think our founding fathers in the USA are turning over in their graves. Never have I seen as much proposed or actual legislation which will give new meaning to the phrase "law of unintended consequences". Some of the states, with California leading the way, are trying to phase out the heavy equipment and trucking industries.:Banghead
I think they are just trying to make them burn cleaner. There is nothing wrong with a cleaner burning engine. I think it's sad they were allowed to lag this far behind the auto industry. Our new Cummins ISX will never puff black smoke, the stacks are as chrome as the day they were made. The new PACCAR engine will hopefully be just as good. And Caterpillar can't make a clean on-road engine so they just give up? Talk about lead, follow or get out of the way!
I have to say I'm with hackalot on this. Today's engines burn much much cleaner than the engines of 20 years ago, yet they aren't clean enough? I'm all for clean air, but if we reach a point where only marginal improvements can be made for thousands of dollars per unit, isn't there a time we can say we're clean enough? In California, they are requiring some machinery and heavy trucks to be retrofitted with modern diesels or be scrapped. When the owner purchased this equipment, it met the standards of the day and was bought in good faith. Now the government comes in and says they must be upgraded or replaced before they were scheduled to be retired? That's an unforeseen major expense to the operator and if nothing else is unfair. I'd love to see someone challenge the EPA on this, it seems unconstitutional to me.
I'm with Steve on this one. Making new machines come out of the factory as less polluting is great! But requiring the upgrading of the existing equipment seems unfair. And unnecessary too, because older machines are not going to be run on a daily basis forever.
I'm gonna stir the pot a little bit here... :stirthepot A question, particularly for the California guys--If a candidate for public office in your state, ran on a platform of "rescind all the clean air laws", would that candidate have a chance of getting elected? Would it be a landslide one way or the other, or would it be a close race? Would it be an advantage or a disadvantage to a candidate to advocate any sort of relaxation of such rules, or does the advantage go to the candidate that advocates for an even harder line? I'm asking, because I don't know the answer. We, in this industry, have our own set of insights, which may or may not be shared by the majority of the population. I'm interested in what conclusions we can draw from recognizing the differences...
I have to agree with Steve also. You don't hear them calling for upgrading all the older cars to today's standards. As long as an engine is running good it should only have to meet the specs. it was manufactured under. Regulatory agencies tend to justify their own existence.
Steve/ anyone what is the criteria? i would be done with my 85, 86, 87, 92 Lulls:ban
AFAIK in CA if you upgrade the engine in a older car or light truck (i.e. do a swap) it has to meet the new regs. not the regs in place for the model year of the vehicle. (somebody will correct me if I'm wrong) I wonder if there could be a compromise reached for equipment for something similar, like if you upgrade the powerplant it needs to meet the new regs, but you can repair and run the original version for it's lifetime. Maybe also make a concession that no old iron can be brought into the state, but if it's already there it's OK? Maybe get the ACLU interested in taking the case? :dizzy
I'm trying to remember what I've read, I think it's machines and trucks over 10 years old. Orchard Ex is correct, the repowering must meet current emission standards. There was a period a number of years ago where the State of California was buying up classic cars and crushing them in order to improve their air quality. What a crying shame that was!
Digger242j, I am intrigued by your premise. In Washington state I have no doubt that the tree hugggers on the west side would not vote for rescinding regs but the farmers on the east side would make it a landslide for common sense. Maybe a better way to show how the world would change is to just shutdown all the diesel engines for a week or better yet, a month. Then we would all have the chance to actually see, hear, smell and feel the real affects of diesel smoke. Other than empty store shelves, dried up gas station pumps and the stoppage of all the trappings of society I believe few would know the difference. Good Thread!
We all need clean air,I thought the trees took the carbon dioxide out of the air and give back the oxygen ,I think it's called photosynthesis.The government has gone to far with this issue,"cap & trade","carbon credits".They put forth these programs in the guise of cleaner air ,when it is really just money changing hands.We not only have some of the most clean & efficiant equipment in the world but also one of the cleanest countrys in the world.The government needs to step back and let the trees do there work,so we as equipment operators can do our work.
It really has nothing to do with clean air. It is all about money and power! The more you can regulate and control the more power it gives the guys making the rules. I agree the Founders are turning over in their graves!!
Appointed not elected! The CARB burocrats are appointed, not elected. All the say in California comes from 3 population centers. We do not have the dirty air of the past. It's all about money. California Adopts Low Carbon Fuel Standard "This is Cap On Trade" New measure will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase use of alternative fuels. This is about trading or buying and selling of carbon credits, among other non-productive or rationing of energy. Just another hand in your pocket, steeling our money.
I didn't ask whether the CARB people were elected. I'm sure they're appointed by, and are responsible to, somebody that is elected. John C understood why I was asking. Does the very strict nature of California's emission regulations enjoy the support of the electorate, or not?
Sad to say that any candidate who ran on reversing these rules, or slowing the new ones would only get the vote of the business people. We are far outnumbered by the vast urban educated masses who believe anything that makes noise, dust, smoke, etc. is evil and should be outlawed. This is perpetuated by the media, who has convinced the masses that our air is dirty, our water poluted, and our lifestyle generally at odds with the world. The opposite is true. Our air is cleaner now than in the 70's, despite the fact that nearly 4 times as many people live here. I have stood and spoken at CARB board meetings, along with hundreds of other business owners, only to be treated like we are a bunch of baby killers. The other side parades out the poor welfare mother who lives in subsidised housing near the port, and has small children with athsma. That plays to the press better than a hard working business owner who has supported the state for 20 years. The rule as passed into law now required all large fleets, over 5,000 fleet horsepower, to register by the first of last month, and no fleet, large or small, can add a non-tier engine to their fleet. The tier 1 was introduced in roughly 1996, depending on horsepower. Right now, any pre 1996 equipment is worthless in CA. If it was registered in your fleet by the deadline, you can continue to operate it, but you can't buy another one, or sell it in state. These machines are now basically worth scrap iron price in this state. The next catch is the fleet averaging, that says you must retire or replace up to 20% of the total installed horsepower of your fleet each year untill your emissions are down to the formula set by the state. This is where it gets even more fuzzy, because reality has nothing to do with it, only what you can document. One old engine, such as a D-8K you use only 300 hours per year, can cancel out the D-8T in your fleet that works 3,000 hours. You can designate a machine "low use" and then use it up to 100 hrs per year. Once you make that designation, you may NEVER use it over 100 hrs per year, under penalty of law. I am all for cleaner air, but this rule, and many like it in CA are the death of many industries. CARB's own research has shown that by only relying on the federal rules at the manufacturer level, we will get the same level of reduced emissions, just about 3 years later than they will by spending BILLIONS of dollars trying to retrofit old iron, and force fleets into replacing viable machines earlier than economically feasable.
I was born in California and lived there until 2002. In the late 90's, it started getting to me. Not so much the emission laws, but just all the BS that it took to make a buck and be in business. The state, counties and cities all seem to have it in their minds that new business isn't important. It's hard to describe without going into conspiracy theory and extreme political views, but the reality is that those who run the state have no regard to what it takes to create income. To make it worthwhile, I had to charge ridiculous amounts to remain legal. If I worked without permits, I could make a fair living, stay busy and competitive. I always wonder how many contractors are legal and how they can make a profit paying the fees required to stay in business, plus the taxes and still find clients willing to pay enough to turn a profit. If you are doing government work, that might work out, but if you are working for private citizens, it's just about impossible. Adding more and more restrictions on equipment just makes it harder to make a profit. For me, it was either leave the state and find a place that I could make a good living, or continue to take the chance of working illegally. I moved to Texas and after a few slow years, have done fairly well. This is my best year ever, and it's just getting better. The guys that I know back in California laughed when I left, but now are either talking about moving out, or actively trying to sell their homes to leave California. The weather is nice, but otherwise, there isn't any reason to stay there. There are other places where you can make a living without all the BS. I honestly don't know if it's possible to vote out the problem. The main voting blocks are very extreme and active in their views. They are in denial of what they have caused, and in my opinion, their mindset is that they haven't done enough and need to do more to make everything right. It's not failure, but a lack of effort in social programs, environmental restrictions and taxation. Why anybody would remain there is really a mystery to me. Eddie
So I guess if your starting in business you need to buy a 96 or newer machine which is costly.
wow, this goes way deeper than new engines. I like John C's idea of shutting it all down for a week! Tim
more than meets the eye It will take a smarter man than me to understand the thinking of the over strict laws of cal. To my thinking the repowering of older machine that are only used on a limited basis defeats the thought of a lower carbon foot print it starts with the mining of ore for the new engine too replace that d8k engine. the transportation costs of the ore the fuel used manu. etc the waste over comes any rational thinking of the common sense man . I can go on but my point being common sense over rules overthinking thanks the BIG D
I have been thinking about this a lot today. If you want to change the voters' minds and opinions, apply the same rules to them. Outlaw any car that is 4 years or older and require them to jump through the same hoops as an equipment owner. I agree with earlier posts about the emissions being cleaner now and when do you say enough is enough? This is the best it gets? I have an 08 F550 service truck that has a diesel particulate filter on it, dumbest idea I have ever heard of, at least I thought when I got it! It shoots diesel fuel into the exhaust stream to burn out the emissions caught by the filter. We are using more fuel to make it cleaner? Now, on the other hand, I can fire up my 81 Mack and it will shoot small black particles everywhere when it first starts. I realized that is what my DPF is trying to prevent, and I like to see the "black as coal" smoke roll out of the Mack when I lay the pedal down, but after driving newer trucks I kind of feel a little guilty about the smoke. But, I think that in the past ten years the research and development of cleaner burning diesel engines has got to the point where it should be good enough. Road tractors dont leave black streaks on trailers any more, I can drive my farm tractor all day long and not smell like diesel smoke. This should be good enough! It is a shame that Cat is dropping on road engines, but I can't blame them for saying "we quit, let us know how you do!". The problem with all of this is it starts in California, but eventually reaches all of us. I don't know, just my opinion!
What I would add to this topic, is passenger airplanes and trains. Both are essentially diesel powered, both operate in CA cities, and both smoke like, well, freight trains. Ever notice the brown cloud hanging over an airport? As far as I know, jet engines dont have any emission controls. Newer locomotives do, but the same BNSF locos that pull freight in CA come through my town, and they are old dash 9 GE's with no emission controls to my knowledge. Maybe the railroads and airlines just have stronger lobbys!
Well, the AQMD is headed for them too. I am afraid they will try to proove they can run the railroad too. I wonder what freight rates would do if the railroad could only operate 10 year old or newer loco's in CA. I am pretty sure port traffic would head elswhere due to the rate increases to pay for all of it. Just what a struggling economy needs is some more regulation piled on our back while we already can't walk on our own feet.
Back in early 1959, the bus drivers went on strike in L.A. As anyone knows who lived there at the time, that was probably just about the worst smog season we ever had. But during that week, the air was really clean! As soon as the strike was over, more smog! Now I'm not attributing the improvement just to the buses not running, weather patterns may have had an effect as well, I just don't know. But almost every bus in LA was running a 6-71 at the time. Chaniging the subject, I'm sure that all businesses will have to pass the cost of the premature engine replacements to the customer. In the case of any highway construction, that is going to mean increased cost to the state and to the taxpayer. Other services, to the county or municipality or the consumer. I am one who left CA years ago, too overregulated, too overpopulated, too costly, too much traffic. I hated those beautiful 12 foot traffic lanes and wide shoulders on the freeways having an extra lane carved into the same space, reducing lanes to 10 feet or less. Not much margin for error with 8.5' width vehicles. Rant over.
This idea that you can just pass it on needs to be re-thought. What is going to take place on August 1st is the door shuts on CARB fleet registration. Anything that cannot be fitted with a PM filter less than tier 2 is zip. There is no notices going out to contractors telling them to register, which would be real easy to do. CARB makes the rules and it's up to each affected contractor to know and comply. When you complete registion CARB gives you a certificate and says," you may need this to get on to a job site." Let alone a huge fine per day for not compliance if you are not registered. I think we will lose a huge amount of small contractors. The majoriety have no idea that they need to register and will miss the grandfathering there equipment untill 2014-15. I talk to owner operators every day that just don't know what is going to happen on August 1st. There will eventually be a huge shortage of small business and registered equipment. The Idea that the cost will be passed on will be at end of the transition. Before that we will go through the coming HIPPER INFLATION, with great increases in equipment cost, labor, materials and overhead. This means contractors will have to borrow more in a time when borrowing is real hard to do even with good credit. I think it's going to be real hard to start a business let alone fund it or borrow. If we can hag on for the next 10 months?????? There will be a market?????? Is this about the environment or clean air, No it's misdirection. It's all about control on business. The adds are now moving against cows and pigs for CO2 were will it stop.
Has anyone looked at LA County School Buses? When I was there in February, we parked near an elementary school and some of the buses looked like they were from the mid 60's. If contractors need to replace/upgrade equipment fro CARB compliance shouldn't school buses fall under the same regulations? Rick
The teachers union here apparently has more political power. If the school spends money on new busses, then there may not be enough to hire more administrators and teachers. With all the talk of how bad the emissions are for the children, I would think that would be one of the first places to look for improvements. Some districts have a lot of new busses, but there are a lot still running around with 6-71's in them.
Polititians are not out to help people. They will use any means necessary to take more and more of our rights and freedoms until we have none, including guilting people into thinking they can save the planet. Those are not billions of their dollars, those are our hard earned dollars! And why should we get to spend our own money how we want to? Shouldn't we just let the government tell us how to spend every dollar?:usa Unfortunately, the people running this country don't care about small business. Actually it's impossible to describe "without going into conspiracy theory and extreme political views", or just flat out STUPIDITY! Less small business, more government control! The sad part of all of this is that 90% of the people in California actually believe that these laws should be passed, no matter what the cost to small businesses. And guess what, when California creates these new standards, it doesn't take long for the rest of the U.S. to follow suit. Bottom Line...... We're Screwed , and it's too late to fix it:shf
Well, on the bright side, look at how much polution we have saved over the last year by NOT WORKING. If you want to clear the air, nothing does it like a good recession. Same goes for traffic. It is much easier to get to work in the SoCal area now, if you still have a job to go to. I made it to the job in peak hours last week in the same amount of time it took a year ago by leaving 2 hours before the rush hour. I guess that will end up delaying a bunch of roadwork, if they figure there is less traffic now. Cgraham has it right, We're screwed.