BCM Community
Bus Discussion => Bus Topics ( click here for quick start! ) => Topic started by: TomC on May 25, 2009, 10:30:12 PM
-
I know that there are only a few of you in California. But what I found is that if you have a conversion (a vehicle that did not start out as an RV) then you'll be subject to both truck and bus smog regulations coming up. With a single vehicle of 1975 or newer, your good till 2014 when you'll have to update to a 2010 engine. The exception to this is if you put less than 7,500 miles a year on your vehicle, then you can extend that out till 2021. So maybe a simple toggle switch in the speedo feed? There are some counties in California that are not affected by this, or have a different schedule. Check with the ARB website. Good Luck, TomC
-
Hmmmmm. . .
Since mine's a 1964, I guess I'm exempt???
??? ???
-
Is this for the whole US or just California? M&C
-
Isn't it interesting that a state that can't pay it's bills is continuing along a path to ruin it's tax base even more than it has already?
They've spent more than they've taken in every year since Schwarznegger took over. If they had increased spending to match inflation and population growth (both, not just one), they would have a surplus right now. Why did we get rid of Gray Davis? Are we all pleased by a brogue? No, we just have believed what the 'news' told us! There is no 'news' media, they are just pawns, good looking, but just pawns. "Hey, California, I'm a Pretty Guy, and you should believe what I say!" Fabian Nunez is a great guy who is TOTALLY HONEST, HAS THE TAXPAYERS BEST INTEREST AT HEART, AND WANTS OUR STATE TO EXCEL! In his camp are the Easter Bunny, the Tooth Fairy, and, quite possibly, Santa Claus! Contact me offline for ocean front property in Kansas if you belive any of the preceding information.
The answer is to vote against anyone who now holds public office until they 'get it'. Most of us fools like our state assemblyman and senator! In turn they like us because we vote for them. As soon as we don't vote for them, then they'll have to make some changes. Among those are a change in who actually controls the direction our state goes. Right now we're being ruled by environmental wackos who really detest the US and want it to fail, detest capitalism and want it to fail, and detest freedom and want us to lose it.
Are your in Office Now? You're out! NEXT!!!
When we stop overspending bureaucrats, control the anti American sentiment, start learning based on scientific method rather than 'the sky is falling' mentality, and stop the attitude that payroll is not an expense, we will be a 'leading' state. Until then, you guys in the other states tell your leaders that California is not the model you see as succesful!
Apparently eleven states automatically adopt the environmental rules adopted by California! If you live in one of those, see the paragraph above the begins "The answer is to vote against anyone who now holds public office..."
I Pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, One Nation Under God, with Liberty and Justice for all. What a revealing statement! What innovative thought! What wonderful sentiment! What other American utterance more accurately depicts the founding principles of our nation? What American utterance has more frequently been stomped on by the minority in our nation? The Flag? Burned, defiled, stomped on, hung upside down, hung below the Mexican flag, etc.
One Nation, Under God is a basis for our country. But, We are guaranteed freedom OF religion. The people who object to this read it as freedom FROM religion. So, we shouldn't say 'Under God' because their rights are violated! They are an extreme minority in the US. Majority rule runs the republic. But, they want the majority to allow them to win. Only a fool would allow that to happen.
"Politically Correct" allows the minority to decide whether what I say is accurate, valuable, and worth considering. Let's quit being "POLITICALLY CORRECT"!
TomNPat
-
The entire nation will be adopting California emissions or a version of. One emssions standard will be better for car manufacturers as they no longer need to make a different vehicle for some states.
I hope this is for light vehicles only as I could never afford to replace my Series 60 with a 2010 DD15.
-
2 years ago I called the State Air Resources Board asking how long 2 stroke diesels in RV's would be exempt from emissions regulations. His answer was simply, " ...soon nothing will be exempt ......diesels are dirty."
Very powerful agency staffed by non elected folks.
So, I guess its time to consider registering out of state. Or flip that speedo switch! And start measuring for a large exhaust particulate filter and prepare for annual tests.
By the way, a lawmaker here recently proposed a new GPS device fitted to every vehicle to charge a per-mile tax. Shot down... for now but with the States current financial situation these guys are grasping for any money they can. I know we already pay a fuel tax per gallon and this is designed to raise new money without catching heat for raising the fuel tax.
Agreed that these policies and thinking drive industry away. They won't be able to call California the, " the Golden State" much longer.
-
Two comments and not trying to stir anything up.
First, the courts are starting to rule against some of the measures Callyfornia, (actually the city of Los Angeles) has tried to put into place concerning the stuff they are trying to put in place at the ports that would eliminate older trucks.
Second, it was said in an article the other day that this financial crisis in Callyfonia is so bad that when it shakes out it might not be as tree hugging and liberal as in the past...that folks are starting to look at the cost of some of this tree hugging crap!
Now let me say...I am for the environment...I do not think a 20 gallon diesel fuel spill should cost $20,000.00 (Twenty Thousand) to clean up.
Jack
-
Hey Tom, could you post a specific link to that topic on ARB? It's a very large website and I poked around for a while, no luck finding it...
As time goes on I'm happier that I have a 1962 Crown! Until they decide to outlaw anything old... :)
Gary
-
1965 MC5, smokes like a Meschersmitt ;D
-
The important fact here is that all of our conversions come under the rule of a commercial bus-since that's what the vehicle started life out as-even though you may have it registered as a motorhome now. I will post the link later. Good Luck, TomC
-
If upheld, that would represent a major change in the law. In every other way, the law views them as RV motorhomes or "housecars" if they are titled that way.
Here is a link to the ARB site: http://www.arb.ca.gov/homepage.htm
But after about 15 minutes looking through it I couldn't find anything relating to that. I look forward to a link direct to that topic.
But I suspect that by 2014 California will be considerably different. Either they will have changed their priorities or they will be so broke they would immediately cave in if taken to court on it.
-
Isn't it interesting that a state that can't pay it's bills is continuing along a path to ruin it's tax base even more than it has already?
TomNPat
If someone could post the link that would be cool. I'm not sure where I will fit. The PO bought the shell as a glider in Germany and had it converted in Oregon. I'm not sure it was never licensed as a bus anywhere.
It will be interesting to see how California negotiates its problems. We moved to CA from KS and have on the whole, liked the fact that Californians want to help everybody. 13 years ago when we moved everybody said, "taxes are going to kill you". Our overall tax bill was so much cheaper that we paid for our move out of the savings. I have lived in IA or IL and it would have been the same story from those states.
CA's current problems are based on Prop 13. For the non CA residents, Prop 13 limits property taxes for longtime residents. In some cases to the tune of 10's of thousands of dollars per year. Not only that once you reach a certain age you can transfer the low tax base to another property.
Property taxes are what states use to smooth out the ups and downs of income and sales taxes. Warren Buffett was on Arnie's first election team until he said Prop 13 as it is written will kill the state.
Anyway off topic.
Mike
-
I am in favor of prop 13. I have a friend that has a 100+ acre ranch right in the middle of a big city. It has been in his family since the 1800's. Why should he have to move? Prop 13 has inabled him to keep it.
The state will get there money if it ever sells. My two cents.
-
I just phoned the Diesel hotline at the California Air Resources Board at 1-866-6DIESEL (or 1-866-634-3735). I asked if my Housecar was subject to the new diesel regulations. He asked what I meant by Housecar. I said I had a commercial bus that had been converted to a motorhome and that I believed the official registration designation for my vehicle currently is the word Housecar. He said that the regulations do not apply to motorhomes.
While this is not exactly a statement that the new rules don't apply to me, it sure is close since I described my situation accurately and he strongly suggested the rules don't apply to me. I specifically said 'commercial bus' twice.
Since I have posted the actual California hotline phone number, perhaps everyone reading this could call them and ask and post the answer here. I really believe the rules are unlikely to apply to us since buying a new engine will cost more than many of us can afford, and we don't have customers to pass the cost along to. How much is a brand new engine swap anyway? $70K?
-
I'm glad that it only costs me $48 a year to tax and license my bus. Living in Nebraska does have some advantages. Our state government is required by constitution to be fiscally responsible and they do have a surplus at the moment for a rainy day. Our gas taxes are some of the highest however. Fortunately we have also been able to escape some of this rediculous stuff that migrates out of the west coast. I've heard from some trucker buddies that California is also trying to require what they call a "green tire" for all over the road commercial trucks that enter their state. I'll bet that turns into a fiasco. Later
-
I will bet a Cold Beer that this has no effect on existing RV, Bus conversions, etc.
I predict you will be Grandfathered in since you make up a minuscule amount of vehicles in the big picture and those who make the rules also own RV's, Bus conversions and will protect them.
I think having read "Chicken Little" as a child, helps in understanding these worries. ;D
Cliff
-
.
-
As far as I can tell, the government doesn't make a dime by requiring cleaner diesel engines except perhaps sales tax on engine conversions and motor vehicle sales tax on vehicles bought earlier than planned due to emissions issues.
This is all about cleaning up the air.
-
All of this is just so far off topic.....don't ya just luv it?
Smog story: A friend was on a rant one day about "charcoal lighter". This guy was opinionated all the way thru and I was amazed at how infrequently he was correct. Really, he was spring loaded to the WRONG position. Given that he thought charcoal lighter was a "stupid thing to regulate", I felt obliged to look into it. LA made it illegal to sell charcoal lighter that burned in open air and produced high levels of particulate. Remember how that stuff used to send up a cloud of black smoke when you first lit it off? Well it turned out that Dow Chemical had a zillion tons of napalm left over from Nam. The Fed didn't want it and Dow was stuck with huge stocks and what exactly do you do with "old Napalm"? Dow, being chem wizards, figured a way to make Napalm burn without leaving that nasty gasoline/chemical taste that ruins the subtle flavors of a good hotdog. Problem was it smoked like all gitout. No problem though cause who cares about a BBQ fire, right? Care to venture how many back yards have a BBQ fire going in the back yard at least once during a weekend? OODELS! For those of you that haven't spent time in LA, you often couldn't breath without being aware of doing so and having an idea that what you were doing was wrong. So many people were gasping and dieing of resp. problems that some smart bunny came up with the idea that preventing the dumping of stuff in the atmosphere was in need of being regulated. "NO durn Gummint Interference" was tried for a long while and the industry was left to self regulate. That didn't work with air pollution any better than it has with Banking or Savings and Loans or Big Oil or Steel, or nationwide hi way systems, etc. As usual, the GUMMINT was drug, kicking and fighting and screaming, into the area of REGULATING THE AIR..."Oh, my God" and "can you believe this Mildred"? Not being able to breath and watching your children hack themselves into underweight will stiffen a mans spine to the point that he will involve the Gummint....against all his instincts and industry spokesman rhetoric. Not breathing was a strategy used by the Russians to inspire people to lie for the Communist party and we have used it for the same purpose....except that we force the "truth". Breathing is important and recognized by all humans as being so.
Back to the issue: It turned out that LA was supplied with Charcoal lighter weekly by train tank cars and they were numbered in the many. It accounted for oodles of tons of co2 and particulate every day. Fortunately, the peak consumption was on the weekends and that was out of sync with freeway sources so it evened out the pollution over a week's period and that was a silver lining of sorts and that point was exploited by the Conservatives and industry. Bless their hearts for always looking for the positive. The LA city council and LA county council were elected on a platform of "DO SOMETHING ABOUT AIR QUALITY". If the only thing they regulated was charcoal lighter, I would have been disappointed in them but that is not the case. They stuck their grubby little paws in almost everything and doing everything they could see to do they only succeeded in holding the state of pollution to the same level and that level was unsat. They cast about to be more strict and regulate more things in a constant effort to clean up the air in the LA basin. Can't please everybody every time but you have NEVER seen the day that the Auto Industry, Oil industry, Chemical industry or .... has EVER be happy with anything that LA has done. EVER!
We tried it the other way in so many issues for so long and self regulation is a failure in the long run. Never fails! I am not going to tell you that I know what needs to be done. I am not that stone cold stupid out of my field. I can tell you that I have sharpened an ear to the rhetoric and have developed a habit of looking to who profits from what by following the money. Certain remarks set of my alarms: "Gummint never did nuthin that ever worked" and "we got to throw out ALL the politicians". The "conservatives" use this mantra cause liberals are usually more popular and represented in Gummint. "Junk Science", spoken with a guffaw, comes to mind also. "Well, I don't understand what they have on their mind", an admission of confusion, when followed by a suggestion that the course of action is known by the speaker and we should follow him/her gives me LOGIC whiplash every time.
Oh well! I feel better now.
John
-
Brian,
What are ya, a communist? :o ;D ;D ;D Everybody knows that the polits are making a kill'en out of this reg stuff. ??? Why else would they do it? :P And the people that oppose reg are true patriots simply by definition. :'( Yeah, you got your nerve bringing up facts and evidence and book learn'n all at the same time. >:( :D
Be well guy and write more often,
John
-
Living in Nebraska ... ... Our gas taxes are some of the highest however.
Nebraska's state levied gasoline taxes are currently 27.3 cents a gallon, which is practically smack dab on the national average (27.2 cents). There are more than a dozen states (mine included) that are over 30 cents per gallon. For diesel fuel, they are also close to the middle of the pack, with 18 states having higher tax rates.
ref: http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes/upload/State_MotorFuel_ExciseTax_Notes_4-2009.pdf
-
.
-
After my first trip overseas I've always been a big supporter of the EPA. If one would have met me at the plane when I returned to the country I would have kissed them.
However, it was interesting to contemplate spending thousands of dollars to make my bus's air cleaner. It give's me insight into the other side of the equation.
I am in favor of prop 13. I have a friend that has a 100+ acre ranch right in the middle of a big city. It has been in his family since the 1800's. Why should he have to move? Prop 13 has inabled him to keep it.
The state will get there money if it ever sells. My two cents.
Not making a judgment about Prop 13. Only pointing out that it is a big problem for the budget of CA. Buffett was replaced immediately when he pointed out that it needed to be changed. He questioned CA giving welfare to the richest people in the USA. He didn't last the day.
It is no surprise that the people from Nebraska, Buffett's home state are bragging about their state's finances in this thread.
Mike
-
Prop 36 limits property tax to a bit over 1% per year of the price of the property the last time it was sold. This is okay most of the time, but if a property has not sold in decades, it is ridiculous. Buffet, when questioning Prop 36, used himself as an example saying the it was unfair that he should only be paying a couple of thousand a year for a multimillion dollar property. I understand the sentimental nature of Airbag's friend's case. But it can also be said that it is unfair that he should not be taxed at the same standards as the rest of Californians merely because it is inherited property as opposed to self-earned.
Things have a tendency to go from one extreme to another. Prop 36 was a result of a populist revolt against ridiculously rising property tax rates. It probably could use some fine tuning. By the way, CA gets back about 85 cents for every dollar it sends the feds. Alaska gets back about $1.40, and they don't have the huge illegal immigrant population to provide free services and education for. I have a place in Austin, and the property tax rates are 3 times what they are in CA, plus they reassess annually. I think there could be lots of ways that CA could save money, but the environmental stuff is not the problem.
Anyway, my bus does not pollute. It disinfects, crop dusts, and perfumes as it goes.
-
Colorado is one of the states that tends to adopt California regulations. The front range counties have a diesel emission requirement that ALL diesels must be dyno tested. That costs $119 and not many places can test a bus.
However, today, I got my classic plates for the bus ;D ;D ;D ;D.
You have to buy 5 years worth of plate, but you no longer have to have an emission test. My cost was $607. Colorado does not have any restriction on classic plates as far as driving or usage. Plus, you get cool plates!!!!!
I now own four vehicles with classic plates :) :)
Jim
-
Here is a good link for pending California diesel regulations. Apparently the regulation exempting motor homes has not been finalized. When it becomes law it will show up in the California Code link below. The rulemaking calender is the last link which includes agency name/phone contact numbers. The good news is, if it passes, bus nuts are exempt!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2008/truckbus08/truckbus08.htm
Scroll down to Appendix A to find this exemption for Motor Home:
Section 2025. Regulation to Reduce Emissions of Diesel Particulate Matter, Oxides
of Nitrogen and Other Criteria Pollutants, and Greenhouse Gases
from In-Use Heavy Duty Diesel-Fueled Vehicles
(c) Exemptions
This regulation does not apply to:
(11) Motor homes for non-commercial private use.
(45) “Motor Home” means a single vehicular unit designed for human habitation for
recreational or emergency occupancy and built on, or permanently attached to, a
self-propelled motor vehicle chassis, chassis cab, or van, which becomes an
integral part of the completed vehicle.
California Code of Regulations
Title 13 Division 3 Article 4 - DIESEL PARTICULATE MATTER CONTROL MEASURES
http://weblinks.westlaw.com/toc/default.aspx?Abbr=ca-adc&Action=ExpandTree&AP=CAT13D3CH3.5&ItemKey=CAT13D3CH3.5&RP=%2Ftoc%2Fdefault.wl&Service=TOC&RS=WEBL9.05&VR=2.0&SPa=CCR-1000&pbc=4BF3FCBE&fragment#CAT13D3CH3.5
Rulemaking Calender
www.arb.ca.gov/regact/2008calfin.pdf
......see page 11
-
I'm glad we moved from ole SoCal in 06! That's another reason to not go there with the bus, besides the horrible traffic on the I-5, 405, 55 you get the picture! ::)
Sheesh, what next. Although I knew something was brewing when we got the message that our front end loader was going to have to get a special exhaust to cut down on the particulates at the tune of a couple of grand! I left the company so don't know exactly what did happen! I do know the owners weren't too happy with it! >:(
~Paul~
-
Living in Nebraska ... ... Our gas taxes are some of the highest however.
Nebraska's state levied gasoline taxes are currently 27.3 cents a gallon, which is practically smack dab on the national average (27.2 cents). There are more than a dozen states (mine included) that are over 30 cents per gallon. For diesel fuel, they are also close to the middle of the pack, with 18 states having higher tax rates.
ref: http://www.api.org/statistics/fueltaxes/upload/State_MotorFuel_ExciseTax_Notes_4-2009.pdf
Crap! Now what am I gonna complain about!!! :o Thanks for that info. I had read however that we were among the top 10 in fuel taxes but I'm not gonna dispute your facts. Later
-
Well it turned out that Dow Chemical had a zillion tons of napalm left over from Nam. The Fed didn't want it and Dow was stuck with huge stocks
Got a source for this one?
What I know about napalm and Dow Chemical, it just doesn't ring right.
First, Dow would make a zillion tons of ANY military stock unless someone had already bought it.
Second, napalm is an additive put into a gasoline or kerosene base, jelled with naptha (soap base) and other ingredients (known as "secret sauce") which are not safe to breathe or to put residual traces into food. It would cost more to de-toxify a big batch of it than it would cost to write off. In addition, it is useful to such folks as the Forest Service, movie studios, etc., and is still in production for such users as well as the DOD.
I'm not saying that it isn't possible, but this one sounds a little unlikely.
-
BG6,
I couldn't agree with you more. It does sound strange and "stranger than fiction is fact". This went on in 1990 or before a little. Too long ago for me to be all that confident of the exacts. The charcoal lighter issue was common discussion back then and the spin was "isn't this environmentalism gone MAD?". I guess that could be researched at the library with a periodicals subject search.
Dow was involved in some way and they were looking for an exemption so they could utilize the napalm stockpile. Just ruminating here but suppose the fed wanted to dispose of the stockpile cause they no longer needed it so they contracted with DOW to dispose of the napalm they had manufactured for a tidy sum. Then DOW sells the polluting crap with a GUMMINT waver. That fiction would tie together nicely. And it is fiction! Sad that it is so believable in so many circles.
I had no idea what napalm was made from except that it contained gasoline and soap. The toxicity angle was real news and thank you. :) I wonder if it would be arguable that once the charcoal was burning that all the toxicity of the lighter has been consumed in the combustion process? ALL charcoal lighter is POISONOUS and not a "food grade" substance and I don't need to look that up. I am taking some licence here with your line of reasoning and I actually agree with your points. Fact is I don't understand the chemistry of this or any other chem process.
I would appreciate the answer to your healthy and reasonable doubts myself. I think the questions are: When did LA/Ca. start regulating the chemistry of charcoal lighter or have they ever done so? What has been DOW Chemical's involvement in napalm or its disposal. The rub, for me, has been at the conclusion of the research and "proof" the doubter usually pulls a W with the answer "So what?". At one time I was paid handsomely for my research and professional opinion and I feel wasted on most of those doubters. Nice to see a wager on the eventual proof/results. Till then "I am completely confident that I can answer any question you might ask....to my satisfaction". ;D Said in good humor and with all respect to you.
Your fellow traveler,
John
-
I'm pretty quick to yell "HOGWASH!" (or something more colorful) whenever somebody's story doesn't add up, but my jury is still out on the Napalm / Charcoal Lighter fluid thing.
It is true that Dow was the sole supplier of Napalm to the military during the Vietnam era. Although, technically speaking it was the reformulated Napalm-B. The original napalm contained napthalene and palminate, as well as aluminum soap with gasoline. By the Vietnam period, the composition had changed over to polystyrene, benzene and gasoline.
The internet shows that there have been patents issued for the reclaiming of styrene found in Napalm. Basically, it sounds like a distillation process whereby the mixture is heated and the gasoline and benzene separate out at different temps.
Since 1973, the US stockpile of napalm was stored at the naval weapons station in Fallbrook, CA. There have been a couple of government contracts to recycle and dispose of the stuff. 3.3 Million gallons of it was used for firing a cement kiln in East Chicago for two years. Some has also been burned as additives to coal and natural gas plants in Texas and Louisiana.
That is how our military disposed of their stockpile. If Dow Chemical did, in fact, have a stockpile of their own, it is anybody's guess what they did with it. The fact that napalm can be separated out into gasoline and benzene, and the fact that benzene is an ingredient in charcoal lighter fluid, at least lends some plausibility. .... Isn't it amazing what you learn reading about buses?
-
WEC,
Amazing does not even half cover it. Nice work and well done.
I saw a documentary long ago about pollution. It involved trace amts of benzine in drinking water. Seems that the clue that there was a problem when 10% of the children developed leukemia...and died, of course. You must know the rest of that story as it has been repeated so many times for so many substances. It boggles my mind that benzine is a component of charcoal lighter, still to this day. Guess that proves that the lighter is not a "approved for food processing" chem.
You are from Pa? Ever work at Mechanicsgurg Naval Supply Depot? You mentioned Fallbrook Weaps depot. My Command installed all the burglar alarms in those bunkers up there in the mid 60's. Napalm isn't all they have up there....it gets worse. Do you have a connection to the industry or an agency? Interesting stuff. I am sure many are interested in this topic but maybe offline would be better.
Thank you for sharing and all,
John
-
John:
No, I've never had any affiliation with the military or their supply chain. I'm no organic chemist either, I just compiled info from several sources after playing around with some Google searches. Oh.... and I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
I can state with some certainty that Benzene has been used as an ingredient in charcoal lighter fluid. There was a class action lawsuit filed in Massachusetts that named a list of Benzene containing substances, and the charcoal lighter fluid was on their list. I can't say for sure whether ALL of the charcoal lighter fluids contains Benzene, or whether new Benzene-free products have come on the market. For that matter, I never got far enough into this to confirm whether Dow, or one of their entities actually produce this product.
I would have to think that if liquid charcoal lighter fluid is used properly, the Benzene would be fully burned away before the food ever sees the grill. I've never been a big fan of the pre-soaked briquettes like Matchlight, as I think they keep emitting fumes longer.
Various websites seem to split their concern about charcoal lighter fluids into two areas. Basically, there is general concern about any product that contains Benzene, a known carcinogen. [Benzene is also found in all sorts of stuff you will find in your garage, including WD40, Weed-B-Gone, and the gasoline you buy at the pump is about 1-2% Benzene.] The other concern are the environmental issues from burning the stuff, including the release of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) into the air.
Oh, ... and use of Napalm for lighting your home charcoal grill should be highly discouraged. ::)
-
Back in the seventies we lit our charcoal using a metal one gallon can with the top cut off and several 1 inch holes around the bottom. We lit our charcoal with one sheet of newspaper. Now they sell these type of starters. Missed the boat again.
Remember the additive in gasoline MTSB or something like that? When the environmentalist demanded it in our gas the oil companies said "oh that's going to be expensive". Several years later it showed up in the squiggly wiggly bug eyed river minnow and they demanded it's removal from the gas, The oil companies reply "oh that's going to be expensive"