Not your typical Red/Green sticker question

California

Sorry if this is posted elsewhere. I looked but didn't find anything.

You may have read that CARB is in hot water for covering up the fact that one of their lead researchers had falsified his educational credentials to obtain CARB employment. This author was responsible for the scientific data proposed in a report regarding diesel truck emissions that affects vast numbers of commercial trucking interests.

Link here:

http://www.ocregister.com/articles/tran-222324-board-carb.html

This was CARB's response:

"CARB also reacted to the scandal that the principal author of the supporting health study for the rule had presented false credentials. CARB said it has “directed staff to withdraw and redo the health report that carried Hien Tran's name since it was learned last year that he falsely claimed he held a PhD in statistics from UC Davis.” However, CARB said nothing to indicate the “redo” would change the conclusions of the study let alone that it would change any aspect of the rule."

My question for the group is what exactly defines the pollution requirements that determine red/green sticker status? Not VINs, but the actual levels of pollutants? Who was the author that proposed this dual-sticker (red or green) arrangement. And, has this research ever been challenged in earnest? Does the data (post-sticker requirement) get peer reviewed regularly to objectively determine the effectiveness of such a program?

In a nutshell, has anyone really looked at whether limiting Red sticker season by five months has had a measurable impact on the air quality?

This isn't a sound level or sparky debate, just looking at the emissions.

Thanks

CARB is an out of control, self funded, bureacratic, job killing, activity limiting monster with no oversight.

Attorney General Brown has sided with CARB on the above scandal since his religion is the non existent global warming nonsense rather than utilize his office to investigate Mary Nichols of CARB for her activities.

Just more of the same old, same old.

In response to your question/comment, if a study has ever been completed, it would have been by CARB itself and the results tailored for their desired purpose.

Bob

Really good question there, groop. It bears questioning CARB on pretty much everything that came out of that bureau since Hien Tran has been employed there. Frankly, I'd like to know if *everyone* there has appropriate credentials for the studies and determinations that have been done and placed upon us Californians, and would like to see any rules based on scientifically questionable conclusions repealed.

Anyone have a petition? Where do I sign! :ride:

many times it comes out to red tape and filing paperwork.

I believe it was the first year of the WR450, it was a red sticker. But the next year (changing nothing) it was a green sticker. Doesn't make sense, right? Well, it was mostly because Yamaha didn't file the paperwork in time in order to get the "green sticker cert."

CA has ALWAYS had much more restrictive enviro laws than pretty much any other state. This is an example of that. There are plenty of studies out there that show how much emissions that OHVs produce, but does that matter when you compare it to the emissions from, say, daily commuters? In CA, yes.

We also make lawnmowers and weedeaters use catalytic converters. Does this make sense? Maybe, maybe not, depends on your perspective. Seems pretty lame, but when you add up all the weedeaters in CA, it adds up.

You also have to think abut the psychology of it all. People are much more likely to go to sears and buy a lawnmower with a cat, than they would to stop driving their hummer to work. It's less of an "inconvenience."

CARB is an out of control, self funded, bureacratic, job killing, activity limiting monster with no oversight.

Attorney General Brown has sided with CARB on the above scandal since his religion is the non existent global warming nonsense rather than utilize his office to investigate Mary Nichols of CARB for her activities.

Just more of the same old, same old.

In response to your question/comment, if a study has ever been completed, it would have been by CARB itself and the results tailored for their desired purpose.

Bob

My understanding is that they are funded by the fines that they impose!:lol::ride:

People are much more likely to go to sears and buy a lawnmower with a cat, than they would to stop driving their hummer to work. It's less of an "inconvenience."

Funny example but off-topic. This year's Consumer Reports buying guide listed two Toro lawn mowers as 'best buys' and available from Home Depot. However Home Depot cannot sell them in (nor ship them to) California because they are not CARB-certified.

Now back to the topic...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now