Pontiac GTO Forum banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Just a ? Why is California so strict on emission's ? I know I could probably research the question on the Internet, but I want to know from actual California Native's, is it that bad there ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
If you'd been in the LA basin in the 70s, you wouldn't question why. BROWN air that would burn your eyes. The air is so much more breathable now. If only they could do something about the residents, it'd be more livable! :lol:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
353 Posts
Its not as bad today as it used to be. Due to the high density population, and the lay of the land, air quality has and will continue to be an issue in the state, especially the southern part as the jetstream/mountains/combustion tend to make things pretty awful. Summers get bad when it is hot. Keep your cats on please!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
254 Posts
Discussion Starter #5 (Edited)
I was in San Diego during my Military day's and it seemed quite nice there. That was in 2001. I've seen the Movies where it shows thick smog so dense you can't see 50 feet, but I figured that it really wasn't that bad. So it's nice to know that the high emission law's have cleaned up the air since the 70's era. And as my post stated I wanted the question's answered by actual California Native's..........................
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
479 Posts
I was born in 82 and I could remember times when the air was thick enough where it seemed that you could cut it with a knife. You practically had to chew the air before you took a breathe.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,100 Posts
Thanks in part to tighter emissions laws, California's air is cleaner now than in the 50's.

The Los Angeles basin and San Joaquin Valley are two areas where the air just hangs for days. In fact, when the Spanish first visited what was to later become Los Angeles, they remarked how the smoke from the Indians' fires would just rise into the air and hang there.

Coastal cities, like San Diego and San Francisco, benefit from marine air exchange, which moves the air inland. Los Angeles doesn't get the same effect. What's sort of unfair is that the dope smoking hippies in San Francisco drive around in their old VW buses blowing huge clouds of smoke -- but that's all pushed toward Sacramento -- which gets dinged by the Feds because their air isn't clean.

Of course, the hippies take no responsibilty -- as they're too busy inhaling their own farts.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,445 Posts
I lived in California for a short time in 2004-2005, but always visited while I was growing up. The first time I went to LA, to visit my aunt, uncle and cousins, I was 7, in 1973. The air was bad. We were there in the summer and coming from Pittsburgh you would figure I would be adjusted to pollution. My eyes and nose burned and the only thing you wanted to do was stay inside. Through the late 70's to the early eighties it got better. I say the last real bad year that I remember in LA was 1976.

Most states in the northeast have adopted California regulations and all vehicles built today are 50 state compliant as far as pollution control.

An interesting little tidbit is that cars that meet SU LEV emissions regulations are actually cleaner than most large cities air. By driving those cars you actually emit cleaner air out of the exhaust pipe than what goes into the intake.

If you were to take the emmissions from a 1965 vehicle and measure the pollution by volume, versus a 2001 vehicle, the 1965 vehicle would put 96% more pollution in the air than the 2001. For 2007 we have cut that number to somewhere between 97.5% and 99.5% clean versus 1965.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
232 Posts
Thanks in part to tighter emissions laws, California's air is cleaner now than in the 50's.

The Los Angeles basin and San Joaquin Valley are two areas where the air just hangs for days. In fact, when the Spanish first visited what was to later become Los Angeles, they remarked how the smoke from the Indians' fires would just rise into the air and hang there.

Coastal cities, like San Diego and San Francisco, benefit from marine air exchange, which moves the air inland. Los Angeles doesn't get the same effect. What's sort of unfair is that the dope smoking hippies in San Francisco drive around in their old VW buses blowing huge clouds of smoke -- but that's all pushed toward Sacramento -- which gets dinged by the Feds because their air isn't clean.

Of course, the hippies take no responsibilty -- as they're too busy inhaling their own farts.
BTW, the hippies are now driving Prius' and other hybrids. Aren't electric cars and hybrids the fave of movie stars in Hollywood? Didn't they try to sue GM for discontinuing their all electric car, the EV1?


I used to travel down to see races at the now defunct Riverside Raceway back in the 70s and 80s. In the 70s, the hot desert air was clear. As the 80s came, the LA smog finally reached the area due to the winds and it was as bad as LA. Sadly, the track's land was sold and, IIRC, a shopping center and condos now roost there. :mad: What a sad loss of great auto racing history.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
353 Posts
Actually, our air is cleaner now that it has ever been in the past. The main issue for inland CA in inversions. Those inversions trap the air, and hence pollutants. There is no off shore push that can reach these areas and move it out as has been previously posted.

We need to be very cautious about combustion, as PM10, NOx and SOx are problematic species for AQI numbers. Ozone becomes a problem in the summer as well. I think we are doing an acceptable job as a state at keeping things as clean as possible, balancing the environmental concerns, with economic ones.

I am a bit skeptical however about ever tightening and more stringent emission standards for non stationary sources. We cannot purchase Diesel powered passenger cars in the state any longer, and this is a major bummer, as the newer FI systems, and lower sulphur fuels make them acceptably clean IMO. They are very efficient and blow the hollywood hybrids away in terms of economical transportation. They can use a viable alternative fuel as well, as biodeisel is a much better alternative than ethanol. Biodiesel contains no sulphur and produces fewer particulates, allowing cat traps to be smaller and more effective.

End of rant
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top