new exhaust emission rules

Started by -----, May 25, 2007, 10:36:37 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

80 Vert

Quote from: jasoncordelle on May 28, 2007, 11:13:51 AM
Jem, I think you're missing the point a little. Low income shouldn't be an excuse for polluting in the same way as it shouldn't be an excuse for violence, lack of manners or self-respect.

I don't think he was saying that if you're not wealthy you have no rights...I think it's just a matter of making sure that the said 1.3 Corolla is not belching toxic fumes, just because it's cheap.

It should be somethng you budget for when buying or owning a car, to have a regular service done...which in theory would make the car run a lot better and a lot less dirty. In theory...

Any properly maintained car should be able to meet a certain standard of lets say 3% CO, there's NO excuse for having even slightly smoking cars on our roads low or high income. Just because someone may be on a low income gives them no excuse to drive a polluter (as in smoker). I have a 1979 Beetle here that came from the USA, Its last smog cert came with it (done last year) which i just dug out. The CA max level is set at 2% CO, the mentioned car was measured at 0.03% CO and passed. By the way this car isn't restored or has a new engine and has done a giziloin miles. What it did have before smog was a service with new leads, plugs, points, airfilter, fuel filter, tune.
Proves that even old cars can be maintained to run at a reasonable level.
2010 T5 Transporter TDI  Tuned by Superior Tuning NZ
2003 Jetta Coupe soon to be R36TT
1991 Golf GTI 2.0 TSI swapped
1963 Type 34 Karmann Ghia, turbo 2.0
1990 Porsche 964 911 Carrera 4
1980 1303 Beetle vert, under restoration

HandsomeDan

Quote from: Spinner on May 28, 2007, 11:47:52 AM
yes i have several times....have you????
Yes.
Quote from: Spinner on May 28, 2007, 11:47:52 AM
ever treked in the himalayas????
No...I can't afford to.
Quote from: Spinner on May 28, 2007, 11:47:52 AM
their own filth is  piles of organic waste.....generated by individual humans...
What a complete load of bollocks. There are cans, bags, bottles and many, many inorganic pollutants just tossed aside by slum-dwellers and peasants in most poor nations. Not to mention the incredible amount of pollution coming from clapped-out cars!
The term, "never crap in your own nest", does not seem to apply to many of these people. It's not JUST the wealthy such as yourself (I am talking relatively, now) who make the mess...every human being is responsible for their patch.
I am not denying that major corporates and larger, wealthier countries pollute. I AM disputing that 3rd world countries are blameless.
To say they only pollute with organic waste is incredibly naive. Surprising from you, considering that you normally come across as well-informed and far from naive.
1998 Mk III Golf,
1992 B4 Audi 80
2007 Toyota RAV4
2000 Mazda SP20 AWD (JDM Mazdaspeed Edition)
1996 Toyota Starlet - daily hack
2003 Opel Zafira GSi 2.2
2007 Volvo XC70

feelou

Now now. It looks like we've found ourselves a topic.

Quotepoverty is not an excuse for pollution its a reason and cause of pollution......its the rich and well off that are in a position to make a difference....and its that sector of society that uses up and emitts far more than any other sector of society!!!!!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
86 Quattro coupe
85 Jaguar XJS
86 100 Avant (Hindenburg/garden shed)
88 200qt Avant (confirmation of OCD)

Spinner, I can't help noticing you own a 85 XJS (one of many cars, maybe?). Your 1985 XJS emits 24% more carbon dioxide per km than a 2006 BMW X5 4.4. And that assumes your Jag is properly tuned. Check this calculator out.

This discussion confuses 2 things.

  • Who pollutes more - this is down to the car, not the owner. Old cars pollute more.
  • Who should pay for pollution - this is a belief question

Richer folks might pay more, but that won't reduce emissions. Take polluting cars off the road.

RobClubley

This is always an interesting subject.

I think that there should be a proper emissions test and that all vehicles must be gradually made to conform, but it has to be a slow process to enable cars to be sorted out or replaced over time and to enable all of the testing centres in the country to purchase the equipment.

Yes it would be expensive to do, and people will object as they always will when they media portrays it as the nasty government trying to take even more money from us hard working taxpayers.

But you also can't just sit back and do nothing, it isn't going to go away.

Personally I think the whole greenhouse gas/carbon thing is bollocks designed to enable governments to more easily create new taxes on "environmental" grounds. BUT we do need to stop our cars chucking out so much of all of the other poisons/particulates etc, especially in the cities.
1985 ur quattro
1992 Ford Courier - the sensible daily

80 Vert

Yes exactly,
Limiting cars to 2004 and newer & having some bullcrap visible smoke test isn't the way to do it.
2010 T5 Transporter TDI  Tuned by Superior Tuning NZ
2003 Jetta Coupe soon to be R36TT
1991 Golf GTI 2.0 TSI swapped
1963 Type 34 Karmann Ghia, turbo 2.0
1990 Porsche 964 911 Carrera 4
1980 1303 Beetle vert, under restoration

BB

#25
Quote from: jasoncordelle on May 28, 2007, 11:56:49 AM
Yes.No...I can't afford to.What a complete load of bollocks. There are cans, bags, bottles and many, many inorganic pollutants just tossed aside by slum-dwellers and peasants in most poor nations. Not to mention the incredible amount of pollution coming from clapped-out cars!
The term, "never s**t in your own nest", does not seem to apply to many of these people. It's not JUST the wealthy such as yourself (I am talking relatively, now) who make the mess...every human being is responsible for their patch.
I am not denying that major corporates and larger, wealthier countries pollute. I AM disputing that 3rd world countries are blameless.
To say they only pollute with organic waste is incredibly naive. Surprising from you, considering that you normally come across as well-informed and far from naive.

This isnt what this is about. Its about whether a visible test is enough.
  I think the visible test is fine for NZ as it would be hypocritical and to costly to the average person to do any more and if it scrapped the cars before they should be it will make more pollution. thats all.

Except! I cannot imagine living like this, it just makes me wanna cry thinking how that must be.
Quote: "oh and they are soo poor that any waste that does make it too the piles of garbage is picked over by the really really poor who eek out an existance from sifting through the rubbish.....u think we have a recycling industry!!!!" Quote from spinner.
The end is nigh, but the end of what is the question?

80 Vert

Visible test = no standards, something NZ is very good at.
Always half arsed measures implemented by uneducated politicians.
2010 T5 Transporter TDI  Tuned by Superior Tuning NZ
2003 Jetta Coupe soon to be R36TT
1991 Golf GTI 2.0 TSI swapped
1963 Type 34 Karmann Ghia, turbo 2.0
1990 Porsche 964 911 Carrera 4
1980 1303 Beetle vert, under restoration

HandsomeDan

Quote from: vert1 on May 28, 2007, 02:28:34 PM
Visible test = no standards, something NZ is very good at.
Always half arsed measures implemented by uneducated politicians.
Agreed.
1998 Mk III Golf,
1992 B4 Audi 80
2007 Toyota RAV4
2000 Mazda SP20 AWD (JDM Mazdaspeed Edition)
1996 Toyota Starlet - daily hack
2003 Opel Zafira GSi 2.2
2007 Volvo XC70

HandsomeDan

I have a feeling that a lot of what the government will be doing over the next few months/years will really be targetting "Carbon Credits" and making the balance right for a show of "doing the right thing".

I won't confess to even knowing how the carbon credit thing works...just that since its inception, there seems to be a lot more publicity surrounding anything that pollutes, that's easy to remove (so not power stations, factories and trucks).

Quote from: Spinner on May 28, 2007, 02:46:07 PM
(i know this as i was desperate to get one of the coke bottles in nepal as they are bottled by "swastik" bottlers...all the bottles have a line of tiny swastikas etched around the base of them!!!! very non PC!!! >:D

An interesting sidenote: The swastika is a holy symbol for Hindus, apparently (yup, I watched the Da Vinci Code, too)...
1998 Mk III Golf,
1992 B4 Audi 80
2007 Toyota RAV4
2000 Mazda SP20 AWD (JDM Mazdaspeed Edition)
1996 Toyota Starlet - daily hack
2003 Opel Zafira GSi 2.2
2007 Volvo XC70

RobClubley

Quote from: jasoncordelle on May 28, 2007, 03:12:23 PM
An interesting sidenote: The swastika is a holy symbol for Hindus, apparently (yup, I watched the Da Vinci Code, too)...
It's the other way around though - or is that just the buddhist version?



1985 ur quattro
1992 Ford Courier - the sensible daily

RobClubley

Quote from: Spinner on May 28, 2007, 03:26:47 PM
yep the swatika is a sanskrit symbol meaning good luck/prosperity etc ....and its irrelevant the direction it faces....as some claim....they use it either way round.....

Ahh..
1985 ur quattro
1992 Ford Courier - the sensible daily

HandsomeDan

It's also a design on the ceiling at the Hofbrauhaus in Munich, where Adolf used to sit and plot before he came to power...I sat there and looked up: there it was (although very stylised).
1998 Mk III Golf,
1992 B4 Audi 80
2007 Toyota RAV4
2000 Mazda SP20 AWD (JDM Mazdaspeed Edition)
1996 Toyota Starlet - daily hack
2003 Opel Zafira GSi 2.2
2007 Volvo XC70

HandsomeDan

So back to the issue at hand: what does a litre of beer cost at a student bar, compared to at Hofbrauhaus?
1998 Mk III Golf,
1992 B4 Audi 80
2007 Toyota RAV4
2000 Mazda SP20 AWD (JDM Mazdaspeed Edition)
1996 Toyota Starlet - daily hack
2003 Opel Zafira GSi 2.2
2007 Volvo XC70

HandsomeDan

1998 Mk III Golf,
1992 B4 Audi 80
2007 Toyota RAV4
2000 Mazda SP20 AWD (JDM Mazdaspeed Edition)
1996 Toyota Starlet - daily hack
2003 Opel Zafira GSi 2.2
2007 Volvo XC70

HandsomeDan

1998 Mk III Golf,
1992 B4 Audi 80
2007 Toyota RAV4
2000 Mazda SP20 AWD (JDM Mazdaspeed Edition)
1996 Toyota Starlet - daily hack
2003 Opel Zafira GSi 2.2
2007 Volvo XC70

BB

So there you go guys even spinner dosent agree with me regarding just a visual test!

I am going to really enjoy the look on faces around town and vask when cars that blow no visible smoke get told they have to get scrapped or have there old donks recoed because the invisible fumes are slightly to high, along with the garages faces who cant do WOF anymore cause they cant afford a very expencive machine. And it will always be arbotary the wof guys will only half rev or half block the tube as they test thier cars.
I mean all the old 5 pot audis will be off the road as soon as the test comes in including my 200 which is fine and im doing a better engine in my own good time, and i only drive it about 4000kms a year max.
And in the end it will do nothing to the level of pollution when all you still need is a little money and you can have whatever size V8 truck you want.

If it blows smoke fail it if it dosent, dont! Come on you ALL know im right ;D
The end is nigh, but the end of what is the question?

qta4

Do you actually have to have an engine in a car to get a warrant, can't see any requirement in the regs.
Jem could start up a new service to those who have visible exhaust smoke. :D
Skill is, sucessfully tightrope walking across the Niagra Falls.
Intelligence is, having the sense not to do it.

BB

I could install air pumps ;D To blow fresh air into the exhausts so the reading is better, oh but thats old hat :)
The end is nigh, but the end of what is the question?

80 Vert

2010 T5 Transporter TDI  Tuned by Superior Tuning NZ
2003 Jetta Coupe soon to be R36TT
1991 Golf GTI 2.0 TSI swapped
1963 Type 34 Karmann Ghia, turbo 2.0
1990 Porsche 964 911 Carrera 4
1980 1303 Beetle vert, under restoration

BB

To be honest I think the folk at the ltsa have been sweating over trying to get the details and all the classic car exemptions in place. So basically they will get paid for ages to work out how to make loads of law that will still piss some inocent people off and then make loads of garages spend loads of money on special machines that will pass 99% of cars that would just pass anyway cause theyll set the limits so they will pass so as to not piss everyone off unfairly. In the end they will achive nothing. They sure wont bring anything in till the warehouses of jap imports are sold off! the finance companys would go nuts.

Emmisions is very much not a face value thing. Because of hypocricy and bullcrap freedoms more than bullcrap laws it gets twisted all around. i mean in the end who want to drive a smoky car? Nobody but about 1% do cause there so broke they cant do nuthin till it  stops. 
The end is nigh, but the end of what is the question?