JJsKJ wrote:
Cheaper/easier for a company to spend to scrap than to fix their own emissions related problems......"offsetting"....BS!
I sure wish I had the place and money to buy up hundreds of old classics to save them from the crusher.
Now if they want to take ALL of the cars from 1974-1990's off the road, cept for those that pass smog, more power to them. Seriously, what cars from that time period really matter anyway? (cept for any of the actual "performance" models built during that time)
I have read this from many sources, and everyone has a different take.
First off, I don't see a huge deal as it is voluntary. If I want to trade a '69 Mach 1 to be scrapped, that is my business. If someone else wants to MAKE me do it, we have problems.
The car companies are up againts the laws of diminishing returns emissions-wise. No car sold here has a emissions related problem "to be fixed." I have seen reports that the average new car produces 95-98% fewer emisions than a 1974 model. To improve that final 2-5 % is a huge monumental waste. To all intents and purpose, modern cars are emissions free.
If you are poor, and have a car that can't pass emission, screw you? But if you have money to keep your old car 100%, that is fine? A bit of (probably unintentional) classism exists in this argument. But you hear it again & again from varied sources.
We have no smog testing for cars here. A vehicle emitting excesive smoke as to be a hazard is ticketed & removed from the road, but no emissions testing.
This crap started with CARB and frankly the sooner the Kali's throw CARB into the Pacific, the better this country will be. We would see a huge jump in mileage & power immediately.