When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I will just get like an alky carb and double the fuel pump volume and go alky! I have run cars before on alcohol! It does cut your mileage in half!
That is what we ran with the blown alcohol car, straight methanol, might need more than double the fuel pump..... Remember watching an interview with John Paul Dejoria and he was running his Harley on Patron.
How many c1-c3 owners will be able to drive them in another 25 years?
Some one will be driving them.
.
New vehicles sold in this country for over the past twenty years are so clean that civilian vehicle generated pollution is far down the list of contributors (even with older pre-1976 emissions testing exempt cars factored into the calculations).
Offshore ship emissions top the list of external (exempt) and internal (CARB regulated) contributors.
People who do not live near the ports seldom hear about ship emissions pollution, Estimates of the emissions pollution vary, but one mid-size 1600CEU container ship entering the ports of LA/Long Beach one time emits as much pollution as one million on-road vehicles over a year. Another larger, but irregular, exempt emission source is wildfires. The recent wildfires in the three months of June, July, and August produced PM2.5 emission quantities estimated to be in excess of three years of all CARB regulated emissions. A growing exempt emissions concern is air pollution from China (and the Paris Agreement signatory nations exempted China from emissions controls until 2030, one reason why the US backed out).
Agriculture production chemical usage emissions are CARB regulated, but dust production is partially exempt (while construction site and roadway dust is CARB regulated), and plant growth ozone emissions are exempt.
Of the CARB regulated air pollution contributors, on-road vehicle particulate emissions are fifth in significance (most from older Diesel engines):
Ozone pollution is concentrated more by geography that proximity to vehicle emissions, with congested LA topping the areas of concern but relatively unpopulated Bakersfield and Fresno close behind because of similar mountain containment and a resulting inversion layer that traps the ozone from multiple sources (natural forest emissions, agriculture and industrial sources, again, the problem is not on-road vehicles). The last Stage-3 smog alert was 1974, in the Inland Empire city of Upland, and by 2000 there were zero Stage-1 smog alerts statewide (and vehicle emissions controls have improved since then, with ULEV's and PZEV's). Since 2000 proving the success of traditional NOx, HC, O3, and CO pollution controls, the CARB regulatory efforts have been redirected to reduce particulate emissions (PM2.5 emissions, the past two decades fear, with CO2 emissions next).
California has CARB regulated nearly ever activity under it's control that the cost burden to impose more regulations do not produce a higher economic benefit or a higher social "quality of life" benefit (but the bureaucracy must grow, regardless of a negative cost/benefit).
.
California also still has about 2 billion barrels of known oil reserves, and the State collects taxes of every barrel pumped and refined, along with the second highest gasoline tax in the US, so they are not expected to abandon refined motor fuels as a revenue source.
Light them up and smoke them tires with heavy foot , because California's Socialists need the revenue .
New vehicles sold in this country for over the past twenty years are so clean that civilian vehicle generated pollution is far down the list of contributors (even with older pre-1976 emissions testing exempt cars factored into the calculations).
Offshore ship emissions top the list of external (exempt) and internal (CARB regulated) contributors.
People who do not live near the ports seldom hear about ship emissions pollution, Estimates of the emissions pollution vary, but one mid-size 1600CEU container ship entering the ports of LA/Long Beach one time emits as much pollution as one million on-road vehicles over a year. Another larger, but irregular, exempt emission source is wildfires. The recent wildfires in the three months of June, July, and August produced PM2.5 emission quantities estimated to be in excess of three years of all CARB regulated emissions. A growing exempt emissions concern is air pollution from China (and the Paris Agreement signatory nations exempted China from emissions controls until 2030, one reason why the US backed out).
Agriculture production chemical usage emissions are CARB regulated, but dust production is partially exempt (while construction site and roadway dust is CARB regulated), and plant growth ozone emissions are exempt.
Of the CARB regulated air pollution contributors, on-road vehicle particulate emissions are fifth in significance (most from older Diesel engines):
Ozone pollution is concentrated more by geography that proximity to vehicle emissions, with congested LA topping the areas of concern but relatively unpopulated Bakersfield and Fresno close behind because of similar mountain containment and a resulting inversion layer that traps the ozone from multiple sources (natural forest emissions, agriculture and industrial sources, again, the problem is not on-road vehicles). The last Stage-3 smog alert was 1974, in the Inland Empire city of Upland, and by 2000 there were zero Stage-1 smog alerts statewide (and vehicle emissions controls have improved since then, with ULEV's and PZEV's). Since 2000 proving the success of traditional NOx, HC, O3, and CO pollution controls, the CARB regulatory efforts have been redirected to reduce particulate emissions (PM2.5 emissions, the past two decades fear, with CO2 emissions next).
California has CARB regulated nearly ever activity under it's control that the cost burden to impose more regulations do not produce a higher economic benefit or a higher social "quality of life" benefit (but the bureaucracy must grow, regardless of a negative cost/benefit).
.
California also still has about 2 billion barrels of known oil reserves, and the State collects taxes of every barrel pumped and refined, along with the second highest gasoline tax in the US, so they are not expected to abandon refined motor fuels as a revenue source.
Light them up and smoke them tires with heavy foot , because California's Socialists need the revenue .
Your link only explains the EPA's position to separate speculative greenhouse gas concerns from proven traditional smog concerns (why they revised the web page to separate the two concerns with separate boxes).
CO2 has not been proven to be the primary greenhouse gas climate driver, or even a dangerous climate driver, with a greater climate forcing magnitude than any other climate driving factor. There have been zero observations or experiments showing evidence of CO2's causation significance outside the range of scientific error. The science of CO2 based climate fear is not mature enough to provide repeatable proof of CO2 causation or CO2 dangers, and is currently based only on statistical correlation of independent variables (CO2 up drives temperature up as a settled conclusion, ignoring reduced particulates driving temperature up and cleaner atmosphere driving temperature up, etc.). The UN IPCC reports are limited to speculation on the influence of anthropogenic CO2 (ignoring all other climate factors), and limited to climate history since 1880 (ignoring all prior climate factor changes), even when the research data extends further in the past and other significant climate influences are obvious. The UN charter for the IPCC (panel) is to validate anthropogenic CO2 as THE climate change driver, in politically mandated isolation. The IPCC does not independently assess and prioritize the magnitude of all climate drivers (resulting in blind GIGO driven politics). It would be ideal if CO2 research would provide definitive proof of causation that can be repeated independently, like the chemical and physical science validating the processes, the dangers, and solutions to mitigate traditional Smog, but that CO2 causation science does not exist even after over one hundred years of research. The caution represented by the EPA in separating greenhouse gasses from smog is motivated by the revised need to examine all climate driving factors before implementing potentially dangerous premature conclusions (we do not need a man made solution like MTBE in gasoline to be implemented worldwide, by a similar political mandate to that historical California mistake).
C! & C2 is not the best forum on CF to discuss a politically charged concern like CO2's significance as a greenhouse gas (there is a CF Politics section for that, if you feel inclined). In the mean time, drive while you can.
I respectfully disagree with your statements about CO2.. Even highly skeptical scientists agree it is a factor, and most likely the main factor in the rise of CO2 levels (and average temps) world-wide over the past 100 years.
Fact-based info on wind power and bird deaths: https://www.factcheck.org/2018/09/tr...of-wind-power/
It's more like 5-10 bird deaths per year, per turbine.
Hell, 3 birds fly into my glass door and die every year!
You guys are conflating two things. Particulate matter (or PM) contributes to smog.
CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and contributes to climate change.
Not quite.
PM is regulated on it's own and is not a contributor to photochemical smog (ozone).
Particulate matter (PM) consists of finely divided solids or liquids, such as soot, dust, aerosols, fumes, and mists. Two forms of fine particulate are now recognized. Course particles (PM10) include that portion of the particulate matter with an aerodynamic diameter of 10 microns (i.e., 10 one-millionths of a meter or 0.0004 inch) or less. Fine particles (PM2.5) have an aerodynamic diameter of 2.5 microns (i.e., 2.5 one-millionths of a meter or 0.0001 inch) or less. Particulate discharge into the atmosphere results primarily from industrial, agricultural, construction, and transportation activities. Wind action on the arid landscape also contributes substantially to the local particulate loading. Both PM10 and PM2.5 may adversely affect the human respiratory system, especially in those people who are naturally sensitive or susceptible to breathing problems.
OTOH:
Ozone (O3) is one of a number of substances called photochemical oxidants that are formed when reactive organic compounds (ROC) and NOx (both by-products of the internal combustion engine) react with sunlight. O3 is present in relatively high concentrations in the SCAB and the damaging effects of photochemical smog are generally related to the concentrations of O3. O3 may pose a health threat to those who already suffer from respiratory diseases as well as healthy people. O3 has been tied to crop damage (typically in the form of stunted growth and pre-mature death) and acts as a corrosive (resulting in property damage such as the embitterment of rubber products).
Initially, the EPA and CARB did not want to deal with CO2 as a greenhouse gas because their focus was on health concerns and global warming was not considered a health concern until it became trendy.
Considering the cost of anything and everything in Cali (and the drastic increases coming), and the political environment, I can't understand why most people are not leaving for anyplace else.
Mike,
Just the opposite! California is the land of fruits & nuts. Can't keep them from flooding in.
I respectfully disagree with your statements about CO2.. Even highly skeptical scientists agree it is a factor, and most likely the main factor in the rise of CO2 levels (and average temps) world-wide over the past 100 years.
Fact-based info on wind power and bird deaths: https://www.factcheck.org/2018/09/tr...of-wind-power/
It's more like 5-10 bird deaths per year, per turbine.
Hell, 3 birds fly into my glass door and die every year!
Had this talk yesterday.
I hear one talking about large ships here in a post, and I agree with that, but what are they going to do when they want to fly out of any large airport? LAX, SFO, or any other large airport that put planes out one after another. I flew a small jet around 74,000 lbs that burned diesel fuel, Yes jet fuel is diesel. We burned 6,500 lbs of fuel the first hour of flight, a few less than 1,000 gallons as it is 6.7 lbs per gallon. Now what about the 700,000 lb jet.
I doubt that they will shut down airports or fit the planes with cat converters. When I was a boy a teacher said that we breath out Co2 and the trees take that in. The trees omit O2 and we breath that in, so That's how things balance out.
When I graduated high school in 62, there was a well known radio host PAUL HARVEY. He reported what a New York scientist said, then stopped his talk for a while as if he were shaking his head. The New York scientist said by the year 2000 there would be houses from LA to NYC and we will be overcrowded! Last time I flew from LA to the East there were hours of darkness. Did that guy in NY make that happen, all these missing homes?
I think there were jobs created to alarm the population with doom. I can see one way some of it could kill this day and age. One could die laughing. then there is the 500 million year ago stuff, and reports done on the sex life of whatever insect the find interesting.
That is what we ran with the blown alcohol car, straight methanol, might need more than double the fuel pump..... Remember watching an interview with John Paul Dejoria and he was running his Harley on Patron.
Damn, I dont' think I would get too much Patron past me, and into the fuel tank! I would just be sitting on the side of the road, enjoying my day!
CA is good to go because oil is a renewable resource, the Earth produces oil in abundance deep within its mantel in ways that have nothing to do with dead dinosaurs.
CA is good to go because oil is a renewable resource, the Earth produces oil in abundance deep within its mantel in ways that have nothing to do with dead dinosaurs.
Correct, a large portion of oil is from decaying marine life. It is a continuing process, and it only takes a few million years.
Actually, it could be inorganic in nature. Limestone, aka calcium carbonate, in presence of water, high pressure and temperature can produce complex hydrocarbons. Lots of limestone material in ocean sediment. The calcium carbonate is probably from calciferous shells of microscopic organisms, though. This debate has been around for some time about inorganic vs organic as basis of oil formation. This is why you find oil offshore like in the Mississippi delta, and almost always in ancient sedimentary beds onshore.
Doug
Originally Posted by Drothgeb
Correct, a large portion of oil is from decaying marine life. It is a continuing process, and it only takes a few million years.
100% renewable probably also means no gasoline or diesel(unless biodiesel) for any vehicles. I doubt they will pass exceptions for collector cars, as that is something only rich people can afford,and its all about equality out there.Sounds like it will be real nice place to live in 25 years. Sarcasm mode ON. Expensive, crowded, and bicycles and buses for transpo, I wonder if anyone told them how much infrastructure would be required to supply electricity for private electric cars if they are all electric?
And how many BTUs of extra electric they would have to generate to replace all those gasoline BTUs?This is definitely something they didn't float past the engineers, just pass law and assume people will come up with a viable solution.
Hey Doug,
Not to worry....After all it is California. Where else can you think it's progressed to the point that it just can't get any more ridiculous, and then you wake up the next morning, only to find our you were mistaken.
I'm sure the long term goals are to place collector car hobbyist (like myself), into a category that will be so far taxed, we won't be able to afford to keep them.
Then they'll want to take a large portion of the money the hobbyist sells their car for (calling it a tax, because after all, the hobbyist just sold their car to an out of State buyer, therefore the State of California can no longer collect annual licensing fees), and divert that money into more sensible things.
Something like "shoot up houses" (currently in San Francisco), for those who wish to partake in illegal drug activity. After all, the State will want to provide the "drug" of their choice to the illegal drug user to ensure they don't acquire bad drugs, or dirty needles. Then they need a place to stay, eat, sleep, and get ready for the next day to inject another drug of their choice. It's a wonderful life!!
Rant over.....sorry.....I just can't help myself, and unfortunately, that's just the tip of the iceberg of things here in California.
I would love to move from this State, but these keep me here!
GAS in California in 25 Years??? Will they still have “suitable” roads at that time even to drive them on??? Will California even exist and if so would you really want to live there???
Actually, it could be inorganic in nature. Limestone, aka calcium carbonate, in presence of water, high pressure and temperature can produce complex hydrocarbons. Lots of limestone material in ocean sediment. The calcium carbonate is probably from calciferous shells of microscopic organisms, though. This debate has been around for some time about inorganic vs organic as basis of oil formation. This is why you find oil offshore like in the Mississippi delta, and almost always in ancient sedimentary beds onshore.
Doug
I kinda agree with you. Some limestone is organically generated from bones and shell, some precipitates directly from the water. Both, along with other substances, some organic, some not, are part of the process (in my opinion). That’s why I used the term large portion, instead of all or most. And to me marine life is plants, animals, fish, including their bones and shells. Plenty of land based dinosaurs were washed into the oceans too.
I guess my main point is... yes, it’s renewable, but it takes a really long time. I’d hate to run out of gas and have to wait for the next tank full.
Considering the cost of anything and everything in Cali (and the drastic increases coming), and the political environment, I can't understand why most people are not leaving for anyplace else.
Ill be one of them this year, Too pricy too much traffic crime, everything. Its turned into a pit.
09-11-2018, 07:31 PM
, because California's Socialists need the revenue 
.
