Oil & Fuel California's Tough new rules for Diesel Engines

[Z-Michigan]

I think you're actually going to see the Chinese starting to die off somewhat in the not too distant future. It will undoubtedly be obscured by government control of information, but it will happen. OTOH, though, there are probably more Chinese living than indicated by their government stats due to repressive population control giving an incentive to hide people.

I'm not against clean air; I support reasonable emission controls. I just have a problem with the specific way that Calif tends to regulate things, apparently including this regulation. Let me make an observation - if this requires retrofits or simply outlaws currently in use equipment, the following seems likely:
-big construction companies will replace their equipment and will raise their prices; they will not have trouble financing new equipment.
-small and solo construction companies will have trouble getting the cash or financing to replace the equipment. Many will go out of business or move out of state.
-less competition from small outfits will let big companies raise their prices even more.
-higher prices for construction will result in less new construction and will cause prices of existing structures to rise; property owners and banks will do well, while renters will do poorly.

I think the ineffective lobbying against this may be because big operators will see a net profit over time as small operators get squeezed out. Call me cynical, or explain why I'm wrong.

The ag and under-25hp exemptions are interesting too. I bet ag is because the ag lobby doesn't see a benefit in new equipment, and with the central valley and the fruit crop it's a major industry. I have to say a very environment-unfriendly industry with the scale of pesticide use and irrigation, but I don't think this is all about environmentalism - I think the other, more base green is at work. And the sub 25hp may be a bone tossed to lawnmowing operations (most, but not all, commercial mowers are below 25hp) and maybe to big property owners who own that same type of grounds maintenance equipment. I cannot see any good reason for exempting below 25hp when you figure how much construction equipment is only in the 30-80hp range.

Clearly I have more general opinions about California but those are admittedly outside the original scope of this discussion.

 

[Cap-n-Cray]

Or just buy carbon offsets....

Cary

 

[Tom_H]

With the Chinese population over 1 billion and rising, they must not be getting killed off too often by their food. Or their air. Or water.




While I am not advocating deliberate pollution, there has to be a happy medium somewhere.

Although I have not been there to verify first-hand, the environment in China is said to be, well, less than pristine. Maybe it's 1900 Pittsburgh good. The point is, the conditions there are many times worse than here and there aren't massive die-offs, or if there are, I haven't heard about them, and China is happily soldiering onward, burying American industry with cheap goods. All we can say is, the good that we didn't produce didn't harm the environment. It may have harmed a lot of folks wallets, but that seems irrelevant to the Green Forces.

You don't hear about them because the communists don't allow anyone to talk about it. There was a time when drinking water from Lake Erie would kill you. In practical terms, I think we are at some medium point. I think of myself as a pragmatist. I believe ANWR should be drilled, BUT with far more restrictions and regulations than ever before. If one doubts that parts of the US are being run roughshod, read what TBN members themselves have written about their land being polluted and how they are having to fight the government for blatently siding with industry and allowing industry to poision their land:

http://www.tractorbynet.com/forums/rural-living/104875-so-you-think-you-own-8.html

 

[horse7]

There will be smog tests for tractors. There will be a larger demand for CUTS in California. Large road projects with a fleet of Kubota BX24, working like ants. I left CA for many reasons. Cary

That ant swarm of BX24s will be run 24x7 remote from India , won't have to worry about pesky pollution OR immigration laws! (take longer to reach the Domo arigato, Mr. Roboto stage)

 

[ToadHill]

Not being a lawyer, I always believed that legislating that older equipment could not be required to meet standards that were higher than those at the time it was made. I believe the term is "expose facto" (after the fact). It's Like putting a stop sign up at the corner at noon and giving you a ticket because you didn't stop in the morning on the way to work.

 

[Z-Michigan]

The term you're looking for is "ex post facto" and it only applies to criminal law - it means the government can't declare something a crime and then prosecute you for doing it before it was declared to be a crime.

In terms of regulations outside criminal law, the government can step in and ban you from using, or even keeping possession of, almost anything. Ironically the area where this is done most is with firearms, which are perhaps the only type of personal property that has specific protection in the federal constitution (as well as in most state constitutions). Obviously politicians are masters of calling white black and good evil. Nominally there is protection from "takings" in that government theoretically has to compensate you for taking away property, but in practice the law of takings has more holes than swiss cheese, and doesn't apply with much force to anything other than land - and even then, only when you are almost completely prevented from using the land in any way, not just the way you wanted to use it.

 

[putt_putt_green]

I never understood why it's OK when off-shoring manufacturing, all USA laws go into the tank. It stinks of off-shore slavery to me when Chinese workers are paid $0.25 an hour (or whatever they make). And I commend manufacturers in this country who are still trying to make products with our pollution standards and labor laws. That's the major reason I make some type of effort to buy products made in the USA or countries which care about their people and environment, even if it does cost more.

 

[cp1969]

I never understood why it's OK when off-shoring manufacturing, all USA laws go into the tank. It stinks of off-shore slavery to me when Chinese workers are paid $0.25 an hour (or whatever they make). And I commend manufacturers in this country who are still trying to make products with our pollution standards and labor laws. That's the major reason I make some type of effort to buy products made in the USA or countries which care about their people and environment, even if it does cost more.

The wage only seems low when compared to ours. I'm sure these companies pay the prevailing wage; most of the time more. Otherwise, why would anybody work for them if they could do better? It isn't as if these workers are working for half of what their fellow countrymen are making, a lot of the time it is a good deal better than what they were making prior to the 'exploitive' company showing up.

Prison labor is a different matter entirely, but believe it or not, we do it here, too.

 

[the_sandman_454]

The other important thing to keep in mind if you really care about the environment in general. Buying products from foreign countries with lax environmental policies is essentially encouraging that condition to continue, and penalizing the US companies for trying to adhere to our strict standards.

The only way to get the rest of the world to adopt more stringent regulations (like ours) would be for us to boycott their products until things improve in those countries. Of course we Americans are addicted to our cheap junk, and price matters more than our personal beliefs (in general).

 

[flusher]

And that's the heart of the issue. I and the original poster are on the coast, upwind of everyone. Why should we care what happens over in the inland valleys where the smog stacks up against the Sierras? But the governor and legislature have to take a broader view, looking out for all the residents. In the past California has had some of the smoggiest cities in the nation. If air quality rules help those in downwind states, that's fine too.

AP had a more extensive article than the Reuters article that Skypup referenced. See:

cbs13.com - Calif. Regulators Adopt Nation's Toughest Standard

Excerpt:

The rule impacts primarily construction companies. It exempts all agriculture, engines used less than 100 hours per year, and engines under 25 horsepower.

Construction representatives used the cost of replacing the present fleet with all-new equipment and said this would cost $13 billion, while ARB analysts estimated $3 billion/year increased cost for more expensive replacement machines and upgrades to existing equipment.

Los Angeles has gone from unbearable air - literally, the kids weren't allowed to go outside for recess -, to tolerable air after similar rules were enacted. It's not pretty, but it's necessary.

So, does anyone know how much the soot filters, etc cost to bring something like a 75hp construction-grade TLB into compliance?

I don't own a big TLB and my 2005 Kubota B7510HST and 1964 MF-135, I suppose, will come under the ag diesel category. Just curious about the cost of compliance.