In a message dated 98-07-31 08:36:46 EDT, you write:
<< I am all for "saving the environment", but many things that come from
Washington just don't make sense. Let's take automobiles. Car & Driver a
couple of years ago wrote an article that said that at least a third of all
car pollution came from cars which were gross polluters. This means that
these cars were running so badly, or had an engine worn so bad, that they
polluted obscenely. Does the government try to get these cars fixed or off
the road? NO! They keep passing more and more stringent pollution controls
on new cars so that the "average" amount of pollution in the air is less!
Why not fix the pollution at its source? The study also said that it would
be cheaper to give $1000.00 to each of the owners of these gross polluters
to fix their cars, than to implement the current smog program. It also
would have a bigger impact on overall air pollution. I guess this approach
is not politically correct. >>
That is a blatant lie. The government has done plenty to get these cars off
the road. There are car crushing programs in many states now. Their effect
is non existent on the environment but devastating on those who own, restore
or drive them. These cars are collected, points tallied for each one then the
points are usually sold to a large company that now can pollute more. Most
people believe what they read, especially when it comes from a source like C &
D. But the research is not there to back up these claims. I would be all for
emission testing that imposed limits on all cars, no matter what year. But
that is not what these programs are about. It is about money and politics and
had little to do with the environment. My 2 cents.
Wayne
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 20 2003 - 12:09:17 EDT