Another CARB DPF lawsuit

http://www.chicoer.com/news/ci_26660400/north-state-organization-takes-new-legal-jab-at

While these suits are regarding heavy diesels in trucking, the same concerns apply to light diesels.

romad---does CARB actually require a DPF, i was under the impression (at least federally) that companies could use any technology that they deemed necessary to reduce emissions?

Well, the rules in question are CARB's new heavy duty diesel rules that require retrofitting or replacing diesels that don't meet the 2010 model year restrictions. While owners can implement any CARB verified diesel emission control strategy (DECS), DPFs are the the most common.

See: http://www.arb.ca.gov/diesel/mobile.htm

particularly this page:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/decsinstall/decsinstall.htm

This is typical CA and the way they go about crafting regs is one of the reasons I escaped CA. Their regulatory philosophy "ready, fire, aim" and never mind the aftermath. The new ground water laws jerry just signed is another shining example of this.

boertje said:

This is typical CA and the way they go about crafting regs is one of the reasons I escaped CA. Their regulatory philosophy "ready, fire, aim" and never mind the aftermath. The new ground water laws jerry just signed is another shining example of this.

Click to expand...

Yep. I regret not leaving when I retired from the USAF back in '90. However, my parents were here so I figured I'd stay until they were gone. My mom is 94 now. The groundwater bill is just another way to grab ALL of Northern California's water to keep the SoCal pools full and the desert green.

That's it! Maybe the new diesel emissions rules are a way to drive agriculture out of the CPR so there will be more water for Gov. Moonbeam's cronies in SoCal!

It seems that CA forgets who feeds its people. CA farmers have the heaviest regulatory burden of any state in this country.

This is the CPR; the only unregulated agricultural crop is marijuana!

Im still going to work on my highflow dpf exhaust until its not an issue to delete.

Yea just crap to make retro fitting a dpf twice as expensive.

Dirtracr95 said:

Yea just crap to make retro fitting a dpf twice as expensive.

Click to expand...

Well, remember that CARB's aim is not to reduce emissions, but to maximize revenue income to the board and their cronies.

Romad, your last two posts are right on the mark.

I would love to see the trucking industry get together and simply pull out, until the rules get changed in a way that it is at least *possible* to do business.

"Sorry Governor, your grocery store shelves are empty and the people are starving because all of the trucks that have legal emissions equipment are in the shop getting fixed, but the technicians aren't able to fix them enough to pass your regulations."

Except the rules don't apply to vehicles registered out of state/country. So we'd have all those Mexico registered pieces of junk trucks running everywhere.

As for in-state registered vehicles, hey this is the CPR, I would not put it past Moonbeam, Newsom, etc to just "nationalize" all them (in the name of the "people", of course) or get Obama to do it.

Nationalize them and then what - pay for all their repeated DPF system repairs?

Methinks if I were a trucking company and the rules don't apply to out-of-state vehicles, the response would be to register all such vehicles out-of-state.

But first you'd have to move the company out of state, though admittedly the CPR is doing its damnedest to drive businesses out. This CARB rule is probably part of that plan.

romad said:

But first you'd have to move the company out of state ...

Click to expand...

And, given California's generally business-unfriendly regulatory environment, this is a problem??

romad---forgot about this thread, even worse, I forgot about CARB designating products acceptable. Sorry about that, how can they essentially bypass ex-post facto laws (I am sure I am not the first to think this way) by forcing compliance on a previously sold good? This is just asinine.

I believe that if a trucking firm out of state does business in CA, that even there CARB has its mitts in the emissions that that firm emits with their fleet. Their fleet must be compliant to match the miles traveled in CA. It is well known by my hay hauling friends that the non CA hay haulers that do not want to conform to CARB haul their loads to the border and a CA trucker takes it from there so moving your firm out of state and expect to haul into CA to escape CARB will not work. Of course if the haulers are running 2010 truck or later then it's not an issue.
http://www.thetruckersreport.com/truckingindustryforum/trucking-industry-regulations/232406-carb-changing-rules-again-no-new.html

http://www.cdltrucksales.com/carb-compliant-info.htm

http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/onrdiesel/documents/faqverify.pdf

That doesn't make sense because it is a direct violation of the interstate commerce clause in the Constitution. The CPR ran afoul of it years ago when they were tacking on hundreds of dollars to vehicle registrations of people who moved to the CPR from other states and went to register their FEDERAL emissions vehicles here. The U.S. Supreme Court slapped it down resulting in refunds. There still is a small one-time "Smog Abatement Fee", however.

But, the primary targets are small mom-and-pop businesses and fixed-site engines used in various businesses, not interstate trucking firms. For some of these, replacing just 1 or 2 engines would cost the equivalent of 10 years income.

Indeed, it makes no sense but it is reality. You truck into CA, whether a mom and pop firm or interstate trucker, you will comply.

On your original post, I read that same article in the Ag alert publication. CARB just has too much power and need to be cut.

What totally amazes me is that my wife and I have somehow managed to live well into our 70's having to breathe all the terribly polluted air, especially in the last 20-30 years, drink all the polluted water, and have kids who've lived well into their 40's and 50's.

It's not that I'm for dirty air or water or anything else, but when a brush or forest fire produces more pollution than all the motor vehicles, not to mention a volcano or several puking stuff into the air, getting so picky about IC engines, and power plants seems to be the edge of lunacy, or over the edge. But as someone pointed out someone's getting rich off the rules and regs, but it sure isn't the operators of any of the "evil" machines that allow us to have groceries, get from here to there and back again, and have heat and light.

I'm waiting to convert my TDI to solar or wind power though, but in some other lifetime.

LarBear said:

It's not that I'm for dirty air or water or anything else, but when a brush or forest fire produces more pollution than all the motor vehicles, not to mention a volcano or several puking stuff into the air, getting so picky about IC engines, and power plants seems to be the edge of lunacy, or over the edge.

Click to expand...

+1

I've taken some heat on TDIclub, and other forums for my (legal-where-I live) DPF delete...including the extreme "you're killing my kids" soapbox BS. I'm confident that the 200 trees & shrubs I've planted in my yard offsets enough carbon compared to the dire environmental damage I'm doing to the planet.

I've visited cities in India & China. Trust me guys, the greenhouse gas problem isn't being caused from this side of the ocean.