Roadside Pollution Sensors in CA?
04-18-2004, 02:53 PM
#1
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
Roadside Pollution Sensors in CA?
George Orwell was a few years off, but Big Brother seems to be growing up over time...
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Road sensors detect polluters in California
Sun Apr 18, 9:40 AM ET Add Top Stories - Chicago Tribune to My Yahoo!
By V. Dion Haynes Special to the Tribune
Sitting in the back of a van parked along a major thoroughfare here, Howard Pittman stared at snapshots on two laptop computer screens of a 1990s-era Honda Accord with a distinct plume of smoke spewing from its tailpipe.
Within seven-tenths of a second, the time it took for the car to pass the infrared sensing equipment at 40 m.p.h., Pittman's screens filled with a variety of statistics that fingered the Honda as emitting too much carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons into the Los Angeles basin's famously smoggy air.
As if clogged freeways, speed traps and hidden cameras that shoot photos of drivers whizzing through red lights weren't enough, California drivers may have something new to worry about: experimental technology that can clandestinely identify their vehicles as gross polluters, targeting the cars and trucks for state-ordered repairs.
California air regulators are trying out the remote smog-sensing device that someday could supplement the biennial tests at emissions testing stations, a system mandated here by the Environmental Protection Agency (news - web sites) and standard in Illinois and many other states. If the experiment goes according to plan and is approved by the California Legislature, the remote testing sites would show up across the state.
The project is proceeding as states face increasing pressure from the federal government to clean up their air. The EPA last week ordered officials in 31 states to develop new pollution controls to meet federal health standards, and California was cited as having some of the worst air problems in the country. The Los Angeles basin was found to have "severe" pollution; it was the only region in the U.S. to receive that designation.
California's remote testing experiment could help it meet the federal standards. Tracing the license plate numbers of vehicles exceeding emissions limits, state officials would notify the drivers to have additional testing. Anyone whose vehicle failed a second test would be required to fix the problem.
Unhappy motorists
As evidenced by glares from some motorists at the remote station 50 miles east of Los Angeles, the new technology may seem like yet another intrusion by Big Brother.
But proponents and officials in states that are using or testing the technology--including Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Virginia and Missouri--say the remote sites can save public money and motorists' patience. They see them as an answer to growing criticism of the system, in which a bribe can prompt a mechanic to pass a dirty car, or faulty diagnostic equipment can fail a clean one.
Because only a fraction of cars are responsible for most pollution, proponents say the remote system would save millions of dollars by pinpointing only vehicles that need attention. For the majority of drivers, that would mean avoiding the inconvenience of scheduling an appointment and then waiting in a long line at an emissions testing station, and paying up to $25 or more for a test that comes out clean.
"With the remote sensors you can measure thousands of cars per day for less than 50 cents per car," said Joel Schwartz, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington who is studying the sensing device.
The current system "is like trying to stop drunk driving by giving people a sobriety test once a year at the [Department of Motor Vehicles]," he added.
Jeffrey Spring, spokesman for the Automobile Club of Southern California, said: "Generally, we support the technology. But it can impede traffic because [motorists] often stop" to look at the unusual setup on the road.
Others, questioning the reliability of the technology, are pressing California lawmakers to reject the devices.
"It's a nice idea. We have no problem with the goals," said Frank Bohanan, technical consultant with the Specialty Equipment Market Association in Orange County, which represents 5,200 manufacturers of car accessories and performance parts.
However, he said, "There is mixing of plume [from one vehicle to the next]. We don't feel you're getting an accurate reading."
Developed in the late 1970s, the remote emissions sensing technology had been largely suppressed until recently, experts say.
"We received a lot of rejection early on," said Don Stedman, professor of chemistry and biochemistry at University of Denver, who is credited with inventing the device. States have "invested a lot of capital into the emissions testing program, and they don't want to let that go."
Niranjan Vescio, a former EPA official and now a general manager at Environmental Systems Products in Tucson, which manufactures remote sensing devices, agreed.
Ex-official blames lobbyists
"We have fought the battle in so many places with the inspection lobby," Vescio said. "[Whenever anyone suggests using new technology], they say, `You're taking money out of our pockets.'"
But amid growing recognition that the air quality in many parts of the country is getting no better despite emissions testing programs, remote sensing technology is receiving renewed attention.
Studies, including a 2001 National Research Council (news - web sites) report, show that emissions reductions reported to the federal government often are overblown. Requested by Congress, the study recommends that states find better methods, including remote sensing devices, to target the cars responsible for the pollution rather than all vehicles.
"In the 1980s, it was necessary to test every single car," Vescio said. "But cars today [with cleaner-running engines and warning lights indicating a tune-up is needed] do a good job of controlling themselves. . . . A lot of people are wondering, `Why do you have to put every car through that regimen anymore?'"
Texas introduced infrared smog-sensing technology in 2001, phasing out the previous practice of testing the tailpipe emissions of cars pulled randomly to the side of the road.
"This system is less intrusive," said Jimmy Guckian, program administrator for on-road testing for the Texas Department of Public Safety, adding that the remote system is a backup to emission testing sites. "Early on, the complaint was that we were being covert [with the remote testing], like Big Brother. But we now put up signs, and people have accepted it."
With the toughest regulations on auto emissions and the cleanest-burning fuel in the nation, California has vastly improved its air quality since the 1970s, when children routinely were ordered to play indoors because of foul air.
But a steady increase in the population and number of vehicles on the road is slowly diminishing air quality, environmental officials say, prompting innovative approaches.
On a recent morning, a red Volkswagen van from the 1960s, a Chevy pickup from the late 1950s and a late-model Cadillac Catera were among the stream of vehicles that sped by the white van parked on the side of the street in Rialto. Emissions from most of those vehicles fell in the normal ranges.
How the system works
The readings are taken by shooting a beam of infrared light through the exhaust of passing vehicles to a sensing module. Changes in the light that result from interactions with gases in the exhaust are then almost instantaneously analyzed by a computer to determine whether a car is a potential polluter. Cameras also record the license plates of passing cars.
"This car is running 10 times [worse] than what it should be," said Richard Erceg, an air quality engineer at the California Bureau of Automotive Repair, who oversees the pilot program. "Probably 10 percent of the vehicles are putting out 50 percent of the gross pollution."
California air quality officials, who began the experiment in January, plan to collect 1 million samples this year. A report on the pilot will be issued to the Legislature, which will determine whether to adopt the program.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Road sensors detect polluters in California
Sun Apr 18, 9:40 AM ET Add Top Stories - Chicago Tribune to My Yahoo!
By V. Dion Haynes Special to the Tribune
Sitting in the back of a van parked along a major thoroughfare here, Howard Pittman stared at snapshots on two laptop computer screens of a 1990s-era Honda Accord with a distinct plume of smoke spewing from its tailpipe.
Within seven-tenths of a second, the time it took for the car to pass the infrared sensing equipment at 40 m.p.h., Pittman's screens filled with a variety of statistics that fingered the Honda as emitting too much carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons into the Los Angeles basin's famously smoggy air.
As if clogged freeways, speed traps and hidden cameras that shoot photos of drivers whizzing through red lights weren't enough, California drivers may have something new to worry about: experimental technology that can clandestinely identify their vehicles as gross polluters, targeting the cars and trucks for state-ordered repairs.
California air regulators are trying out the remote smog-sensing device that someday could supplement the biennial tests at emissions testing stations, a system mandated here by the Environmental Protection Agency (news - web sites) and standard in Illinois and many other states. If the experiment goes according to plan and is approved by the California Legislature, the remote testing sites would show up across the state.
The project is proceeding as states face increasing pressure from the federal government to clean up their air. The EPA last week ordered officials in 31 states to develop new pollution controls to meet federal health standards, and California was cited as having some of the worst air problems in the country. The Los Angeles basin was found to have "severe" pollution; it was the only region in the U.S. to receive that designation.
California's remote testing experiment could help it meet the federal standards. Tracing the license plate numbers of vehicles exceeding emissions limits, state officials would notify the drivers to have additional testing. Anyone whose vehicle failed a second test would be required to fix the problem.
Unhappy motorists
As evidenced by glares from some motorists at the remote station 50 miles east of Los Angeles, the new technology may seem like yet another intrusion by Big Brother.
But proponents and officials in states that are using or testing the technology--including Texas, Colorado, Arizona, Virginia and Missouri--say the remote sites can save public money and motorists' patience. They see them as an answer to growing criticism of the system, in which a bribe can prompt a mechanic to pass a dirty car, or faulty diagnostic equipment can fail a clean one.
Because only a fraction of cars are responsible for most pollution, proponents say the remote system would save millions of dollars by pinpointing only vehicles that need attention. For the majority of drivers, that would mean avoiding the inconvenience of scheduling an appointment and then waiting in a long line at an emissions testing station, and paying up to $25 or more for a test that comes out clean.
"With the remote sensors you can measure thousands of cars per day for less than 50 cents per car," said Joel Schwartz, a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington who is studying the sensing device.
The current system "is like trying to stop drunk driving by giving people a sobriety test once a year at the [Department of Motor Vehicles]," he added.
Jeffrey Spring, spokesman for the Automobile Club of Southern California, said: "Generally, we support the technology. But it can impede traffic because [motorists] often stop" to look at the unusual setup on the road.
Others, questioning the reliability of the technology, are pressing California lawmakers to reject the devices.
"It's a nice idea. We have no problem with the goals," said Frank Bohanan, technical consultant with the Specialty Equipment Market Association in Orange County, which represents 5,200 manufacturers of car accessories and performance parts.
However, he said, "There is mixing of plume [from one vehicle to the next]. We don't feel you're getting an accurate reading."
Developed in the late 1970s, the remote emissions sensing technology had been largely suppressed until recently, experts say.
"We received a lot of rejection early on," said Don Stedman, professor of chemistry and biochemistry at University of Denver, who is credited with inventing the device. States have "invested a lot of capital into the emissions testing program, and they don't want to let that go."
Niranjan Vescio, a former EPA official and now a general manager at Environmental Systems Products in Tucson, which manufactures remote sensing devices, agreed.
Ex-official blames lobbyists
"We have fought the battle in so many places with the inspection lobby," Vescio said. "[Whenever anyone suggests using new technology], they say, `You're taking money out of our pockets.'"
But amid growing recognition that the air quality in many parts of the country is getting no better despite emissions testing programs, remote sensing technology is receiving renewed attention.
Studies, including a 2001 National Research Council (news - web sites) report, show that emissions reductions reported to the federal government often are overblown. Requested by Congress, the study recommends that states find better methods, including remote sensing devices, to target the cars responsible for the pollution rather than all vehicles.
"In the 1980s, it was necessary to test every single car," Vescio said. "But cars today [with cleaner-running engines and warning lights indicating a tune-up is needed] do a good job of controlling themselves. . . . A lot of people are wondering, `Why do you have to put every car through that regimen anymore?'"
Texas introduced infrared smog-sensing technology in 2001, phasing out the previous practice of testing the tailpipe emissions of cars pulled randomly to the side of the road.
"This system is less intrusive," said Jimmy Guckian, program administrator for on-road testing for the Texas Department of Public Safety, adding that the remote system is a backup to emission testing sites. "Early on, the complaint was that we were being covert [with the remote testing], like Big Brother. But we now put up signs, and people have accepted it."
With the toughest regulations on auto emissions and the cleanest-burning fuel in the nation, California has vastly improved its air quality since the 1970s, when children routinely were ordered to play indoors because of foul air.
But a steady increase in the population and number of vehicles on the road is slowly diminishing air quality, environmental officials say, prompting innovative approaches.
On a recent morning, a red Volkswagen van from the 1960s, a Chevy pickup from the late 1950s and a late-model Cadillac Catera were among the stream of vehicles that sped by the white van parked on the side of the street in Rialto. Emissions from most of those vehicles fell in the normal ranges.
How the system works
The readings are taken by shooting a beam of infrared light through the exhaust of passing vehicles to a sensing module. Changes in the light that result from interactions with gases in the exhaust are then almost instantaneously analyzed by a computer to determine whether a car is a potential polluter. Cameras also record the license plates of passing cars.
"This car is running 10 times [worse] than what it should be," said Richard Erceg, an air quality engineer at the California Bureau of Automotive Repair, who oversees the pilot program. "Probably 10 percent of the vehicles are putting out 50 percent of the gross pollution."
California air quality officials, who began the experiment in January, plan to collect 1 million samples this year. A report on the pilot will be issued to the Legislature, which will determine whether to adopt the program.
04-18-2004, 03:11 PM
#3
Banned
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: In self-imposed exile.
Posts: 14,072
Likes: 0
Received 8 Likes
on
7 Posts
Same. I'd rather deal with a little inconvenience to get air that won't kill me.
Where I think the unfairness of it is though is the fact that diesel-emissions puking trucks and buses get a pass, ditto on most state vehicles. There are some buses and state cars going over to CNG power but I still see an awful lot of the old ones spewing a thick cloud of black carcenogenic soot out the back. The real tragedy is that most of the latter variety are school buses; the new ones typically are the public ones.
It's sad that our society has to resort to this kind of enforcement to get people to put the public welfare above their own bottom line. Truly sad, but if that's what it takes - fine.
First time I see some ratty old junk-collecter's pickup with crap falling out of the back and toxic smoke getting puffed out the tailpipe (these are ALL too common on L.A. freeways) get pulled over, I'll personally pull over and shake that cop's hand, if not offer to buy him a beer when he gets off work.
Where I think the unfairness of it is though is the fact that diesel-emissions puking trucks and buses get a pass, ditto on most state vehicles. There are some buses and state cars going over to CNG power but I still see an awful lot of the old ones spewing a thick cloud of black carcenogenic soot out the back. The real tragedy is that most of the latter variety are school buses; the new ones typically are the public ones.
It's sad that our society has to resort to this kind of enforcement to get people to put the public welfare above their own bottom line. Truly sad, but if that's what it takes - fine.
First time I see some ratty old junk-collecter's pickup with crap falling out of the back and toxic smoke getting puffed out the tailpipe (these are ALL too common on L.A. freeways) get pulled over, I'll personally pull over and shake that cop's hand, if not offer to buy him a beer when he gets off work.