Smog testing vehicles... a cash grab??

[Ian Szgatti]

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jk/061101.htm

[freakray]

So where did you copy/paste this from?

[Ian Szgatti]

Originally Posted by freakray

So where did you copy/paste this from?

Jim Kerr, a Canadian automotive journalist... theres much more to the article, but I thought these main points were of most interest. Do you ask because you'd like to read the entire article, or because you are merely trying to point out that I could not possibly write such a piece? The latter of course being completely correct.

[skibum1111]

Umm, how about a link posted with the article? I think what freakray was getting at was something along that idea....

[freakray]

Originally Posted by Ian Szgatti

Jim Kerr, a Canadian automotive journalist... theres much more to the article, but I thought these main points were of most interest. Do you ask because you'd like to read the entire article, or because you are merely trying to point out that I could not possibly write such a piece? The latter of course being completely correct.

Because I recognized the article and strongly believe if you want to post an article for discussion you should post the source.

Otherwise, if I had not specifically asked, you have committed plagiarism!

[ec437]

I would like to point out that burning a cord of wood only releases CO2 that is in the parts of the carbon cycle that do not concern us.

[drunken monkey]

there is some truth in that automobiles are unfairly blamed for a lot of pollution.
In the UK, as it is in much of the developed world, the massive majority of emmisions come from construction and construction related industries which by and large produce at least 60% of total emmisions and if I recall correctly, this doesn't even include the tertiary emmisions of the end users.

i'm not sure if you read that article correctly but it's main focus is the apparent misguided focus of current emmisions testing amd suggests ways to properly address the situation.
where in that article did the author suggest that pollution/emmisions testing a cash grab?
are you saying that all testing has no purpose other than money making purposes?

somehow you read "wrong focus of testing" and you translated it to "evil companies wanting to make money".

[skibum1111]

Here instead of a tailpipe sniff they plug into the obd2 port and check the computer to make sure everything is where it should be. The problem is that a fairly inexpensive part could be misdiagnosed as a more expensive repair, and the vehicle will still fail the emission portion of the test until the computer says its ok, and a malfunctioning ecm will cause the vehicle to fail the emissions test as well. That could very easily turn into a cash grab for the repair facility.

[Vic2]

Yes, a cash grab. Smog testing brand new cars?

[skibum1111]

Why not? I've seen brand new cars fail the sniff test due to something not assembled right at the factory as well as owner tampering with the emissions systems to gain more horsepower.

[Vic2]

I had a '72 LeMans that blew exhaust like crazy. You could see grey smoke coming out when my car was in line. It did it intermittently and I was thinking 'why now'! Anyway, it stopped enough to pass the test. I was stunned!

The odds of brand new factory cars failing are very low. Personally, I've never heard of anyone failing.

[beef_bourito]

the point is that it's possible and that's why you'd test them, to make sure they aren't poluting more than they should.

[Ian Szgatti]

Originally Posted by drunken monkey

somehow you read "wrong focus of testing" and you translated it to "evil companies wanting to make money".

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jk/061101.htm

My apologies for not posting a link to the source. I recieved quite the verbal whipping over my plaguristic ways...