I came across this article (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/uptospeed/2009/03/black-car-ban.html) about CARB looking to push for more reflective paints, so as to keep cars cooler. Their reasoning was that the cooler a car stays, the less A/C needs to be used, which in turn would use less fuel.
One of the big things that came up was that black just wasn't reflective enough, and wouldn't be able to meet such a standard if implemented, but a recent statement calmed many fears of a ban on the color black in the near future.
Now, if you don't know, CARB (California Air Resource Board), is a division in California for emissions regulations (Green Freaks).
Well, I got curious, and looked up the board members, and credentials. Only one person was listed as automotive related. What really sucks about this sort of thing is the lack of knowledge dictating what should be allowed, and what should be banned.
If you read in the article they want windows to come from the factory with a coating to keep your car cooler, but the last time I checked that is what some decent window tint was for. And coatings. Coatings are ussually chemicals, and I doubt any chemical mixed coating they want to spray on these windows are going to be natural in the least.
Then, they have this huge focus on energy saving, but they will not be open minded to diesel technology, which could provide nearly twice the fuel mileage of gas engines. Instead of encouraging the use of diesel, they claim that it is filthy and is harmful to the environment.
Another thing that I don't like, is the fact that they go around claiming that anything that has a chemical in it is bad for women and children, and the elderly, and the planet. But guess what? Everything has chemicals in it.
I read an article on their websites front page, and it stated that air pollution caused more allergies. I say bull-shit. I think the whole clean freak, lack of exposure to anything causes more allergies in children. They can't build an immunity to particulates and dust, because you have that HEPA vacuum, A/C, and Lysol wiped everything in your house. A little dirt and dust never killed anyone.
What scares me is the fact that these people have the potential power to ruin the automobile. They could implement unrealitic policies that would, and could have already taken its effect on the industry.
It's just like what our teacher said about our government law makers not knowing enough about technologies. They have no business enforcing what they do not understand.
I'm going to end this on a final note. Hydrogen is the answer. It is ready. It is efficient. It just needs an infrastructure to be set in place. Why it hasn't started already, is probably because of dirty money and politics, but it will have to come at some point. Hopefully sooner than later.
According to the Los Angeles Times, "The air board is now taking public comments on its proposed reflective glass rules, which it estimates will add $31-$50 to the cost of a new vehicle while saving Californians millions of gallons of fuel a year by 2020 and reducing greenhouse gas emissions significantly." So while you voice your concern about the 'naturalness' of this clear coat, it seems in this statement that although it could be harmful what we are currently doing is much more harmful. If we can at least reduce the detriment that we're causing.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I have heard some scary things about hydrogen as an alternative fuel. You should check this article out.
http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-hydrogen-hoax
The point I am trying to make about the coating for the windows, is that window tint can dramatically reduce the oven effect that occurs in a parked car, too. What they are proposing is to make more reflective paints and windows. How reflective are we talking? A bright white in direct sunlight is blinding. How would the reflectivity in these coatings affect other drivers' vision? If it is like a mirror, you are going to blind someone driving down the road.
ReplyDeleteThe article you linked was a good read, giving incite to the potential dangers of using hydrogen (for the most part, exploding). But, I still believe it can be done. Maybe not at as large a scale as public transport, but what if it were implemented into semi trucks, and trains. A large dent would be made in emmisions, considering cargo tansport runs 24/7, and it wouldn't require as large of an infrastructure of refueling stations.
It's just an idea, of course, but so was the light bulb and every other innovation we have become accustomed to.