Richard,
Safety inspections and emission inspections are two different things.
Safety inspections are left entirely up to the individual states. Some states
have none, some have regularly scheduled ones, some have one time only
inspections. Currently, I live in a one time only state, where you must get an
inspection to purchase a licence plate, but you need not ever get it inspected
again as long as you own it. Hence, many of the pieces of trash vehicles you
mentioned are on the road here. You can receive a ticket for defects, but that
usually only occurs after the crash.
Personally, I agree with you on the regularly scheduled inspections. This is
done in some of the most dirt poor states in our country, and the world has not
ended from it. A dangerous vehicle is a dangerous vehicle, no matter how poor
a person may be.
Emissions testing is mandated federally. The degree of testing is dictated by
the non-compliance status of the region or state with regards to VOC, CO and
such. States like California are in severe non-attainment, and have draconian
methods implemented in hopes of reducing air pollution. Other areas that are
in attainment, like Kansas, are not required to have any emissions testing.
This applies to all sources of air pollution btw, not just automobiles.
Several methods of determining vehicle emissions are allowed, though the IM240
is the most common. This is the drive on a dyno with a gas collector that most
people are familiar with. Federal law prohibits differential treatment of
privately owned vehicles in regards to corporate fleet vehicles or government
agency vehicles with regards to emissions standards or testing. Though fleet
testing is allowed. Federal law also mandates that SUV's and light trucks are
held to the same emissions standards as automobiles with regards to
manufacturing and on road testing. Only when one gets into the commercial
sized vehicles does the standard change.
How stringent the emissions standards are for a given vehicle are again
dictated federally, and reflect the degree of air pollution in the region. The
worse the area, the tighter the standard. At their worse, the standards are
eight times dirtier then what the vehicle had to demonstrate to the EPA prior
to being released for production. With age and wear on a vehicle though, this
can still be difficult to obtain.
As for collecting and destroying old vehicles, that is in existence in
virtually every state, including California. EPA defined Major Sources of air
pollution can purchase older "gross polluter" vehicles, obtaining an air
pollution reduction credit by their removal. It's simply a method for a source
to reduce air pollution if they cannot reduce it in their own stacks. Many
people do scream about it, and I do not much care for it personally. But it is
a valid method of reducing air pollution. To put it loosely, you could use a
wood stove to heat your house, provided you replaced all the old furnaces in
your neighborhood with heat pumps. Very few industries are able to use this
car crusher technique because of its high cost. They tend to shut down, go
overseas, or purchase the controls they need.
|