When I started working my first job after college I drove this one road every day. It’s a long one, with smooth curves and some not too gentle hills, that winds its way down the valley before reaching the city. It’s rarely busy, except during rush hour, and then of course you’ve got a few bottlenecks. But even then, every road coming out of this city is backed up during rush hour.

There are only a few drawbacks to this drive: it can get a little scary in rough weather and it’s always got at least one cop hidden somewhere on it – so you can’t speed when it’s nice out.

One night I’m driving home with my girlfriend after a party and we get stopped by a roadside check. As we slowed to a stop, the officer leaned forward, in through the driver’s side window.

“How’re you kids doin’ tonight?” he said.

After asking us whether or not we’d had anything to drink (to which, thanks to good planning, I hadn’t) he began to examine the lower corner of my windshield. I realized he must be looking for the annual safety test sticker. I relaxed a bit with the knowledge that I had just gotten my safety test done the day before.

He stood up and asked, “Ever had your emissions test done, son?”

“My what?” I asked. He proceeded to explain to me what an emissions test was and how not having one was breaking the law.

“Public safety, you know?” he said as he ripped the yellow sheet of paper, worth hundreds of dollars, off his little metal notepad and handed it to me through the window.

Of course, I paid the ticket and got the test done. Fortunately, the car was up to standard and didn’t need anything replaced or repaired in order to get it back on the road. I was worried because I had heard that some of my buddies paid an arm and a leg just to make sure their car was safe to drive after they got their emissions test done.

The funny thing was I never got mad. How could I? The government was finally reacting to public demand for cars to be less harmful on the environment. They had succeeded in reducing pollution by making the air quality safer. It’s not something that most of us would do on our own: we don’t have the money to get a hybrid, and most guys my age wouldn’t be caught dead driving any of the newer compacts.

Now that I know about emissions testing and how often I need to get it done, I’ll avoid getting dinged with a fine in the future. Plus, I can sleep a little bit better knowing that I’m not contributing as much to pollution and helping improve the health of others all at the same time. It’s just one more example of how a driver’s knowledge about safety regulations can keep everyone much safer.

• The Thin White Line – Improving Car Safety One Piece of Paper at a Time
• How to Get a Vehicle History Report

You Are Here Emissions Testing – It’s the Law

• Emissions Test – The Basics
• Demerit Points – An Effective Deterrent
• Unsafe Driving Practices
• Speed Limiters Keep Highways Safe
• How Fast Can I Drive?
• Learning to Drive
• Hang up for Safety
• Safety Inspection Tips for Antique Cars
• The Dangers of Curb-siders
• The Safety Bureaucracy Moves Online
• Online Resources Boost Public Knowledge of Road Safety

Just think about the number of safety inspections a car goes through on its way from the manufacturer to your driveway. On top of product development, including crash and road tests, the manufacturer will conduct at least some kind of quality assurance testing for safety before it gets sent to dealerships around the world. In order to even be released on the market it must meet national and regional policies regarding safety mechanisms, emissions limits, engine size, and a host of other subjects.

Once it’s on the market there are a wide range of consumer protection agencies, consumer review websites and magazines that do their own assessments. One of the things they look for is whether or not the manufacturer paid close attention to widely accepted safety standards. They also conduct their own tests for braking distance, collisions and rollovers.

Even in the hands of the driver there is an ever increasing list of laws that were created in an attempt to promote safety. Traffic laws, regular safety inspections, emissions testing, and the notorious “cell phone” bylaw that is cropping up in various municipalities across the continent are all designed to encourage drivers to be more safe.

Most people consider this complex web of laws and safety regulations to be cumbersome and unnecessary, but where would we be today if seatbelts weren’t mandatory? How many more fatalities or serious injuries would be recorded if there were no school zones or speed limits? Of course, one could argue that some laws impinge on personal freedoms, but the point is that driving safely isn’t something people do naturally. The laws exist to protect the broader population.

Also, by making safety a priority the government has encouraged industry to become more innovative when it comes to their own design. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) recently began studying whether to make collision warning systems and lane departure warning systems mandatory. Regardless of the outcome, it’s clear that the automotive industry is responding to our society’s rigorous position on safety: they are the ones developing these new solutions.

Rather than trying to buck against the “system” drivers and car owners that understand the regulations and the paperwork, they are actually able to benefit more than those who don’t. The evolution of communications technology over the past decade is also now lending itself to this bureaucracy, making the entire safety framework much more effective and user-friendly.

The “thin white line” enforced by traffic cops, mechanics, industry regulators, and the government at large is actually a very effective system for ensuring that drivers are more cautious about how they use their vehicles. Often, it’s the paperwork, the laws, and the regulations that make driving so much safer for everyone involved.

You Are Here The Thin White Line – Improving Car Safety One Piece of Paper at a Time

• How to Get a Vehicle History Report
• Emissions Testing – It’s the Law
• Emissions Test – The Basics
• Demerit Points – An Effective Deterrent
• Unsafe Driving Practices
• Speed Limiters Keep Highways Safe
• How Fast Can I Drive?
• Learning to Drive
• Hang up for Safety
• Safety Inspection Tips for Antique Cars
• The Dangers of Curb-siders
• The Safety Bureaucracy Moves Online
• Online Resources Boost Public Knowledge of Road Safety

Biofuels:

Hybrid vehicles such as Ford’s 2007 Escape Hybrid E85 use biofuels to power its internal combustion engine. Ethanol blending is widely used in the United States, Sweden and Brazil as an alternative to petrol, however its environmental credentials have been called in to question with its cultivation being cited as a direct cause of deforestation. There are those who argue strongly that the cultivation of bio-fuels takes up land that could otherwise be used to feed people.

Liquefied Petroleum Gas:

While it has been around for some time as an alternative to petrol its long-term viability in light of global warming has been called in to question. It is non-toxic, non-corrosive, free of tetra-ethyl lead and burns more cleanly than petrol but there is evidence that at low engine loads there is a significant increase in carbon emissions.

Pure Electric Cars:

These would eliminate the need to find a source of power for the combustion engine, but they require powerful batteries and the magnet material is prohibitively expensive given the current market in rare earth substances.

In light of these obstacles, hydrogen fuel-cell electric vehicles (HFEVs) such as the Honda FCX Clarity are providing a focus of attention. Hydrogen is able to be used in cars in two ways: as a source of combustible heat and as a source of electrons for an electric motor. Despite the abundance of hydrogen and its non-polluting properties when burned, the first of these options has never really been a practical option because of the fear of explosion by the highly flammable gas, plus the difficulty of carrying large amounts of fuel and the lack of a re-fuelling network. Consequently, hydrogen fuel cells are being looked at as a way of creating electricity that can be fed into an electric motor to drive a car.

It was reported that since the Honda FCX Clarity was first unveiled in November 2007, there were nearly 80,000 people who expressed an interest in owning one. Production costs of early models were prohibitive as they were in the region of $1million. Since then, Honda has been able to cut its production costs to a more reasonable $120,000 per vehicle. The car is still only available for lease in the United States, Europe, and Japan.

If you want one you’ll need to get to Southern California as that is the state where there are “fast-fill” hydrogen stations. These highly innovative cars can be leased for US$600 a month which includes accident coverage, maintenance, hydrogen fuel and roadside assistance, which assuming you choose to drive the car out of California you’ll need quite a lot. Currently the rate of expansion of hydrogen stations is painfully slow, which is obviously holding back the further development and uptake of the FCX as an alternative form of transport.

In one way the FCX project has got the feel of being a corporate experiment; granted, an interesting and fairly crucial one, even glamorous some might say. It’s no coincidence that by heading for California, they’ve picked one of the global hubs of innovation. If a place can nurture ideas from companies like Apple and Google, then getting the hydrogen fuel-cell car going should be a foregone conclusion for Honda. There is a captive market in California with people only too ready to show their allegiance to this next generation of motor-car.

Honda believes that it could start mass-producing vehicles of this type by 2018, which is difficult to imagine given the challenges to overcome in relation to refueling stations. There is also an issue with the hydrogen being sourced from natural gas through a process of “steaming-out.” In response to this, Honda could do with making a greater play out of the claims that the FCX Clarity is on a par in terms of CO2 efficiency with a battery car using electricity generated from burning natural gas, and much better than the same car using electricity from other states, (54% of which are generated by burning coal).

All of which brings the issue back to our starting point. The reason for the revolution in hybrid vehicles is as a response to the chronic energy crisis faced in many countries and the realization that car ownership is a desire shared by millions of people. Car manufacturers now realize that this is their raison d’être, and as a result have poured heaps of money into the development of this new technology.

• The Evolution of the Hybrid Car
• Examples of Popular Hybrid Models
• Why Hybrid Cars are so Popular
• Barriers to Greater Hybrid Uptake
• Current Car Manufacturer Developments
• Hybrid Car Developments in China

You Are Here Hydrogen Power as an Alternative to the Hybrid­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­­

Written by Mark Evans
Edited by Stanley Butler
Illustrations by Julianne Harnish
Video Engineering by Aaron Peters
Video Production by IMEX Marketing

Executive Producers
International Tuition Services Ltd
Spheri Dot CA Incorporated

To address these problems, car manufacturers have begun to commit an increasing amount of effort and money to prevent their products from becoming a symbol of environmental degradation. The “greening” of the car industry has, up until now, appeared to focus on increasing the efficiency of petrol engines and developing alternative technologies such as the new range of hybrid cars. However, what are the environmental impacts of the millions of cars that end up in the wrecker’s yard?

 The number of scrapped cars is expected to increase, with the countries of the European Union alone likely to experience an increase of around 120% between 2000 and 2015. Whilst this forecast is largely due to growing demand for newer vehicles in the new EU member states, it serves to illustrate the scale of the issue.

This article examines the environmental effects of cars that have reached the end of their lives, and compares the range of legislation that is in place to mitigate these effects.

• Buick Dealer Moreno Valley
• Chevrolet Dealer Moreno Valley
• Dodge Dealer Moreno Valley
• Honda Dealer Moreno Valley

One of the greatest risks to the environment posed by used cars lies in the wide range of potentially toxic materials used in their production. There is a greater level of electronic components found in engines and GPS systems that can contaminate soil and groundwater posing a direct risk to local ecosystems and an indirect risk to human health if they enter the food chain. Battery acid, engine oil, brake fluid and chemicals found in de-icing fluid can also pollute local water supplies either by direct surface run-off or through infiltration in soil, thus polluting groundwater. It only requires a small amount of oil to pollute a disproportionately large amount of fresh water and to illustrate the scale of the issue the US Environment Protection Agency has estimated that 13.4% of used engine oil is illegally dumped, while another 10% goes to landfill.

Reference (*): http://www.monterey.org/recycle/sustainability/transportation/carimpact.html

Clearly, the threat to groundwater supplies from car use is not confined to those cars taken off the road. The effect of non-point source pollution from, for instance, run-off from oil, brake fluid, and other road particles, has been very difficult to quantify. But a US Environmental Protection Agency survey from 1996 of 693,905 river miles estimated that urban run-off was the leading source of pollution for 13% of the river miles that were affected*. In theory, when these cars are taken off the road, the non-point source pollution becomes point source pollution and therefore should become easier to monitor and manage. However, as there are inadequate facilities for treating the waste products from used cars, this often leads to greater pollution.

Reference (*): http://www.bikesatwork.com/carfree/automobiles-and-environment.html

With Europe, USA, and Japan producing a combined 580 million tires a year, there is evidence that the inadequate disposal of car tires is an ongoing environmental hazard as they are virtually non-degradable and spread noxious fumes when burned. They also provide ideal breeding grounds for mosquitoes – an unwelcome additional hazard in those tropical countries experiencing a rapid rise in private car ownership.

Even where cars have been properly stripped of recyclable materials, the painted metal shells pose an ongoing threat where weathering breaks down first the paint, releasing chemical particles in to the air, and then the steel itself. The visual pollution aspect of used car dumps cannot be overlooked, as they create a negative perception of an area for local residents and such dumps may also occupy more space than is desirable in already densely populated urban areas.

An additional point that needs to be considered is that the ELV Directive only stipulates a minimum standard of compliance. The result might be that in the prevention of waste in the manufacturing process, car manufacturers in Europe have to comply with several different versions of the ELV Directive according to which member state they are dealing with. The resulting costs might simply be prohibitive to any waste reduction plan.

Differences in the way the legislation has been implemented are also attributable to the way the public has been informed. As indicated above, the first stage of the process is the consumer having the vehicle processed by an authorized treatment facility (ATF). Even though this can be done free of charge, there is evidence that illegal and irresponsible dumping often occurs when a vehicle is no longer required, thus leading to a range of environmental problems already highlighted. In response to this, waste regulators in the UK and elsewhere have developed on-line directories of ATFs (for example http://www.recycleyourcar.co.uk) aimed at not only consumers, but also ATFs and other public bodies. There may also be scope for the car industry and waste managers to collaborate on some type of awareness campaign to encourage consumers to dispose of ELVs through a proper treatment facility. This may be required more in those countries where, for the time being, awareness of the importance of environmental protection and controls is in its infancy.

• Toyota Dealer Moreno Valley
• Scion Dealer Moreno Valley
• Volkswagen Dealer Moreno

• Jeep Dealer San Bernardino

The treatment procedures for end-of-life vehicles are unregulated in some states so that it is common for disposal facilities to operate inefficiently in relation to limiting environmental damage. With an estimated 7,000 vehicle recycling operations in the United States processing over 11 million ELVs a year, the scope for pollution of ground water supplies is high.

Attempts to pass the type of uniform federal legislation that would impose greater obligations on producers (e.g. the National Recycling Act) have failed largely because of the formidable industry opposition. Where producers have recognized their role in waste minimization, they have only gone as far as voluntary codes of conduct, for example in the Product Stewardship model.

Reference: http://www.epa.gov/osw/partnerships/stewardship/

One reason for the opposition to a more coordinated approach to vehicle waste stems from concerns over greater levels of bureaucracy in state activities. Perhaps a more fundamental reason is that there is little economic incentive to recycle car parts and components as it is currently more expensive than making materials from scratch. Experience from Europe has shown that specific ELV legislation has boosted not only a European, but global trade in recycled materials that often can go back in to the car manufacturing process, thus in turn helping manufacturers meet waste prevention targets. This trade has also had the impact of advancing the development of recycling technologies.

The advantages of greater regulation of proper disposal procedures, targets for recovery and recyclability and greater responsibility placed on producers would also take some of the pressure off the US Environmental Protection Agency which is charged with the task of cleaning up environmental damage.

The significance and extent of car ownership in the United States is well documented. However, as with many indicators of economic growth, the car industry in China highlights the need to develop effective policies to deal with increased consumption. While China is now the second largest country for car consumption and third largest for car production, it has a very low number of qualified ELV dismantlers (356 approved by the state administrative department) which illustrates the urgency necessary for putting in place regulations to deal with vehicle waste. China did pass legislation in 2001 regulating the disposal and recycling of ELVs however the huge growth in the uptake of new vehicles has simply left the low number of ELV dismantlers out of the question for the time being.

Whilst the proportion of vehicles being dismantled in China is very low, the actual quantity of recycled material being produced would suggest that a trade, both domestic and international, is possible. Vehicle recycling provides more than 200 million tons of scrap steel and 50,000 tons of non-ferrous metal*. However, there seems to be a reluctance to re-use and re-manufacture parts within the car industry, which contrasts with the approach in EU countries where new technologies (see arc furnaces above) have facilitated the use of recycled metal in car production with a reduced environmental impact.

The main obstacle to the growth of this trade is that dismantling is still a largely manual process in a country with such a large labor force, and as such it is inefficient in terms of its use of specialist tools. The knock-on effect of this is that there is improper disposal of hazardous substances and therefore frequent severe pollution, worryingly from hazardous substances such as lead, cadmium, mercury, hexavalent chromium, and other heavy metals that are usually improperly treated as common waste. This contrasts markedly with the strict requirements of the EU ELV Directive.

China’s national environmental protection laws would seem to be inadequate to deal with such a rapidly growing industry, and it’s been pointed out that it is in the technical aspects of dealing with the varied waste from vehicles that has lead to such severe impacts on the environment; particularly in water and air quality.

Nevertheless, there are signs that the Chinese car industry is beginning to see the potential of re-use and recovery in terms of improving its competitiveness, particularly as it has designs on increasing exports of vehicles. This assumes a greater significance in the light of rising costs of raw materials. The long-term benefits of investing in re-use and recovery technology should more than off-set the initial cost and are consistent with the aim of Chinese manufacturers to generate a positive image on a global scale.

• Jeep Dealer Riverside