3 Views
California Cool Car Rules Dropped
by
Edward Niedermeyer
(IC: employee)
Published: March 28th, 2010
Share
Remember how the California Air Resources Board was contemplating banning black cars because air conditioning uses so much C02 ( or not)? Well, the madness is over, as The Detroit News reports that California’s proposed “Cool Car” rules are dead. What killed them (besides common sense and the laws of diminishing returns)? Law enforcement, for one, which warned that
the new standards, requiring window glazing to keep car interiors cool, could degrade signals from cell phones and ankle monitoring bracelets worn by felons in rural or mountainous areas.
CARB’s glazing standards also would have been incompatible with toll booth “EZ-pass” technology and could have interfered with cell-phone transmissions.Edward Niedermeyer
More by Edward Niedermeyer
Published March 28th, 2010 2:17 PM
Latest Car Reviews
Read moreLatest Product Reviews
Read moreRecent Comments
- Poltergeist I expect this will go over about as well as the CR-Z did 15 years ago.
- Michael S6 Welcome redesign from painfully ugly to I may learn to live with this. Too bad that we don't have a front license plate in Michigan.
- Kjhkjlhkjhkljh kljhjkhjklhkjh A prelude is a bad idea. There is already Acura with all the weird sport trims. This will not make back it's R&D money.
- Analoggrotto I don't see a red car here, how blazing stupid are you people?
- Redapple2 Love the wheels
Comments
Join the conversation
Having owned similar black and white cars (both Town Cars) in the same climate (southeast GA) my experience is that the color of the car does not make a great deal of difference in use of the A/C -- especially in an automatic temperature control system where it is very easy to leave it at one setting nearly all the time and never push that A/C OFF button. I have also found that at highway speeds there is about an 0.8 MPG penalty for A/C on versus A/C off (05 Town Car, windows closed both cases) The laws of thermodynamics say basically there is no free lunch. Thus, the energy I use to run the A/C, AND also the power steering, power seat (which slides back and forth every time I exit and enter the car), windows and locks has to come from somewhere. Up until the mid 60's, you could buy Cadillacs that had manual seats, locks and windows and no A/C. Today, even the most ridiculous econocar is "fully loaded" by '64 Cadillac standards. There must be a measurable economy benefit to a car with all manual controls versus the same machine with those things electrically operated, but you can't sell it. I think even Volts and Leafs (Leaves?) have electric windows and seats, for heavens sake.
I love the mud huts/modern argument. It's a classic straw man. The fact is that technological advancement is the result of all sorts of stimulus. Bureaucratic rules have their place. Is there anyone here who can reasonably argue that we have not benefitted mightily from clean air legislation? And for car lovers, the major advantage has been the radical increase in efficiency a great part of which has led to cars with a lot more go. Nobody likes the short-term pain caused by conditions resulting from rules changes. Yes, low-VOC paint really sucked. So did the wheezing, emasculated engines of the mid to late 70s. But the ever-inventive human mind coupled with the profit motive have overcome these problems. So will it continue. In the end, so long as the debate is reasoned and we stay away from technology mandates (as opposed to goal-oriented approaches), it's a necessary part of the process.