Drivers prefer tolls to taxes. That’s too bad.

[SP Cook]

I don't know state you're talking about, but I wouldn't call $9 (aka 10 minutes @$55/hour rate) very inadequate.

WV

You cannot begin to follow the book in 10 minutes. 

First the mechanic must complete a state run inspection class, at his or the shop's expense.  And complete a criminal background check, with fingerprints, at his or the shop's expense.  That is a couple of $100, counting the time away from work and the tuition and fees.

Then the shop must have a lift.  Instant oil change with the guy in the basement is not acceptable.    Must also be able to not only inspect, but regularly be in the business of repairing brakes, lights, steering, horns, mirrors, windshilds (to be fair, they let that one slide, all you have to do is have the phone number of a glass shop posted on the wall), and wipers.  Meaning you have to have not  an oil change drone, but someone who understands hydralics, electrical, and suspension parts.  A real mechanic.

Building must have a DEDICATED inspection bay, exclusive of those used for work.    Must have a work bench, wheel puller, floor jack, vise, light, bench grinder, socket set, pipe wrench, toe in gauge, soldering iron, assorted replacement bulbs, tread gauge, wire, wipers, ruler, light device (aprox $1000, only works on old cars before lights were plastic), joint tolarance ball, micormeter, and window tint monitor. 

Must check registration papers, insurance papers, check all glass surfaces for breaks and apply window tint meter, must check all metal (an open gash is a flunk), must lift and check frame, must check horn, mirrors, wipers, plate mount.  must pull two wheels and check brakes inlucing hoses, pedal linings, and emergency brake, must check front end alignment and steering componets for wear, must check exhaust, must gauge all tires for wear including uneven wear.  Must check all bulbs. 

For $9.

Just add $5 to the cost of registration and be done with it.  Any mechanic worth his salt can generate $100 in the time it takes to follow the book.

Which is why nobody follows the book, at least if a person has a car that is under 100K or 10 years old.  They just toot the horn and slap a sticker on.  They cannot afford not to.

[jeffandnicole]

In my state, it is a waste.  The amount the state gets is trivial, and the amount the garage gets has not been changed in decades.  It is $12.66 total, with the state getting $3 of that.  The garage is put in the middle of having to lose customers by not offering the service, or losing money by doing so.  And also of p***ing off customers if they actually flunk a car.   And of fudging by not doing anything, since $9 is a rediculous amount to make for the work involved if you actually followed the book.

Several states have eliminated these program recently.    It is better just to take the fee charged and add it to the registration.

I don't know state you're talking about, but I wouldn't call $9 (aka 10 minutes @$55/hour rate) very inadequate. If there is another service performed (like oil change), then things are actually blended together. I mean, it doesn't really cost much to check horn, seat belt, windshield and mirrors if mechanic needs to pull the car in anyway. Guy doing filter from below the car can check underside of the car. Only relatively long and specialized thing is checking brake pad - that requres either lift or jack, pneumatic wrench and 2-3 minutes to take a wheel off. NYS requires removal of 1 wheel. 

PS: all of the above is based on having my car inspected at Valvoline (plus an oil change) done this spring.

In PA, which still has annual safety inspections at private repair places for around $40 - $60, it's amazing how many cars fail for brakes and windshield wipers.  Brakes are something that the majority of people can't really tell themselves.   Wipers are cheap but have a nice profit margin, and can be replaced in seconds.  You don't have to get those things replaced at the inspection...but then your car won't pass inspection.  You still have to pay the inspection cost (actually, I think you pay half of it from what I heard), but then you have to take the vehicle elsewhere to get inspected again...at their price.

In NJ, which used to have safety inspections in public garages, these failures occurred much less frequently.  No incentive for a public garage to fail you on something that he can't sell you right there.

In PA, a car 1 year old has to get a safety inspection, one of the very few that still requires such a service, and then every year after.  In NJ, a new car doesn't get inspected for 5 years, and then every 2 years.  All inspections are just emission inspections.  They can look at other stuff...and tell you a headlight is out or something...but they can't fail you for it.

Just the comparison of PA to NJ (and there's plenty of other states to compare to as well) shows how states with private testing sites can really hold their customers hostage with phantom failures.

[US 41]

I'm so glad I live in an area where I don't have to go through some BS inspections year after year. All I do every year is pay around $45 for my new registration and that is it; no questions asked and no BS requirements.

[coatimundi]

Most other states, including California, say a cop can require a motorist to get a letter from a mechanic that the car is safe if he thinks a car looks unsafe.  A few others require a one-time inspection if the car is coming in from out of state title. 

The inspection covers a list of the things you would think.  Tire tread, brakes, bulbs, horn.  Varies from state to state.

On my last smog check, about 2 months ago, I had to sign something that said I would have my tires replaced within a certain amount of time.
I mean, you're complaining about $9: smog checks are $50 every two years for less than 30 minutes of actual work. It's a huge racket just to keep that industry, which mostly serves no other purpose (a lot of these places are solely smog check places), in business. Modern cars just don't need to be smogged that often.

I thought that you were taught basic car maintenance in drivers ed. I mean, I never took it, so I don't know, but I thought everyone learned some basic stuff. But, honestly, do you remember any of your other high school classes? I think I'm not too much in the minority to say that I didn't have my mind on pre-calc or British literature when I was in those classes.
I don't know about drivers test either. It's stupid enough as it is to ask about braking distances on wet roads for box trucks, and multiple choice tests aren't for everyone.
In the end, I think it's more the parents' responsibility to teach the maintenance of a vehicle, not the nanny state's. Best thing you can do is break that gender role barrier: teach your daughters about cars. Show them where the oil, coolant and wiper fluid are. Talk to them about belts and hoses. When you go to get an oil change, or do your own oil change, have them hang around with you and watch. It seems like men already do this with their sons, but don't with their daughters, for whatever reason. And it's just a matter of a couple of generations to even it out a little bit, I think.
And I'll step off the soapbox now...

[hbelkins]

I'm grateful that Kentucky abandoned annual inspections back in the 1970s.

We used to require annual inspections, but I don't remember what all was actually inspected. A sticker was placed in the front windshield to certify passage of the inspection. Just about any neighborhood garage could be and was certified as an "Official Kentucky Vehicle Inspection Station."

Sometime in the mid to late 1970s, Kentucky eliminated annual inspections and inspection stickers in favor of insurance stickers. I do not know if Kentucky made having auto insurance mandatory then, or if it was already mandatory, but I would suspect the former because the proof of insurance was a sticker that was placed in the back window of the vehicle. In essence, the insurance sticker replaced the inspection sticker. A few years later, the insurance sticker was abandoned in favor of simple cards kept with the vehicle registration certificate.

And emissions inspections are just global warming Chicken Little-isms, but that's an entirely different argument.

[Sykotyk]

And emissions inspections are just global warming Chicken Little-isms, but that's an entirely different argument.

You may think that, but in places like LA, it's amazing how much clearer the sky is during the day now than it was ten years ago. One of the biggest benefits was cracking down on older vehicles and idling as the primary culprits. So, it does have a benefit. In areas with regular rain, smog isn't as much as a problem as a good storm tends to clear the air for a while.


As for inspections, Ohio doesn't do anything statewide. If you bring in a car from out of state you're required to get an Out of State VIN Inspection, which is a dealership (or the clerk) going out to look at your car's VIN # in the windshield to verify it's what is on the title. That's it. And that's $3. There is emissions checks in Cuyahoga, Hamilton and Franklin Counties from what I'm aware, but don't live there so it doesn't matter to me.

[coatimundi]

And emissions inspections are just global warming Chicken Little-isms, but that's an entirely different argument.

You may think that, but in places like LA, it's amazing how much clearer the sky is during the day now than it was ten years ago. One of the biggest benefits was cracking down on older vehicles and idling as the primary culprits. So, it does have a benefit. In areas with regular rain, smog isn't as much as a problem as a good storm tends to clear the air for a while.

Totally agree with you. Even ten years ago, but between now and twenty years ago is a tremendous difference. But, now, I don't think it's worthwhile - nor would it be worthwhile if I lived in LA - to have my < 10-year-old car tested every two years. If we got rid of it completely, I think people would go crazy and reintroduce all kinds of cars and configurations that they're otherwise keeping off of the roads because they can't get it smogged and, thus, legal. If it were all or nothing, I'd choose all, but I think there's a better way to handle this.

[SP Cook]

I'm grateful that Kentucky abandoned annual inspections back in the 1970s.

We used to require annual inspections, but I don't remember what all was actually inspected. A sticker was placed in the front windshield to certify passage of the inspection. Just about any neighborhood garage could be and was certified as an "Official Kentucky Vehicle Inspection Station."

Sometime in the mid to late 1970s, Kentucky eliminated annual inspections and inspection stickers in favor of insurance stickers. I do not know if Kentucky made having auto insurance mandatory then, or if it was already mandatory, but I would suspect the former because the proof of insurance was a sticker that was placed in the back window of the vehicle. In essence, the insurance sticker replaced the inspection sticker. A few years later, the insurance sticker was abandoned in favor of simple cards kept with the vehicle registration certificate.

And emissions inspections are just global warming Chicken Little-isms, but that's an entirely different argument.

I think the trend is to eliminate these inspections.  In addition to Kentucky, I can remember Ohio and South Carolina doing away with the system in the last decade or so.  North Carolina did away with the physical sticker, but you still need an inspection, the garages have an on-line system now. 

I do remember the Kentucky insurance stickers.  IIRC, it had quite a bit of personal information, maybe residence and agents name.  Never knew any other state to do that. 

Global warming is, of course, pseudo-science, but there is certainly air pollution and, to the extent that places with a high population try to regulate those gases (which the EPA act actually gives them jurisdiction over, unlike so-called "carbon emissions" which the EPA has no jurisdiction over whatsoever) it is OK with me.  The problem, as always is over-reach as the EPA wants air coming out of cars to be cleaner than the air that goes is and wants to impose smog checks (they tried it here a few years ago, but we beat them back) in less populated places with no need.

[US 41]

I think checking people emissions is kind of pointless and unnecessary. There are probably factories out there that put out more emissions in one minute than what your car will put out in one year. Mexico City has no drive days, depending on the last digit of your license plate, and it really hasn't had a significant impact on solving their pollution problems either. Honestly any big city is going to have some kind of problem with pollution no matter what, especially big cities that are somewhat surrounded by mountains like LA and Mexico City.

I personally think global warming is a hoax, but let's just assume its real. It's called global warming for a reason. The US, Canada, and the EU are not the only countries out there. As long as countries like China and India do whatever they want, it doesn't really matter how much the western world cuts back on emissions, because honestly 80% of the world doesn't care about global warming.

[kalvado]

I think checking people emissions is kind of pointless and unnecessary. There are probably factories out there that put out more emissions in one minute than what your car will put out in one year. Mexico City has no drive days, depending on the last digit of your license plate, and it really hasn't had a significant impact on solving their pollution problems either. Honestly any big city is going to have some kind of problem with pollution no matter what, especially big cities that are somewhat surrounded by mountains like LA and Mexico City.

I personally think global warming is a hoax, but let's just assume its real. It's called global warming for a reason. The US, Canada, and the EU are not the only countries out there. As long as countries like China and India do whatever they want, it doesn't really matter how much the western world cuts back on emissions, because honestly 80% of the world doesn't care about global warming.

One thing you have to understand: emissions checks are not about carbon dioxide and global warming - they are about side effects, mostly incomplete fuel combustion.
Carbon footprint of a car, or whatever you call it, is effectively the MPG value. You can do only that much about it.
Incomplete combustion is a much more interesting thing. Anecdotic example: since catalytic converters became mandatory, suicide by starting a car in a closed garage no longer work. Headache is the worst you can get if running a proper converter.  Because catalytic converter takes care of CO, which is the lethal one in closed garage.

[CtrlAltDel]

Global warming is, of course, pseudo-science

I personally think global warming is a hoax

Neither of these statements is — and by a wide margin — even close to true. The evidence against them is everywhere. I'd say more, but that would get too close to the political realm.

[Max Rockatansky]

Global warming is, of course, pseudo-science

I personally think global warming is a hoax

Neither of these statements is – and by a wide margin – even close to true. The evidence against them is everywhere. I'd say more, but that would get too close to the political realm.

Truth, hoax, fact, misleading statistics....whatever you may or may not believe....I just know one thing.  Ghostbusters got me dead-set against the environmental brigade all the way in 1984:

Seriously Walter Peck was on screen for MAYBE 10 minutes and he did more to ruin the reputation of the EPA that probably anyone or anything in the last 30 years combined.

I think that whatever your stance is on global warming or emissions we can all agree on one thing, Walter Peck has no dick. 

[Brandon]

I'm so glad I live in an area where I don't have to go through some BS inspections year after year. All I do every year is pay around $45 for my new registration and that is it; no questions asked and no BS requirements.

Likewise, even if we do have a quick emissions inspection (OBD) at a state-run facility, and pay $101 a year for registration.

[US 41]

Global warming is, of course, pseudo-science

I personally think global warming is a hoax

Neither of these statements is – and by a wide margin – even close to true. The evidence against them is everywhere. I'd say more, but that would get too close to the political realm.

Okay then prove to us that global warming is caused by human activity.

[kalvado]

Global warming is, of course, pseudo-science

I personally think global warming is a hoax

Neither of these statements is – and by a wide margin – even close to true. The evidence against them is everywhere. I'd say more, but that would get too close to the political realm.

Okay then prove to us that global warming is caused by human activity.

[coatimundi]

So here's the problem with the global warming/climate change denying: you have no place in a multitude of discussions. By that, I don't mean that it's not anyone's place to say it, but offering "global warming is a hoax" as an argument is totally irrelevant here, in a discussion about inspection fees.
You either need to ignore the discussions that even remotely touch on the subject, or ignore the coal- and oil-funded malarkey of fake science that's pushed on conservative talk radio and Fox News. But asking someone to prove it in a discussion simply derails the discussion. Someone on a roads forum, who very likely has no expertise in atmospheric and climatic science and can't explain all the intricacies of the process, is just going to Google it, like you should.

[US 41]

I'm pretty sure there hasn't been any actual warming for like over 17 years, which means that humans probably aren't the cause. The weather just changes and it can be unpredictable. It's barely over a degree warmer on average now than it was in 1880. That means if the average temperature in 1880 was 75 degrees then right now it is 76 degrees. Big Deal. I really think we should all flip shit over one degree.  If it is 85 degrees one day and then 99 the next do you flip out about it or do you say oh the weather just happened to be different today.

Seriously we have had more snow the past two winters than I have ever remembered us having. Two summers ago it hardly ever got warm enough for me to use my pool.

CO2 readings don't mean anything to me. There were around 1 billion people living on earth in 1880. There are over 7 billion now. You know what every human breathes out every second of every day? CO2. BTW only 0.039% of air is CO2. Most of our air is Nitrogen (78%) and Oxygen (20%).

[jeffandnicole]

Seriously we have had more snow the past two winters than I have ever remembered us having. Two summers ago it hardly ever got warm enough for me to use my pool.

Those that believe in global warming will say that those things are caused by global warming.

I've noticed that people who believe in global warming use any hot day in the local area to say it's due to global warming. But if it's a cold day, they're quick to explain that it's GLOBAL warming, so just because it's cool doesn't mean global warming doesn't exist.

Whenever there's hurricanes or tornados, it's now due to global warming. Nevermind many destructive storms took place 40, 50, 60 or more years ago.

It's tough to have a conversation with these people because of their inability to acknowledge anything bad happened in the past.  Heck, even normal summertime temps are now caused by global warming, and not by, say, summer atmosphere conditions!

[Max Rockatansky]

I'm pretty sure there hasn't been any actual warming for like over 17 years, which means that humans probably aren't the cause. The weather just changes and it can be unpredictable. It's barely over a degree warmer on average now than it was in 1880. That means if the average temperature in 1880 was 75 degrees then right now it is 76 degrees. Big Deal. I really think we should all flip shit over one degree.  If it is 85 degrees one day and then 99 the next do you flip out about it or do you say oh the weather just happened to be different today.

Seriously we have had more snow the past two winters than I have ever remembered us having. Two summers ago it hardly ever got warm enough for me to use my pool.

CO2 readings don't mean anything to me. There were around 1 billion people living on earth in 1880. There are over 7 billion now. You know what every human breathes out every second of every day? CO2. BTW only 0.039% of air is CO2. Most of our air is Nitrogen (78%) and Oxygen (20%).

Extreme views on either side of the coin would have you believe one of two things.  People who claim climate change generally ignore all the data in front of their face to which there is plenty.  A lot of them throw the word "conspiracy" out there when they are losing an argument and need a maguffin that can't be refuted.  The opposite extreme are the people who are convinced all the ice caps are going to melt in the next 10 year and think that almost major seaboard city will be under 400 feet of water.  These people deny the data in from of the all which has showed progress towards reigning carbon emissions.

OKAY....so here's my legitimate take on the subject that doesn't include a Walter Peck reference.  Basically I don't think anyone could have known at the beginning of the industrial age or automotive era the effect carbon emissions would have in regards to global warming or pollution in general.  Really at the end of the day I think there was an easy energy source and it was exploited in kind...that's human nature.  If anythings like the Environmental Protection Act led to some decent stuff like advancements in the automotive sector towards alternate drive trains and increased fuel economy figures.  Nowadays things like electric cars are becoming more and more common while others like the hydrogen combustion engine have been explored.  I'll say this though; there is a huge reliance in terms of the power grid for coal even until this day and it is an equally large pollution source as all the cars on the road.  Not to mention that the process used to create lithium ion batteries in those electric cars ain't exactly "clean."  So...progress is progress and usually people won't do things unless they are mandated by law....so yeah...not all terrible.

Now with that in mind that same EPA has a lot of negatives that have come in vogue with it.  Basically there is red tape about EVERYTHING nowadays given that almost any kind of public works project in the U.S. requires an burdensome impact survey.  It also led to silly laws like states requiring emissions checks on new cars which cost the tax payer base money on cars that would likely never fail unless heavily modified.  Speaking of modification, the EPA even sought to have new cars built out of production vehicles conform to emission standards....like that was any significant source of pollution.    Basically the automotive sector as much progress as it has made has become the favorite punching bag for environmentalists when their efforts ought to be focused now on how we generate power...  I could get into the efficiency and pollution levels of nuclear power plants versus coal or the myths associated with the former...but I digress.

In terms of climate data, it's pretty clear people have had effect.  But with that in mind there have actually been warmer periods of time in last 1,000 years like the Midevil Warm period which ran 1C warmer than today.  Geologic and climate data is often best viewed from long historic ranges like tens of thousands of years rather than a couple decades or a century.  There is even evidence of higher coast lines in recent geologic history...hell the Florida Keys were formed not too long ago geologically from an under water coral reef.  If you really want to see how wild the climate swings over time in North America alone check out the water levels out in the Great Basin Desert over the last 100,000 years with all the warming/cooling trends. 

[jeffandnicole]

It's interesting to note some predictions as recently as around the year 2000. Many of them had our coastal waterliness much high in just 15 years...which would mean now. None of those predictions came true.

[kalvado]

It's interesting to note some predictions as recently as around the year 2000. Many of them had our coastal waterliness much high in just 15 years...which would mean now. None of those predictions came true.

One of the things which may affected those predictions is lower than average solar activity in cycle 23, peaked around 2000-2002, and significantly lower than average activity in cycle 24, peaked 2012-2014.  There are indications cycle 25 will be weak as well.
This can be be a short term variation, or a longer term, beginning of a small ice age.
Nobody can tell what would happen in cycle 26, 20-25 years from now. Maybe greenhouse effect would save us from a new ice age, maybe all those climate horrors would come true around 2040-2050.
And you may look at Hubble telescope to see how predictions didn't quite work out - for same lower sun activity reasons.

[wxfree]

Pointing out the ignorance of people does not change the science.  You shouldn't be listening to uneducated people, anyway.  Claiming that there is no global warming because you had a cold day is as ignorant as saying there is global warming because you had a warm day.

It's important to keep things in perspective.  One of the biggest factors to be considered is that the majority of the heat caused by global warming is in the oceans.  Up to a point, the heat can basically disappear and be safely stored in the water (and in water vapor caused by increased evaporation).  Heat is also going into the ice and melting it.  This all happens before actual warmer weather.  As these storehouses get increasingly full, that's when warmer weather starts to happen.  Due to differences in heat capacity, the warmer air is a very small portion of the actual heat imbalance.

The normal variation of weather, which will include cold spells, does not negate the heat excess.  Neither does hot weather prove or appreciably increase the imbalance.  It's not actual "global" warming, because it doesn't heat up the interior of the planet, but it also isn't accurate to think of it as "atmospheric" warming.  It's warming of the oceans, ice, land, and atmosphere.  The atmosphere is the last link in the chain, and a very small part of it.  Arguing about how warm the air is makes the discussion a "deck chairs on the Titanic" topic.

By the time the atmosphere is getting warmer, you've already stored up an unbelievable amount of heat above the natural conditions.  As the imbalance between the atmosphere and everything below it grows, the air will gradually follow the trend.  That will happen in an unsteady manner, consistent with weather and climate variations.

[Duke87]

I think checking people emissions is kind of pointless and unnecessary. There are probably factories out there that put out more emissions in one minute than what your car will put out in one year.

Actual data says otherwise:


Yes, a factory individually will be a larger source than a vehicle, but vehicles significantly outnumber factories so collectively it does make a difference.

[hbelkins]

It's interesting to note some predictions as recently as around the year 2000. Many of them had our coastal waterliness much high in just 15 years...which would mean now. None of those predictions came true.

Not to mention all the doomsday predictions back in the 1970s that we were headed for another Ice Age.

[US 41]

You can debate global warming all day. Some people believe in it, some don't. If it was 100% proven it wouldn't be controversial, but obviously it's not.

Back on topic. I would definitely support tolling freeways before I would add a mileage tax or raising the gas tax. There's nothing wrong with having people pay to use the best roads. States like Oklahoma, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Florida all have multiple toll facilities. I don't hear complaints about how those states are forcing poor people onto less safe roads. In fact all the states I just mentioned, besides OK, are eastern states that have more traffic than the rest of the nation. I don't get why states like Indiana and Illinois can't collect toll money off of their interstates. A lot of the traffic on interstates are from out of state so it would make sense to charge tolls, especially in rural areas where it wouldn't be extremely difficult to convert the freeway into a toll road.