Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Archives | Alerts | Electronic edition | Subscribe to the paper
Subscribe to RSS   Add to My Yahoo!

May 30, 2006 9:29 AM

Update on emissions testing

Todd Hartman has this story with more details on the new emissions testing law signed by Gov. Bill Owens last week.

Basically, the new law intends to phase out tailpipe testing by 2010 in favor of more roadside testing that will identify the worst polluters. It provides for a $100 fine for drivers of high-emitting vehicles flagged on roadside tests that then fail a tailpipe test. The $25 emission test fee would be replaced by a $9 increase in auto registration fee.



Discussion

  • May 30, 2006

    9:51 AM

    '81 Dodge Diplomat writes:

    Here's A tip to all you polluters. When you see the on ramp pollution police. Get A good run and let off the gas as you go by. When well away from the check-point resume polluting.

  • May 30, 2006

    10:35 AM

    harry palm writes:

    Everyone needs to get a hybrid and walk around smelling their farts. I am selling my brand new truck and buying a smoke pouring gas guzzling pile of crap, I hate liberals. If the mexicans are welcome to polute, so can I

  • May 30, 2006

    10:51 AM

    Catch 22 writes:

    Can someone please answer this scenario, thank you.
    I want a truck to pull a trailer. I need a 3/4 ton min. to handle the trailer.
    1. I can buy a new or newer used truck with pretty good emission standards for today's environment. Oh, the downfall is sales tax off the purchase of $40K or more for todays new trucks. Then, the registration fee is $700. /year just to park the thing in my driveway so I can use it to pull my trailer and go spend camping $ in the mountains during the summer.
    2. I can buy a '76 Ford 3/4 ton that spew 7.5% carbon monoxide and very high nitrogen oxide that's killing our trees and making air we can't breathe. Oh, the registration fee and sales tax is minimal.

    My point, our tax system encourges people like me to POLLUTE HEAVILY.

  • May 30, 2006

    10:54 AM

    Experienced Tester writes:

    The coast by the emission test posted by '81 dodge diplomat does not work. A litte FYI.

  • May 30, 2006

    2:00 PM

    Anonymous writes:

    Emission testing would work,but the company they chose originally to do it was greedy and charged way to high of a fee to do a minor test.Maryland has a emission testing program .It only cost $8.00 every 2 years.People didn't mind that too much.plus in Maryland they don't have to pay such high fees for tags.Last time I was there it was $75.00 every 2 years.They also have in place a very good computer system for tracking people driving with expired tags,no licenses,and no insurance.Last time I was there it was a $150.00 per day fine for any of those violations.They knew right away when your insurance was dropped or you cancelled coverage and didn't get new coverage right away.They also have an inspection system so they don't have junk cars driving on the road.If you fail the inspection you do not get tags.Why can't Colorado address some of these problems ,like Maryland can. After growing up in Maryland I have to say I have never seen an expired tag on a Maryland vehicle.They just don't mess around out there.

  • May 30, 2006

    2:33 PM

    Catch 22 writes:

    2pm-
    I used to work in an auto shop back in the early 90's. I've seen cars come in with brake noise and after taking the wheels off to inspect- the brakes were non existent. As in they wore the brakes down down to metal. The people didn't have any $ to fix the brakes and they want to drive the car home.
    You would think under normal circumstances the shop with an ASE mechanic would be able to black flag that car- as in you're not driving anywhere as this car is unsafe to be on the road. Who's responsible if that car glided thru an intersection and killed a group of people crossing the road b/c it couldn't stop? I could have prevented that scenario.
    I was told Colorado doesn't have a mandatory inspection b/c it's discriminating against the poor. Plain and simple. Just like if your car doesn't pass the emission test, the owner of the car is only liable up to a certain dollar amount of repairs. Maybe $150. I forgot the $ amount. After $150. and the car still doesn't pass, it's gets a passing emission sticker to protect the poor yet pollute our air. That's a CATCH 22.
    My take, until a congressman's family member is killed by a car with no brakes, there won't be a mandatory inspection.
    Just another Issue Owens doesn't even want to talk about or acknowledge.

  • May 30, 2006

    2:54 PM

    Mark Wolf writes:

    Catch 22 raises an intriguing point: Who would you rather confront at an intersection: a smoke-belcher with good brakes or a clean-burning vehicle whose brakes are shot? Economic inequities aside, mandatory minimum safety checks are rife with fraud potential, but should the state have some role in establishing safety standards for vehicles it licenses?

  • May 30, 2006

    4:20 PM

    Lefty writes:

    I'm all for mandatory inspections, I want to live and and sleep well knowing the other vehicles on the road pass inspection.

  • May 31, 2006

    8:21 AM

    harry palm writes:

    Lefty, how dumb can you liberals be? After years of testing they showed that these tests DO NOTHING. So how does having a sticker make you sleep better at night? You liberals seem to just want feel good idiotic things to make yourselves feel better about being such wastes of life. I really doubt humans are killing anything, I think the liberals fear of the planet dying because of us is just their hope like christains have with god. To friggin vein to realize that long after humans are dust and all traces of us ever being here are gone, the planets and universe will go on long without us. It has been here for a few billion years, I really doubt that humans who are as smart as you could possibly destroy the place. Pollute away my friends

  • May 31, 2006

    8:52 AM

    Greenpeace writes:

    Harry -
    Spoken like a man who leases his Hummer, then wonders why he is living paycheck to paycheck.

    Spend on, my friend!

  • May 31, 2006

    9:04 AM

    Observer writes:

    The premise that safe vehicle requirements discriminate against the poor is hogwash. That's why owning a vehicle is a PRIVILEDGE and not a necessity. If you cannot afford to maintain a vehicle, perhaps you should not own one. Personal finance is all about choices, and too many of the poor are that way because they choose things like popping out the kids, and racking up the bills without any thought as to how to pay for it all. That does NOT entitle them to endanger the rest of us because they choose not to maintain a vehicle.

  • May 31, 2006

    9:32 AM

    Lefty writes:

    HP- You really think mandatory safety inspections are a dumb idea? Wham, your dead, you just got hit by a car with no brakes. You don't think that happens?
    What about heavy trucks and trailers? Since it's no big deal how about just repealing the safety inspections on those trucks since everything is just alright and the honor system is working so well.
    Yeah, I thought so. Caught you sleeping at the wheel.

  • June 1, 2006

    8:43 AM

    harry palm writes:

    Christ, you liberals are truly fascinating. We are speaking of emissions testing and the stickers, then you come back with some crap about mandatory safety inspections. THERE ARE NO MANDATORY SAFTEY INSPECTIONS you twits. Only for commerical vehicles are there. This is the problem with you liberals, you live in a world of hypetheticals and dreams of unicorns and flowery fields. You seem to think we can fight wars by rubbing Jasmine oil on our nipples and burning incense with the middle east to solve problems. And on issues you like this, you just spout craziness. So are telling me you are for mandatory safety inspections of all vehicles? Or are you just insane by thinking they actually look those things over when you get emmissions tested? Who do you suppose is going to be doing the inspections? Probably illegal mexicans who nothing about cars and will take 10 dollars to sign off on it anyway

  • June 1, 2006

    9:29 AM

    Anonymous writes:

    Harry, what r u doing alive? I thought my brakes failed and I accidently flattened you.
    Man, u r hard to kill.

  • June 1, 2006

    9:44 AM

    Anonymous writes:

    Since I started this vehicle inspection debate, let me tell you how Maryland handled it.It could be different now,but when I lived there this is what the rules were. Only certain automobile stations who passed background checks and signed an agreement with the state could do inspections.If a station did not do an expection by specific qualifications and passed a car that was later found out it was not done right the station could lose there license and be fined heavily.The station was only allowed to charge $40.00 for the inspection,any repairs needed they could shop around and get better prices or have the station do it.After repairs were made they could bring the car back to be reinspected at no cost. They had 2 times to get it right at no cost for reinspection.They had 2 weeks because that's what Maryland gave them on a temp tag to get it done.No pass inspection no get tags.Tags and or stickers are issued every 2 years at a cost of $75.00 for 2 years.There is no personal property tax and Maryland has a flat tax of 5% statewide.The program did not hinder people it kept junk cars off the road, made sure people kept up their vehicles,made sure they had proper tags,made sure they had insurance and made their services affordable.I'm sure some got past the system some people will find a way, but for the most part I felt a whole lot safer driving in Maryland than I do here,and driver's out their are alot worse but I knew if I got hit ,if it was a Maryland driver they had insurance.

  • June 1, 2006

    12:22 PM

    Anonymous writes:

    Nobody cares what they do in Maryland!
    This is Colorado. Try to stay relevant. Submitting information that is years old and from another part of the country is of little use. Just go smoke another cigarette.

  • June 3, 2006

    11:11 AM

    Anonymous writes:

    That useless Owens signed the bill to keep his suckup high-livin cronies who own these rip-off joints wealthy and happy!

    Emission testing is a joke--on all of us poor saps who buy new vehicles only to watch old pieces of EXEMPT junk fly buy us on the road spewing smoke for miles.

  • June 3, 2006

    11:15 AM

    get a life writes:

    Scuse me?? You know, I'd like to know what they do in Maryland. They seem to have a better idea of how to handle this emission thing better than Colorado does, dimwit.

  • December 20, 2007

    12:35 PM

    richard s writes:

    Safety inspections are just a racket. We have them here in Utah. Here, check out this website: http://inspectionscam.tripod.com/
    Of course all mechanics would like to force people to have them for the $ they make. Fact is, Colorado has a better accident record per miles driven than Utah, with its bogus safety inspection program. Just a way for the politicians, mechanics, and car dealers to rip you off off. Don't get it started, you'll be SORRY!

  • December 4, 2008

    1:53 PM

    richard s writes:

    Sorry but that link went dead. Here is a link that works to the Utah Vehicle Safety Inspection Racket:
    http://safetyinspections.tripod.com/
    All the research and data are at this link, including a comparison of Utahs and Colorados accident rates. If Colorado wants this program, I would be happy to export it from Utah if I could, then Coloradoans could get ripped off, and Utahns would be left alone. This is just one program that we can't seem to get rid of because mechanics, car dealers, politicans, etc make so much money off of it, and they lobby constantly to keep it going-and of course those safety inspection officials don't want to lose their easy jobs and end up driving patrol cars again. Typical boondoggle. Ronald Reagan had it right when he said "the closest thing to immortality on this earth is a government program."

  • December 4, 2008

    1:54 PM

    richard s writes:

    Sorry but that link went dead. Here is a link that works to the Utah Vehicle Safety Inspection Racket:
    http://safetyinspections.tripod.com/
    All the research and data are at this link, including a comparison of Utahs and Colorados accident rates. If Colorado wants this program, I would be happy to export it from Utah if I could, then Coloradoans could get ripped off, and Utahns would be left alone. This is just one program that we can't seem to get rid of because mechanics, car dealers, politicans, etc make so much money off of it, and lobby constantly to keep it going-and of course those safety inspection officials don't want to lose their easy jobs and end up driving patrol cars again. Typical boondoggle. Ronald Reagan had it right when he said "the closest thing to immortality on this earth is a government program."

Join the discussion

Required
Required (Will not be published or sold)

Talk to me

Featured today

Today's poll

Search this blog

Recent posts

Chat transcripts

Caption this!