Expanded Calif. High-Polluter Program

[Stocker]

From this morning's online Redding Record Searchlight (aka the Wretched Flashlight):


SACRAMENTO - California regulators expanded a state car-scrapping program Friday to provide incentives of as much as $4,000 to motorists who surrender high-polluting vehicles and replace them with cleaner cars.

California Air Resources Board Chairwoman Mary Nichols said the program would help get some of the oldest, dirtiest cars, trucks and sport utility vehicles off state roads.

Unlike the federal "cash for clunkers" program signed into law Wednesday by President Barack Obama, California's effort is not primarily designed to replace gas guzzlers with more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Instead, the state will target those cars with the worst smog-forming tailpipe emissions - pollutants that give areas of California some of the country's dirtiest air.

Some 300,000 California drivers who own cars older than model year 1976 will be solicited by local air districts.

Beginning April 1, drivers could get $1,000 if they turn their car into a licensed dismantler. Low-income Californians would be eligible for $1,500.

The regulation also provides a voucher between $2,000 and $2,500 to drivers in two of the state's most polluted regions - Southern California and the San Joaquin Valley.

The vouchers could be redeemed at new and used dealerships for a fuel-efficient car that's four years old or newer. Low-income Californians could buy a fuel-efficient car up to eight years old.

California currently has a car scrap program, but it is limited to cars newer than model year 1976 and that fail the state's smog check.

The Legislature in 2007 directed the board to expand the program to get more polluting cars off roads. About 22,000 cars are currently scrapped under the program each year.

When fully enacted, the state incentives are projected to lead to the surrender of another 15,000 cars a year.

Air regulators strengthened the Legislature's directive by providing Californians with vouchers to buy fuel-efficient cars.

To qualify, cars that are model year 2009 or older would have to get about 28 miles per gallon. The standard would increase to 42 miles per gallon for model years 2010 to 2015.

The board also adopted language preventing Californians from collecting incentives from both federal and state programs, a move that was opposed by California auto dealers.


So, the state that is $24 billion in debt suddenly has cash for this program. And while some people might be enticed into buying new if this incentive were added to the federal 'clunker' cash, the state has shot down that possibility...  therefore seemingly dooming widespread acceptance & use of the state's latest brain fart. It would seem that the target group (folks owning older, higher-polluting vehicles) are probably less likely to be able to afford a new vehicle anyway, even with incentives -- so why cripple the program by eliminating the federal dollars, which obviously don't cost the state anything??

[emsvitil]

Actually it would make the state money because of:

1.   sales/use tax on new vehicle
2.   registrations fees go up on new vehicle
3.   insurance rates go up


Do this instead of giving out any money:

1. No sales/use tax on new vehicle.
2. Your old cheaper car registration fee rolls forward to the new vehicle.
3. Your old cheaper insurance rate rolls forward to the new vehicle.

[Stocker]

Actually it would make the state money because of:

1.   sales/use tax on new vehicle
2.   registrations fees go up on new vehicle
3.   insurance rates go up

You're right, of course -- that's what I get for not thinking things through...   

Do this instead of giving out any money:

1. No sales/use tax on new vehicle.
2. Your old cheaper car registration fee rolls forward to the new vehicle.
3. Your old cheaper insurance rate rolls forward to the new vehicle.

Hmmmm, that would be a plus, but put fewer dollars in the state coffers -- Arnie would never go for it.


Dunno if the state actually sees any $$ from insurance premiums?   

[emsvitil]

Maybe indirectly from a small increase in insurance company profits......

But your costs DO go up.....


The state shouldn't lose any money, and get less pollution.
That's what they want, isn't it?   

[Stocker]

The state shouldn't lose any money, and get less pollution.
That's what they want, isn't it?   

[4RunnerChevy]

So you buy a newer vehicle and your insurance, registration go up.  I don't see the savings ?  For a 2006 vehicle, just the reg. with take you to 1000 in two+ years.  I don't know any middle class that can pick up a car payment, insurance, registration, to give up thier car /truck that costs Gas and $12 a month to insure.

[Stocker]

Yep, looks like another poorly thought-out scheme from California's fine elected oafficials, probably doomed to fail. If they had allowed the credit to piggyback on the federal 'clunkers' credit, it may have been a halfway decent incentive for someone considering a new vehicle but still on the fence.

[kneedownnate]

Actually it would make the state money because of:

1.   sales/use tax on new vehicle
2.   registrations fees go up on new vehicle
3.   insurance rates go up

Actually, that's a negative.  Why?  Even with the help, many, many people just still couldn't afford to buy a newer vehicle ( ), and those same people often can't afford higher insurance premiums or registration fees.

[Stocker]

^ True for a great many people, but for those who do utilize the program, they will pay the sales tax & increased DMV fees, and their insurance premium will increase.

The program will not -- nor is it intended to -- make it possible for someone to buy a new vehicle if they cannot afford one in the first place. The only thing I believe it will do is be a nice little financial shot in the arm for someone who was going to buy anyway.

[kneedownnate]

The only thing I believe it will do is be a nice little financial shot in the arm for someone who was going to buy anyway.

Ding ding    That's about all I see coming out of it. 

[Tallchevy]

How about the State giving me the 4 g's & I'll swap a 3rz into my 87 4Runner.

[Plekto]

Wait - so old classics only - and pre-smog only...

The Federal bill has a specific exemption for pre 1985 due to exactly that - the idea that people will crush old restorable or parts cars.

Dang - just messed up.

[germ]

The state has time to figure this crap out when they can't even balance a budget? What a bunch of idiots. I really hope that the california population is smart enough to elect new people in there who can do the job. If I was that indecisive, people would die, and I'd be selling pencils on the street corner.

Erik

[kneedownnate]

Unfortunately the masses are brainless and aren't willing to recognize or consider that the government does NOT have their best interests in mind, or that they have no real clue what they're doing and are mostly holding offices to stroke their egos and further their own agendas.  And we have far too many city folk who have no grasp on anything past the end of their block 

[Rocksurfer]

I have questioned these nutty ideas from our "elected officials" remember we put them there so we can (and I do) ask them why this. This is in a nutshell my current question about these programs especially the ones that will take any vehicle even if it isn't a gross polluter. The first question is why, sure I can understand California's program on buying vehicles that can no longer pass smog that does make sense to some degree but what I don't understand is why, why is the government buying anything. If the vehicle can't pass then it doesn't get registered and cannot be driven so why would anything be done in the first place. The owner either fixes it or junks it and gets the scrap price for it, why should we pay for it.

Now onto the current new program coming first off why should we again pay someone for their car, if it can't pass it can't be driven. If it does pass then again why should we pay anything for it. Also there is one big thing that really bugs me about ending a perfectly good vehicles life early. There are plenty of people out there that could use these vehicles that are passing smog that couldn't buy a new vehicle in the first place. They will be the ones that end up struggling since they won't have that cheap get to work car.

One other thing that should make you think about scraping a perfectly good vehicle before its time is all the hazardous waste created by scraping a vehicle, especially when it is still in usable condition. Vehicles are not completely recyclable and all of the waste is hazardous materials that cannot have anything done with them but to deposited into a landfill.

The true question here is why do they have these programs in the first place, what is the real reason? Carbon footprint plain and simple. For the same reason some companies are involved with these kind of programs is they get carbon credits for their carbon footprint. Now think about what is working its way through our congress right now the carbon footprint bill. Once that little gem gets passed you'll wish you'd saved that clunker to turn in to get your carbon credits. Those that have been collecting credits by doing these programs will be able to use them to show they have a smaller footprint than they really do. This is what it is truely all about.