It does stagger ones credulity, does it not?

John

John Rodgers
Clayartist and Moldmaker
88'GL VW Bus Driver
Chelsea, AL
Http://www.moldhaus.com

On 3/5/2011 9:15 PM, Jake de Villiers wrote:
> Great essay Jim, as usual!
>
> I'm happy to be living in BC where tailpipe emissions are what matter,
> rather than the Republic of California where governmental (emphasis on
> 'mental') decree holds sway.
>
> It absolutely amazes me that it is okay to drive an inefficient WBX but not
> okay to replace it with a newer and much more efficient 2.5 Subaru or 2.0
> Ford Zetec engine.
>
> Jake
>
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Jim Akiba<syncrolist@bostig.com>  wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Mar 2, 2011 at 7:15 PM, Old Volks Home<oldvolkshome@gmail.com
>>> wrote:
>>> As Don said, it takes money to get the exceptions - Kennedy was
>>> willing to pay, but Bostig won't.
>>>
>> Ah if it were only so simple. And indeed with the right amount of money we
>> could get the EO, although the amount would be in the millions of dollars.
>> Everyone likely just reeled in reading that figure, and now thinks that I'm
>> either blowing smoke, or have no idea what I'm talking about. But let me
>> explain why.
>>
>> It's all too easy for people to speculate on why something happens as it
>> does. Their perspective warps the speculation, sometimes toward the right
>> answer, sometimes far far away from it. In the case of california's visual
>> inspections, and any of their extremely aggressive anti-pollution
>> legislation you have to remember the goals of the state. They are not those
>> of individuals, and not even those of a large number of individuals if they
>> are not also a large part of the state as a group.  In trying to understand
>> the chain of events and their drivers, it's usually a good idea to look to
>> the same thing that those setting policy do.  Previous experiences of
>> similar entities.
>>
>> One of California's huge problems is/was/will be pollution control of
>> "mobile sources" which includes highway and off-highway vehicles.
>> California
>> has come a long way, and continues to pass the most progressive emissions
>> control legislation in the world. They are also a massive market for auto
>> manufacturers. CA has been sued by both the EPA and the manufacturers at
>> various stages along the way. As contentious as each interested group's
>> goals might be on the outside, they must collude on the inside to actually
>> accomplish enough of their individual goals to keep moving forward while
>> protecting their individual interests as best as they can. The interest of
>> the industry is to sell vehicles, and spend as little as possible on R&D,
>> manufacturing etc in compliance in order to access that market. Those
>> setting compliance policy want to be as stringent as possible to actually
>> achieve lower pollution levels without triggering backlash from the public
>> or from those manufacturers, from which they also derive revenue in the
>> form
>> of various flavors of taxes all along the entire chain of preproduction,
>> through to sale, ownership, etc.  So they arrive at a strategy that can
>> serve both sets of goals. One that decreases pollution levels effectively,
>> maintains or increases revenue for both, and will not cause a backlash for
>> any party that is large or strong enough to cause problems. The problem
>> most
>> of their legislation is addressing is fleet overturn, just as Germany and
>> Japan have both taken measures to enforce through legislation. CA has a
>> massive problem with fleet overturn, or really lack thereof. IIRC the
>> figures I saw several years ago during my research into what was going on
>> was something absurd like in 1990 17% of registered CA cars were 100k+, by
>> 1995 it had soared to 40%.  In any case, forcing fleet overturn through
>> legislation achieves the goals they are after. It's actually a very good
>> plan for meeting all of their goals, BUT we (the little niche interests)
>> get
>> pinched in the middle. There is also plenty to complain about from the
>> libertarian POV, but again, to achieve the goals of groups in primary
>> consideration, and at the correct scale, it really isn't a horrible idea...
>> even though we (bostig and vanagonland) get screwed in the process.
>>
>> Be certain it is *not* an issue of Kennedy paying, and Bostig not. Bostig
>> has invested $1.25 million in development in the last 5 years on something
>> pretty nuts from most conventional viewpoints.  The value to us is in the
>> capabilities, knowledge, and processes developed and acquired, and the
>> folks
>> we've returned value to in the form of product, support, and personal
>> capability. Kennedy spent nothing like this in money, time, or effort.
>> Kennedy did spend perhaps a couple thousand for the CS95 and shed testing
>> for the ej22 conversion they/he developed. But the difference is in timing
>> which some additional absurdity is revealed about the actual effects of the
>> policy at the small scale (where it matters least if at all). It is still
>> possible to easily and cheaply get an engine conversion swap an executive
>> order in CA... as long as it's old enough. So while we could for instance
>> get a carb EO on an OBDI pre-96 engine conversion, OBDII/ post 96 is
>> virtually impossible. In fact, when we sent our EO application to the CARB
>> in 2006, we reached exactly one step into the process before the CARB
>> deferred and said the EO would not be possible because they would not
>> review
>> it. They deferred to the BAR, by which a conversion can be stickered on a
>> case by case basis by ref review. But we weren't the only ones. In fact,
>> the
>> *only* engine conversion that is OBDII to obtain an EO in CA was announced
>> in late 09.
>>
>> The joint project was between GM, SEMA(the largest auto
>> aftermarket industry association in the US, Bostig is a member), and... the
>> CARB.   The E-rod engine package was born to address a bigger version of
>> our(vanagonland) complaints.  The hot rodder market in CA is 500-1000 times
>> larger than vanagonland itself. They also (unlike even the import/street
>> market) have deeper pockets and a voting demographic. They complete more
>> projects, and build more specialty vehicles. CA realized two problems with
>> the (relatively) large hot rodder market, one was with titling, the other
>> with emissions control. The project addressed the issues for the largest
>> subset of the aftermarket with the most money. The end result with the
>> E-rod
>> is an engine package that includes the engine(LS3 V8, various
>> displacements,
>> complete, and includes exhaust ending at the cats) and engine management,
>> and they even throw in a pedal. The price: $8k-$11k, no mounting, no
>> carrier, no cooling, incomplete exhaust, etc etc etc... just the engine
>> ending with the cats, engine management, and you must be able to implement
>> it in it's full form within your project or not at all.
>>
>> When you consider that we are able to produce and sell a *much* more
>> complete system, with much better support and documentation, for less
>> money... and on top of that at production levels less than 5% of what the
>> e-rod is doing, it's really not too shabby... but it should also reveal
>> what
>> it *really* would take to accomplish CARB EO on an OBDII engine swap, as
>> again.. we look to a previous example. No surprisingly it's the only one to
>> date, and we see that it is simply not possible given our
>> conditions/constraints/scale. It is not for lack of trying, either in
>> actual
>> dev, building, researching, hoop jumping, or cash outlay... at least not in
>> comparison to KEP and the ej22 EO. Apples to Oranges.  If anyone can help
>> us
>> figure out how to obtain enough growth in vanagonland to achieve even a 4x
>> increase in scale, I bet we could make enough noise to make it happen. But
>> as of right now, I don't believe this is possible as of course vanagonland
>> is shrinking. It would be one thing if cash outlay were the real problem,
>> but it should be clear that in the reality that I perceive (within which I
>> always leave plenty of room for me to be wrong and correct my POV) we
>> cannot
>> justify another attempt at CARB EO in CA for the Bostig conversion, it is
>> neither realistic nor prudent.
>>
>> Thanks for your attention,
>>
>> Jim Akiba
>>
>> PS (NVC) check out "drunk history" on youtube, hilarious
>>
>
>
> --
> Jake
>
> 1984 Vanagon GL 1.9 WBX - 'The Grey Van'
> 1986 Westy Weekender/2.5 SOHC Subie - 'Dixie'
>
> Crescent Beach, BC
>
> www.thebassspa.com
> www.crescentbeachguitar.com
> http://subyjake.googlepages.com/mydixiedarlin%27
>
>