RV.Net Open Roads Forum: Newsom signs bill to ban the sell of gas powered generators

RV Blog

  |  

RV Sales

  |  

Campgrounds

  |  

RV Parks

  |  

RV Club

  |  

RV Buyers Guide

  |  

Roadside Assistance

  |  

Extended Service Plan

  |  

RV Travel Assistance

  |  

RV Credit Card

  |  

RV Loans

Open Roads Forum Already a member? Login here.   If not, Register Today!  |  Help

Newest  |  Active  |  Popular  |  RVing FAQ Forum Rules  |  Forum Posting Help and Support  |  Contact  

Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Around the Campfire

Open Roads Forum  >  Around the Campfire

 > Newsom signs bill to ban the sell of gas powered generators

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 5  
Prev  |  Next
Sponsored By:
Fisherman

Angus, Ontario, Canada

Senior Member

Joined: 09/28/2002

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 10/10/21 04:36pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Why don't they include those stinking motorcycles.
Motorcycles were indeed more fuel-efficient than cars and emitted less of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, but they emitted far more smog-forming hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen, as well as the toxic air pollutant carbon monoxide. For the most recent model year vehicles tested -- from the '00s -- the motorcycle used 28% less fuel than the comparable decade car and emitted 30% fewer carbon dioxide emissions, but it emitted 416% more hydrocarbons, 3,220% more oxides of nitrogen and 8,065% more carbon monoxide.

fj12ryder

Platte City, MO

Senior Member

Joined: 08/19/2003

View Profile



Posted: 10/10/21 06:17pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Fisherman wrote:

Why don't they include those stinking motorcycles.
Motorcycles were indeed more fuel-efficient than cars and emitted less of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, but they emitted far more smog-forming hydrocarbons and oxides of nitrogen, as well as the toxic air pollutant carbon monoxide. For the most recent model year vehicles tested -- from the '00s -- the motorcycle used 28% less fuel than the comparable decade car and emitted 30% fewer carbon dioxide emissions, but it emitted 416% more hydrocarbons, 3,220% more oxides of nitrogen and 8,065% more carbon monoxide.
And they they can go after the boat motors. No reason those little boats need motors anyway. They're fourstroke now, but doubt if they have much smog controls.


Howard and Peggy

"Don't Panic"

atreis

IN

Senior Member

Joined: 08/29/2005

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 10/10/21 06:30pm Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

toedtoes wrote:

43018.11. (a) (1) By July 1, 2022, the state board shall, consistent with federal law, adopt cost-effective and technologically feasible regulations to prohibit engine exhaust and evaporative emissions from new small off-road engines, as defined by the state board. Those regulations shall apply to engines produced on or after January 1, 2024, or as soon as the state board determines is feasible, whichever is later.
(2) In determining technological feasibility pursuant to paragraph (1), the state board shall consider all of the following:
(A) Emissions from small off-road engines in the state.
(B) Expected timelines for zero-emission small off-road equipment development.
(C) Increased demand for electricity from added charging requirements for more zero-emission small off-road equipment.
(D) Use cases of both commercial and residential lawn and garden users.
(E) Expected availability of zero-emission generators and emergency response equipment.
(b) Consistent with the regulations adopted pursuant to this section and relevant state law, the state board shall identify, and, to the extent feasible, make available, funding for commercial rebates or similar incentive funding as part of any updates to existing, applicable funding program guidelines for districts to implement to support the transition to zero-emission small off-road equipment operations.


Bold emphasis mine. The earliest this will be effective is 2024. And there are built in exemptions for emergency response equipment. In addition, it is all based on whether zero-emission options are available. What this type of legislation does is 1) encourage companies to develop zero emission options and 2) convert the low hanging fruit (ie, more people will buy electric lawn movers and leaf blowers instead of "dirty" ones.

It does not say "gas powered" - the regulation is based on the actual emissions. According to the bill, these small off road engines produce more emissions in one hour than a non-electric/hybrid vehicle produces over 1,100 miles of drive time (or 1.47 hours driving at 75 mph). If manufacturers reduce those emissions in their products significantly, then that can extend the timeline.

It's amazing how many folks get their panties in a twist over something they've never bothered to actually read.


Thank you for posting the actual text. Hopefully more states will do this and provide even more incentive for development of zero-emission options.


2021 Four Winds 26B on Chevy 4500


wapiticountry

Mountain West

Senior Member

Joined: 10/02/2011

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 10/11/21 09:25am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

atreis wrote:

toedtoes wrote:

43018.11. (a) (1) By July 1, 2022, the state board shall, consistent with federal law, adopt cost-effective and technologically feasible regulations to prohibit engine exhaust and evaporative emissions from new small off-road engines, as defined by the state board. Those regulations shall apply to engines produced on or after January 1, 2024, or as soon as the state board determines is feasible, whichever is later.
(2) In determining technological feasibility pursuant to paragraph (1), the state board shall consider all of the following:
(A) Emissions from small off-road engines in the state.
(B) Expected timelines for zero-emission small off-road equipment development.
(C) Increased demand for electricity from added charging requirements for more zero-emission small off-road equipment.
(D) Use cases of both commercial and residential lawn and garden users.
(E) Expected availability of zero-emission generators and emergency response equipment.
(b) Consistent with the regulations adopted pursuant to this section and relevant state law, the state board shall identify, and, to the extent feasible, make available, funding for commercial rebates or similar incentive funding as part of any updates to existing, applicable funding program guidelines for districts to implement to support the transition to zero-emission small off-road equipment operations.


Bold emphasis mine. The earliest this will be effective is 2024. And there are built in exemptions for emergency response equipment. In addition, it is all based on whether zero-emission options are available. What this type of legislation does is 1) encourage companies to develop zero emission options and 2) convert the low hanging fruit (ie, more people will buy electric lawn movers and leaf blowers instead of "dirty" ones.

It does not say "gas powered" - the regulation is based on the actual emissions. According to the bill, these small off road engines produce more emissions in one hour than a non-electric/hybrid vehicle produces over 1,100 miles of drive time (or 1.47 hours driving at 75 mph). If manufacturers reduce those emissions in their products significantly, then that can extend the timeline.

It's amazing how many folks get their panties in a twist over something they've never bothered to actually read.


Thank you for posting the actual text. Hopefully more states will do this and provide even more incentive for development of zero-emission options.
And even better, all these wonder machines will be produced in third world countries like China that are actually ramping up coal fueled electrical generation to meet the increased demand from the manufacturing industry. China is building 47 new coal fired power plants currently and estimates are they will construct up to several hundred more. Nothing happens in a vacuum. (multiple sources including Time.com and CNBC).

Timmo!

Far away from this WOKE website!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Senior Member

Joined: 03/10/2005

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 10/11/21 09:47am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

The outrage should be against lawmakers who create laws mandating the use of a product (zero emission generator) that does not exist (we lack the technology).

If one searches the following phrase "zero emission generator" online, these are the types of generators listed:

Battery packs
Hydrogen fueled, sparked ignition
Natural gas

If it was economically and technically feasible, then wouldn't Honda be all over this?

toedtoes

California

Senior Member

Joined: 05/17/2014

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 10/11/21 10:10am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

Timmo! wrote:

The outrage should be against lawmakers who create laws mandating the use of a product (zero emission generator) that does not exist (we lack the technology).

If one searches the following phrase "zero emission generator" online, these are the types of generators listed:

Battery packs
Hydrogen fueled, sparked ignition
Natural gas

If it was economically and technically feasible, then wouldn't Honda be all over this?


It's not mandated until the technology exists. The bill is a way to encourage companies to create the technology.


1975 American Clipper RV with Dodge 360 (photo in profile)
1998 American Clipper Fold n Roll Folding Trailer
Both born in Morgan Hill, CA to Irv Perch (Daddy of the Aristocrat trailers)

Timmo!

Far away from this WOKE website!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Senior Member

Joined: 03/10/2005

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 10/11/21 10:23am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

It is about "zero emissions" (aka Climate Change), small (gas powered) and large (diesel, natural gas, etc) generators are included, taxpayer subsidies and credits are in play.

From CARB May 2021 workshop--

[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]
[image]

https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/fil........21%20Workshop%20Staff%20Presentation.pdf

atreis

IN

Senior Member

Joined: 08/29/2005

View Profile


Offline
Posted: 10/13/21 10:28am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

wapiticountry wrote:

And even better, all these wonder machines will be produced in third world countries like China that are actually ramping up coal fueled electrical generation to meet the increased demand from the manufacturing industry. China is building 47 new coal fired power plants currently and estimates are they will construct up to several hundred more. Nothing happens in a vacuum. (multiple sources including Time.com and CNBC).


As far as I know, there is nothing in the bill mandating that new equipment of any sort be manufactured in third world countries.

BCSnob

Middletown, MD

Senior Member

Joined: 02/23/2002

View Profile



Posted: 10/13/21 10:49am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

wapiticountry wrote:

And even better, all these wonder machines will be produced in third world countries like China that are actually ramping up coal fueled electrical generation to meet the increased demand from the manufacturing industry. China is building 47 new coal fired power plants currently and estimates are they will construct up to several hundred more. Nothing happens in a vacuum. (multiple sources including Time.com and CNBC).

In other words, if China isn’t going to be a better steward of the environment than why should the USA (= “we have no desire to be better than China”). I’m sorry to say, but we (Americans), pollute (CO2) 2x more than Chinese; meaning, we need to cut our emissions to be as good as the Chinese.

* This post was edited 10/13/21 10:58am by BCSnob *

Timmo!

Far away from this WOKE website!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Senior Member

Joined: 03/10/2005

View Profile



Good Sam RV Club Member

Offline
Posted: 10/14/21 10:05am Link  |  Quote  |  Print  |  Notify Moderator

If you want to cook the books, then measure CO2 emissions per capita. Using that yardstick, China wins, even though they emit twice the level of CO2 emissions.

[image]

https://www.forbes.com/sites/ianpalmer/2........ons-and-energy-solutions-for-mitigation/

Reply to Topic  |  Subscribe  |  Print Topic  |  Post New Topic  | 
Page of 5  
Prev  |  Next

Open Roads Forum  >  Around the Campfire

 > Newsom signs bill to ban the sell of gas powered generators
Search:   Advanced Search

Search only in Around the Campfire


New posts No new posts
Closed, new posts Closed, no new posts
Moved, new posts Moved, no new posts

Adjust text size:




© 2022 CWI, Inc. © 2022 Good Sam Enterprises, LLC. All Rights Reserved.