HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: johnt@ee.ubc.ca (john jay tanlimco)
Subject: Re: Air Care, emmissions testing
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Distribution: bc
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:02:04 GMT

In article <1dc71cINNa48@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett) writes:
>In article <schuck.720989040@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>>Some very interesting emissions research is being done in Colorado.
>>The professor who has done this research has also come up with a
>>gadget that can be set up on the road side to measure emissions of
>>cars going by. It uses a TV camera to record license plate #'s and is
>>relatively cheap. It is not as accurate as the Air Care type stations,
>>but that isn't important because the 2 out of 10 cars pollute much
>>more than the other 8.
>
>This sounds ludicrious to me.  How the heck is this device going to
>measure emissions quickly enough to photograph the offender?   It takes
>time for gases to travel to the sensor!  In my case the tail-pipe is
>on the left side of the car so the gases would have to travel 8 feet
>before they reached the sensor.  The car is going to be travel a *long*
>way before the gases reach the sensor.
>
>Besides this, wind direction, wind speed, and air turbulence would all
>have to factored in in order to decide which car produced the emissions
>and how dispersed the gases were by the time they got to the sensor.
>A certain error factor were be tolerable since an additional test would
>be performed, but I can't beleive that this could do much better than
>50% accuracy.

I don't think it is measured the way you think it is.  If I'm not
mistaken, it uses some form of light to measure pollutants.
Based on the reflected light, it can then determine whether the
car is polluting or not.  This is probably much like how a radar
camera works.

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
John Jay Tanlimco | University of British Columbia  | #$%!#^^&*(()_+|&^$$##!@
johnt@ee.ubc.ca   | Dept. of Electrical Engineering | @#$%^&*()!@#$%^&*()_=!@
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
From: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett)
Newsgroups: bc.general,ubc.general
Subject: Re: Air Care, emmissions testing
Date: 5 Nov 1992 22:25:48 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: bc
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

In article <schuck.720989040@sfu.ca> Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca writes:
>Some very interesting emissions research is being done in Colorado.
>The professor who has done this research has also come up with a
>gadget that can be set up on the road side to measure emissions of
>cars going by. It uses a TV camera to record license plate #'s and is
>relatively cheap. It is not as accurate as the Air Care type stations,
>but that isn't important because the 2 out of 10 cars pollute much
>more than the other 8.

This sounds ludicrious to me.  How the heck is this device going to
measure emissions quickly enough to photograph the offender?   It takes
time for gases to travel to the sensor!  In my case the tail-pipe is
on the left side of the car so the gases would have to travel 8 feet
before they reached the sensor.  The car is going to be travel a *long*
way before the gases reach the sensor.

Besides this, wind direction, wind speed, and air turbulence would all
have to factored in in order to decide which car produced the emissions
and how dispersed the gases were by the time they got to the sensor.
A certain error factor were be tolerable since an additional test would
be performed, but I can't beleive that this could do much better than
50% accuracy.

Bill "the skeptic" Arnett.
-- 
Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca
Newsgroups: bc.general,ubc.general
From: vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl)
Subject: Re: Air Care, emmissions testing
Reply-To: vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl)
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd.
Distribution: bc
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 18:55:17 GMT

Actually, there is no corelation between engine size and allowable
emissions in the air care tests.  This is because the measurements
are ppm and %, the total volume of pollutants is irrelevant.

(This, incidentally, is why a hole in your muffler cannot help
 you pass emissions testing.)

Dave.

Newsgroups: bc.general
From: mcoyle@fraser.sfu.ca (Michael Francis Coyle)
Subject: Canoe For Sale
Summary: See subject
Keywords: canoe sale
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: bc
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 23:48:27 GMT

14" Paluski canoe, used five times
$500 OBO

reply via email to 
	mcoyle@sfu.ca


Newsgroups: bc.general,ubc.general
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Air Care, emmissions testing
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Distribution: bc
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 07:58:02 GMT

In article <1dc674INNa3c@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> arnett@unixg.ubc.ca (Bill Arnett) writes:
>In article <1dbmnrINN91l@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca> koichi@unixg.ubc.ca (Koichi J Kishimoto) writes:
>>
>>jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)writes:

>>Yes, and the stories of blown engines shown on TV recently is worrying.

Nope, didn't write this. 
>
>Bill.
>-- 
>Bill Arnett                            Internet: arnett@unixg.ubc.ca


-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Newsgroups: bc.general
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Referendum intitiatives in BC
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 03:11:09 GMT



Well, it's been a year or so since the provincial election. I'm sure
most people voted, and voted on two questions included on the ballot.

I can't remember the exact details, but I know they were regarding
direct democracy ballot inititiatives. I think it was so we could
propose referendum questions.

Does anyone remember more clearly what the questions were? I know
that they both passed easily in the provincial election.

And why haven't we heard anything about this? I think the legislature
has to debate the law. Are the NDP trying to hope we forget, or are things
actually in the works?


-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Newsgroups: bc.general,ubc.general
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Air Care, emissions testing
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Distribution: na
Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1992 04:48:23 GMT

In article <1992Nov7.194728.27568@ee.ubc.ca> kenb@ee.ubc.ca (Ken Buckland) writes:
>vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl) writes:
>> jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes (and draws a fancy picture):
>> > vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl) writes:
>> > >(This, incidentally, is why a hole in your muffler cannot help
>> > > you pass emissions testing.)
>> > 
>> > Depending on the shape of the hole, and its position, the exhaust gases
>> > could easily, and conceivably create a vacuum, and suck in more air into
>> > the hole, thus diluting the exhaust.
>> 
>> As to this vacuum theory, yes it is conceivable that fresh air may enter
>> the system.  However, it is extremely unlikely since the muffle/tailpipe
>> create a back pressure in the system.  This is why air pumps are necessary
>> for air injection anti-pollution systems, and the engineers who designed
>> the car cannot simply strategically place a well shaped hole to achieve
>> the desired effect.
>
>I was assured by three different muffler technicians (all from reputable
>muffler institutes) that exhaust system holes *do* suck air into the
>exhaust.  This might be due to a vortex effect - I don't know.  Further,

That seems to settle it. Here on the net we've had theoretical conjecture
and argument, then the muffler shop confirms with empirical evidence.

The scientific process goes on. SO it follows that we should now all
put in for NRC grants, write a paper, take on grad students, neglect
teaching, and then sit back doing nothing. :-)

>
>Ken Buckland
>kenb@ee.ubc.ca
>

-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
Newsgroups: bc.general,ubc.general
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: Air Care, emmissions testing
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: bc
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 18:44:00 GMT

Some very interesting emissions research is being done in Colorado.

The simplified findings are that 8 out of 10 cars produce limited
emissions, 1 of the 10 produces the equivalent of the first 8 combined
and the 10th car produces as much as the first 9 put together.

The professor who has done this research has also come up with a
gadget that can be set up on the road side to measure emissions of
cars going by. It uses a TV camera to record license plate #'s and is
relatively cheap. It is not as accurate as the Air Care type stations,
but that isn't important because the 2 out of 10 cars pollute much
more than the other 8.

At least one city in Utah has used this system sucessfully.

Cars that really pollute are summonsed to report to a testing station
where the really accurate gear is. 

The city in Utah has already reported a better quality of air.

In California, as part of the air cleaning efforts, some of the oil
companies are buying old cars still on the road for 700$.


The proper fix for BC air quality is to buy a bunch of the cheap road
side testers and spread them out over the Lower Mainland during peak
driving hours. Record the big polluters and require them to report to
an AirCare station. We will only need one or two of these.

Scrap the cars that are unfixable -- maybe even pay the owner some
money -- and require the others cars to be fixed.

This kind of solution would only inconvenience the polluters.


-- 
============================================================================
"We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin                  schuck@sfu.ca
============================================================================
Newsgroups: bc.general
Subject: Restaurants in Williams Lake
From: bcrock@happy.nuts.almanac.bc.ca (Brad Crockett)
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 92 20:12:50 PST
Organization: 'Happy' in Duncan, BC, Canada

Looking for an appropriate restaurant in Williams Lake from which
to purchase a $75 gift certificate as a Christmas present.  Are
any WL residents getting this feed, and if so can they recommend a
good place for a quite dinner for two?

Brad Crockett, Duncan, British Columbia, Canada
bcrock@happy.nuts.almanac.bc.ca           :->
Newsgroups: bc.general
Newsgroups: bc.general
From: robinson@mdivax1.uucp (Jim Robinson)
Subject: Re: Air Care, emmissions testing
Followup-To: bc.general
Reply-To: robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com (Jim Robinson)
Organization: Motorola - Mobile Data Division; Richmond, BC
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
Distribution: bc
Date: 6 Nov 92 22:51:33 GMT

Koichi J Kishimoto (koichi@unixg.ubc.ca) wrote:
>
>One immediate solution which could reduce emissions in all cars is 
>alternative fuels. MTBE and ethanol blends are claimed to reduce emissions 
>by 20%. Both are available now.  

I believe Mohawk sells an alternate fuel. Does anyone know anything about
it? Specifically, whether it would reduce emissions by 20% and which
emissions would be affected?
-- 
Jim Robinson
robinson@mdd.comm.mot.com
{ubc-cs!van-bc,uunet}!mdivax1!robinson

Newsgroups: bc.general
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: Transit Levy on BC-Hydro Bills
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 22:06:01 GMT

jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes:


>>
>>The Coquihalla itself cost 1 billion. 
>>

>hey, guess what? The Coquihalla is a *TOLL* road!!!

>The highway is actually ahead of schedule  in paying itself back, because
>it was so badly needed, that many people use it.

Yes, but where did the billion $ come from in the first place.
It certainly wasn't gas taxes.


>But they don't build billion dollar projects every single year

Not every year, but there has been in the last 5-6:
The Coquihalla  - 1 billion plus
The Alex Fraser - 250 mil 
Upgrades on the Squamish Highway - 125 mil
2 new super ferrries in construction - ??? part of the highway budget
Others I can't remeber off the top of my head.

>I thought it was whether or not it is fair for people who do not directly
>or indirectly use a service (public transport) to subsidize it for people
>who do use it.

Drivers directly benefit from public trnsportation,
because without it the roads would be clogged much worse and many more
bridges like the Alex Fraser would have to be built.

>People can sit here blowing smoke about how nice transit is, therefore it
>should be subsidized, but that does not tackle the fact that it would be
>fairer, more expedient, and more efficient to let the actions of the 
>competitive free market determine the optimum combination of buses, cars
>taxis etc. Subsidies make waste and misallocation of resources a virtual
>certainty.

Optimum? Free market?

The building of bridges and roads and ferries have *nothing* to do
with the free market. If they did there would be a toll on every road
and on every bridge.

And as for "waste of resources", thats what you do every time you use
a car instead of public transit. You waste gasoline and pollute the
air and take up space in parking lots and on roads that could be 
put to better use.

A better solution, and cheaper, would be to ban cars in the downtown
area of Vancouver and force people to use buses, skytrain and commuter
rail. That would be cheaper and cleaner and much less of a waste of
resources.
-- 
============================================================================
"We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin                  schuck@sfu.ca
============================================================================
From: koichi@unixg.ubc.ca (Koichi J Kishimoto)
Newsgroups: bc.general,ubc.general
Subject: Re: Air Care, emmissions testing
Date: 6 Nov 1992 17:37:33 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: bc
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

Since this discussion hasn't included any hard numbers on emission
requirements, I decided to see if I could discover what the max.
allowable for 1992 would be. The results: 

1) Emission requirement (ppm, %) is not a fixed value. In fact it
   varies with car model and engine displacements. Hence a larger
   displacement car would have a larger maximum allowable limit.

2) Federal pollution requirements exist, but is not in a form usable
   by the Air Care test (pollutants per mile).

An example: A Honda Accord, 1992 model year, less than 2.5lt engine
            displacement.

Maximum allowable values (well maintained cars are MUCH lower):

Hydrocarbons (HC)        :  Idle  220 ppm
                         :  Load  500 ppm

Carbon monoxide (CO)     :  Idle  1.2%
                         :  Load  1.2%

Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) :  Load  1500 ppm

---------------------------------------------------------------------

The maximum allowable values for the 1992 Honda seems to be very large.

My 1981 model year car (2.4lt engine) achieved test values of :

HC :  Idle  18ppm  
   :  Load  47ppm    

CO :  Idle  0%     
   :  Load  0%         

NOx:  Load  1108 ppm 

easily passing the 1992 requirement set for a 2.5lt (or less) Honda
Accord.

If you want to discover what the emission requirements for your car is,
call the Air Care main office at 775 0103. Don't bother with the 
Air Care HotLine.



Newsgroups: bc.general
From: schuck@fraser.sfu.ca (Bruce Jonathan Schuck)
Subject: Re: Referendum intitiatives in BC
Reply-To: Bruce_Schuck@sfu.ca
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 06:41:24 GMT

jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes:

>Well, it's been a year or so since the provincial election. I'm sure
>most people voted, and voted on two questions included on the ballot.

>I can't remember the exact details, but I know they were regarding
>direct democracy ballot inititiatives. I think it was so we could
>propose referendum questions.

>Does anyone remember more clearly what the questions were? I know
>that they both passed easily in the provincial election.

1) Recall -- the right to recall an elected MLA 
   Gee, I wonder why the NDP have been slow on this one. :)

2) Referendum -- the right to hold referendums.
   Gee, I wonder why the NDP have been slow on this one. :)

>And why haven't we heard anything about this? I think the legislature
>has to debate the law. Are the NDP trying to hope we forget, or are things
>actually in the works?

I saw an ad in the paper a week or two ago calling for submissions.
A very small ad. :)

Call your MLA for more info. I will be.


-- 
============================================================================
"We've got to get bigger guns" -- Dick Durkin                  schuck@sfu.ca
============================================================================
Newsgroups: bc.general,ubc.general
From: jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison)
Subject: Re: Air Care, emmissions testing
Organization: University of BC, Electrical Engineering
Distribution: bc
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 21:42:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.185517.25840@mprgate.mpr.ca> vanderby@mprgate.mpr.ca (David Vanderbyl) writes:
>Actually, there is no corelation between engine size and allowable
>emissions in the air care tests.  This is because the measurements
>are ppm and %, the total volume of pollutants is irrelevant.
>
>(This, incidentally, is why a hole in your muffler cannot help
> you pass emissions testing.)

Depending on the shape of the hole, and its position, the exhaust gases
could easily, and conceivably create a vacuum, and suck in more air into
the hole, thus diluting the exhaust.

  =========================================== 

   exhaust -------------------------->  

 ==================    ======================
                 / ^ / 
       -----------/

Air flows IN instead of out, as you  might assume.

The gas is moving at  a high velocity, and is therefore at a lower pressure,
which will suck in air.


>
>Dave.
>


-- 
__________________________________________________________________________
 John Paul Morrison                     |  
 University of British Columbia, Canada |  
 Electrical Engineering                 |   .sig file without a cause
 jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca              VE7JPM |  
________________________________________|_________________________________
From: twong@civil.ubc.ca (Thomas Wong)
Newsgroups: bc.general,ubc.general
Subject: FREE worldwide network access in B.C.?
Followup-To: alt.internet.services,can.general
Date: 13 Nov 1992 19:16:24 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Civil Engineering, U.B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
NNTP-Posting-Host: sam.civil.ubc.ca


Just as a follow up to the previous message, yes, Free Net (the
growing organization that is bringing worldwide network access to anyone 
with a computer and a modem for FREE) is coming to B.C. And as the previous
message has already stated, it'll be setted up in Victoria and Nanaimo
first. But the purpose of this message is to let others know that the
bulk of this discussion is being carried out in "can.general". So please
read this newsgroup for more info.

Followups to this discussion will be redirected to can.general.

And do try telneting to FREENET-IN-A.CWRU.EDU for to see how the
Cleveland FreeNet is setted up and for more info on Free Net.

Thomas.
From: myahgula@questor.wimsey.bc.ca (Michael Yahgulanaas)
Newsgroups: bc.general
Subject: Haida canoe for sale
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 21:06:33 PST
Organization: Questor|Free Usenet News|Vancouver, BC: +1 604 681 0670

Is anyone interested in purchasing a 52 foot fglass Haida war canoe from 
a Haida boat company. The canoe is molded off the hull called Lootaas, if 
you remember Lootaas sailed/paddled up the seine to PAris, and from 
Vancouver to Haida Gwaii ( Queen Charlotte Islands ). If you are 
interested please fax To 604 626 3228.


--
  Michael Yahgulanaas (myahgula@questor.wimsey.bc.ca)
    | QUESTOR:  Free Dial-in Public Access to Usenet Health, Medical News |
    | & AIDS forums, and Info on Global Environment at  +1 604  681 0670. |
From: dkmiller@unixg.ubc.ca (Derek K. Miller)
Newsgroups: bc.general
Subject: Re: Transit Levy on BC-Hydro Bills
Date: 10 Nov 1992 19:40:38 GMT
Organization: University of British Columbia, Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: bc
NNTP-Posting-Host: unixg.ubc.ca

In article <1992Nov8.061620.6455@ee.ubc.ca> jmorriso@ee.ubc.ca (John Paul Morrison) writes:
>Let's make a deal: I'll agree to pay the full share of road costs for 
>my driving, if transit users pay for the full cost of their transit
>use. I won't face having to pay any more money though, because gasoline
>taxes make up for at least 50% of the price of gas, and gas taxes already
>raise exorbitant amounts of revenue for the government.
>

Sure. Provided that we can somehow factor into the cost accouning the
indirect environmental costs of the fossil fuels you burn, pollutants
you produce, and those of the mining a manufacturing for your car
(and those of the buses too, of course).
 
Ah yes, just let people pay for only those things they use. That wayu,
no one will ever change.
 
      :=:=> Derek K. Miller                 dkmiller@unixg.ubc.ca
      Researcher, Alma Mater Society        thegrodd@tz.ucs.sfu.ca
      University of British Columbia, Canada