New California Regulations About To Make Cars Crappier For Everyone

In California they’re poised to foist new regulations on the masses requiring a new sort of reflective window glazing on auto glass that will supposedly help combat global warming by keeping the inside of cars cooler. The problem? The window coatings seriously interfere with electronics inside the cars including GPS units, cell phones and satellite radios.
And this isn’t just California’s problem. Remember that our most populous state is such a large market that it’s easier for car manufacturers to make all their cars compliant with California standards rather than manufacture a special line of cars for sale in California.

Consumers nationwide should protest to a hyperactive California regulatory agency on the verge of ruining automobile global positioning systems and other safety features. Because California is such a large market, car manufacturers trying to comply with Golden State mandates might change auto designs nationwide.
At issue is a rule being considered by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) threatening to require all cars and light trucks sold in California after 2012 to feature metallic reflective window glazing to keep interiors cool and thus use less air conditioning. Less AC, goes the theory, would mean lower carbon emissions.
Toyota tried this approach back in 1989-94, and it was a disaster. The problem is that the new windows would reflect radio waves, thus highly compromising the use of GPS units, garage-door openers, laptop computers, satellite radio systems, parolee ankle bracelets, wireless medical equipment and cell phones. CARB admits the mandate would interfere with radio signals but is poised to promulgate the new rule later this month anyway. A 15-day public comment period would follow, during which alert consumers could overwhelm the bureaucrats with objections.

First, I’m not sure why the government would need to mandate something like this. Nobody likes it when the inside of their car turns into a blast furnace in the summer. Everyone wants better fuel mileage out of their vehicles. So if this is such a brilliant idea, why aren’t they already doing it?
Second, electronics not working in cars isn’t just an inconvenience. It’s dangerous. Here in North Dakota, where major winter storms strand people on the roads every year, cell phones are a life line. And, indeed, just this week the state was faced with a tragedy where three college students from Dickinson State University ended up driving their jeep into a pond out in the country and drowning. The girls made calls from their cell phones for rescue as their car was sinking. Tragically, they didn’t call 911 which would have allowed authorities to pinpoint their rescue and perhaps rescue them.
But if this new California regulation were in place they might not have been able to make the call at all. As coincidence has it, the Jeep they were in was registered in California.
So this isn’t just a silly regulation that won’t like achieve the goal it’s intended to achieve. It’s a regulation that will inconvenience millions of Americans, and perhaps even put them in danger.

Tags: , ,


«
»
  • sayanything-2227

    Agreeing that it's a completely unneeded regulation, there are ways around the difficulties listed. Remember when people first started getting cell phones and they installed little antennas on the roof or out the back window? We can just do that again.

    It might form a market for repeaters that pick up cell signals sent from your phone and gps inside the car and rebroadcast them outside. Buying the repeater would just be another hidden tax.

  • sayanything-42

    From bellweather to belfry full of bats in one generation…

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    What about OnStar? Maybe Govt Motors will protest this one. In any case, since AGW is a lie, all regulations based on that are unnecessary.

    Sitting next to this regulation on the AGW crazy train is the one banning black cars in CA.

  • http://Array Mongol

    Another proof that liberals are inbred morons with a thinking ability of a squirrel . The regulation will "keep interiors cool and thus use less air conditioning." Ah… yooo geniuses, what about cold states, especially in the winter time? They will now have to burn more gas to make up heat lost due to this rule. This will result in at least the same if not more "greenhouse" gases in the atmosphere. Stupidity thy name is libtardism

  • http://sayanythingblog.com robport

    ACtually, GM might be behind it. On-Star works through an exterior antenna. On-Star also sells in-car cell phone subscriptions.

    So maybe GM is looking at it as a way to drive more custoemrs to their servicse.

  • http://fu.com/ robert108

    Thanks for the info, Rob! I assumed OnStar worked like a cell phone, but that was obviously an incorrect assmuption on my part. I have never been a fan of GM, since long before Obama's fascist takeover.

    It wouldn't surprise me if your supposition is right, btw.

  • LaMonte

    To use the cellphone, just turn the air conditioning up full blast and open the windows. Problem solved. Not so much intended energy savings, however.

  • jimmypop

    motor world or some car mag had a story about the auto glass.

    the logic is flawed per mythbusters tv show!!!!! these libbys say a cooler car means less ac and the less ac the less gas you burn. mythbuster tested this!! AC DOES NOT USE MORE GAS!!!!! plus, we up north will lose the solar heat gain that keep our car warm when its cold out!

    oh, the mag also pointed out the cost of the glass vs. the 'proposed' gas savings….. guess what… dont make sense. you will never save enough gas to justify the cost of the more expensive wind shield. these people are just not smart.

    (I bet algore will be in the glass bz very, very soon)

Create a SAB Readerblog


Recent Comments

Powered by Disqus

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development