Author Topic: California to reduce carbon emissions by... banning black cars?! (Read 1791 times)

Bindare_Dundat · « **on:** April 10, 2009, 02:03:58 AM »

The California legislature is considering regulating the color of cars and reflectivity of paint to reduce the energy requirements to cool them. A presentation on the proposed legislation by the California Air Resources Board is below.

The problem isn’t the color per se, but the reflectivity of the paint overall. And dark colors just don’t reflect well, so they are likely out. “Jet black remains an issue,” says the report.

Anyone who’s ever entered a very hot car knows that it can be cooled down immediately by driving a few feet with the windows open, effectively neutralizing any color-caused heat issues before engaging the air conditioner. But whatever, black is evil.

The new regulations would be phased in beginning in 2012, so if you want that black car, you better buy it soon. More on Autoblog and CrunchGear.

And you thought that black Toyota Pious you bought made you such a good person. Think again, you tree hating energy slob. Luckily, black websites are still ok, even though they, too, use more energy.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/26/california-may-ban-black-cars/

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #1 on:** April 10, 2009, 08:02:59 AM »

Quote from: Bindare_Dundat on April 10, 2009, 02:03:58 AM

The California legislature is considering regulating the color of cars and reflectivity of paint to reduce the energy requirements to cool them. A presentation on the proposed legislation by the California Air Resources Board is below.

The problem isn’t the color per se, but the reflectivity of the paint overall. And dark colors just don’t reflect well, so they are likely out. “Jet black remains an issue,” says the report.

Anyone who’s ever entered a very hot car knows that it can be cooled down immediately by driving a few feet with the windows open, effectively neutralizing any color-caused heat issues before engaging the air conditioner. But whatever, black is evil.

The new regulations would be phased in beginning in 2012, so if you want that black car, you better buy it soon. More on Autoblog and CrunchGear.

And you thought that black Toyota Pious you bought made you such a good person. Think again, you tree hating energy slob. Luckily, black websites are still ok, even though they, too, use more energy.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/26/california-may-ban-black-cars/

They are talking about banning tv's over there too.

Liberalism is a true mental disorder.

headhuntersix · « **Reply #2 on:** April 10, 2009, 08:12:04 AM »

WE WILL TELL U WHAT TO DO< WE ARE IN CONTROL.

They are also forcing gas stations to retro fit their pumps with new nozzles. The old nozzles block 90% of the fumes. these new nozzels which cost a ton, block an additional 3%. This is going to force gas stations out of business...for fuel vapors. The moron they had on tv was saying how we need to crack down on all this polution and we should not have to breath poluted air.....

Hereford · « **Reply #3 on:** April 10, 2009, 08:29:35 AM »

Getting rid of 5 million illegals would help curb pollution a great deal...

The problem here is that there is way too damn many people.

tonymctones · « **Reply #4 on:** April 10, 2009, 09:21:13 AM »

are they going to darker skinned ppl too b/c by their logic its going to take more energy to cool them down. fuking idiots

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #5 on:** April 10, 2009, 09:35:17 AM »

Quote from: tonymctones on April 10, 2009, 09:21:13 AM

are they going to darker skinned ppl too b/c by their logic its going to take more energy to cool them down. fuking idiots

Hysterical. where is Decker and 240 and Lurker on this garbage?

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #6 on:** April 10, 2009, 09:42:37 AM »

this is so racist

Where is Jesse and Al on this banning of black

headhuntersix · « **Reply #7 on:** April 10, 2009, 10:02:02 AM »

Yes..great point...all black people use to much energy to cool down...ur band from Kalifornia...please move to Alaska. This is as bad as that idiot from Texas and the asian names.

240 is Back · « **Reply #8 on:** April 10, 2009, 11:54:45 AM »

Quote from: 333386 on April 10, 2009, 09:35:17 AM

Hysterical. where is Decker and 240 and Lurker on this garbage?

sorry, i was working. looks like i'm not a true lib after all, huh?

shootfighter1 · « **Reply #9 on:** April 10, 2009, 12:20:07 PM »

If this is truely being considered, what an idiotic idea. California is a liberal mess.

MB_722 · « **Reply #10 on:** April 10, 2009, 12:57:04 PM »

FOLLOW UP: CARB says "Just kidding about banning black paint..."

Quote

To be completely fair, the California Air Resources Board never intended to ban black paint -- or any color of paint, for that matter. When devising ways to implement the Cool Cars Initiative, CARB couldn't find any dark paints that passed the 20% solar reflectivity test, which others took to mean that CARB would be banning them. Not so, says a CARB spokesman: "We are by no means interested in banning or restricting car colors." For now, CARB is sticking with the reflective glass portion of the initiative, which would add a reflective clear coat to windows and $31-$50 to the price of a new car, and is taking public comments on the proposed new rules. Thanks for the tip, Jason

[Source: LA Times]

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/03/29/follow-up-carb-says-just-kidding-about-banning-black-paint/

Eyeball Chambers · « **Reply #11 on:** April 10, 2009, 01:00:15 PM »

Black is Beautiful!

Bindare_Dundat · « **Reply #12 on:** April 10, 2009, 01:00:51 PM »

Quote from: MB_722 on April 10, 2009, 12:57:04 PM

FOLLOW UP: CARB says "Just kidding about banning black paint..."
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/03/29/follow-up-carb-says-just-kidding-about-banning-black-paint/

Thanks for the update.

The True Adonis · « **Reply #13 on:** April 10, 2009, 01:02:26 PM »

Trying to "Pull a Coach" again are we?

FOLLOW UP: CARB says "Just kidding about banning black paint..."

To be completely fair, the California Air Resources Board never intended to ban black paint -- or any color of paint, for that matter. When devising ways to implement the Cool Cars Initiative, CARB couldn't find any dark paints that passed the 20% solar reflectivity test, which others took to mean that CARB would be banning them. Not so, says a CARB spokesman: "We are by no means interested in banning or restricting car colors." For now, CARB is sticking with the reflective glass portion of the initiative, which would add a reflective clear coat to windows and $31-$50 to the price of a new car, and is taking public comments on the proposed new rules. Thanks for the tip, Jason

[Source: LA Times]

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #14 on:** April 10, 2009, 01:04:11 PM »

So people have to pay $50.00 more for junk science?

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #15 on:** April 10, 2009, 01:31:50 PM »

Quote from: MB_722 on April 10, 2009, 12:57:04 PM

FOLLOW UP: CARB says "Just kidding about banning black paint..."
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/03/29/follow-up-carb-says-just-kidding-about-banning-black-paint/

so when you get that blinding glare from sun reflecting off the car window in front of you, now it'll be even more blinding $:-\$

Bindare_Dundat · « **Reply #16 on:** April 10, 2009, 01:37:00 PM »

Quote from: The True Adonis on April 10, 2009, 01:02:26 PM

Trying to "Pull a Coach" again are we?

FOLLOW UP: CARB says "Just kidding about banning black paint..."

To be completely fair, the California Air Resources Board never intended to ban black paint -- or any color of paint, for that matter. When devising ways to implement the Cool Cars Initiative, CARB couldn't find any dark paints that passed the 20% solar reflectivity test, which others took to mean that CARB would be banning them. Not so, says a CARB spokesman: "We are by no means interested in banning or restricting car colors." For now, CARB is sticking with the reflective glass portion of the initiative, which would add a reflective clear coat to windows and $31-$50 to the price of a new car, and is taking public comments on the proposed new rules. Thanks for the tip, Jason

[Source: LA Times]

Why don't you take it up with the original author of the article? Let us know how it turns out.

240 is Back · « **Reply #17 on:** April 11, 2009, 12:27:41 AM »

TA is an incredible asset to this board. He's knocked off two lib-hating articles today with actual facts.

shootfighter1 · « **Reply #18 on:** April 11, 2009, 05:42:12 AM »

Hugo, please continue posting. Your ativar is f'n great.

It didn't seem correct when posted. Still, I'd have to see the proof that this reflective coating would actually do anything significant. When the vast majority of CO2 emissions are not man made (and CO2 being the main cause of global climate shifts is still debateable).

Hugo Chavez · « **Reply #19 on:** April 11, 2009, 06:55:38 AM »

Quote from: shootfighter1 on April 11, 2009, 05:42:12 AM

Hugo, please continue posting. Your ativar is f'n great.

It didn't seem correct when posted. Still, I'd have to see the proof that this reflective coating would actually do anything significant. When the vast majority of CO2 emissions are not man made (and CO2 being the main cause of global climate shifts is still debateable).

I'll post some, it's just going to be way less. have a lot of work to do before little Hugo arrives.

Soul Crusher · « **Reply #20 on:** April 11, 2009, 08:12:14 AM »

Quote from: Hugo Chavez on April 11, 2009, 06:55:38 AM

I'll post some, it's just going to be way less. have a lot of work to do before little Hugo arrives.

That girl is amazing.