Future of driving a "classic" car

[DC871F]

20 hours ago, Zed Head said:

This last post sounds like the "far left Progressive" view that you were deriding in your first post.  But that's okay, that's what discussions are for.  This year's election isn't even really about left or right.  It's about fatalism versus hope.

Climate can be controlled.  If you ever spent time in the LA basin in the 80's you know what happens if you just let people run riot.  Tried to find a picture and instead I found that it's been a problem for far longer and they've been working on it for way before my time on the planet started.

California is a good model for what could be.  But it's full of those "far left Progressives".

https://www.aqmd.gov/home/research/publications/50-years-of-progress

https://www.insider.com/vintage-photos-los-angeles-smog-pollution-epa-2020-1

 

 

The war on drugs is a boondoggle at best, trying to control the climate with both arms and one leg hog tied is worse. 

How would it workout of you mowed your grass, weeded, had professionals visit every 90 days giving you the latest chemicals when your neighbor the entire time threw weed spores into your garden and grass every minute of every day?

In a perfect world I think is what you meant about being able to control the climate.

I have lived at the same beach for over 40 years and its quite the same as it ever was. Mr. Gore predicted by 2010 that the eastern seaboard would be "inundated". Science or science fiction? When people start reacting, you hope that they react methodically, not emotionally.

 

Edited November 9, 2020 by DC871F

[Zed Head]

"Out of sight, out of mind", they say.  Funny how that can be interpreted two ways.

One could argue that the earth will be pulled in to the sun in six billion years anyway.  Destruction is inevitable, why wait?  You can go round and round on these topics.

I do understand the weed analogy though.  My neighbor's yard was full of dandelions.  Lazy bastard.

[w3wilkes]

16 minutes ago, Zed Head said:

I do understand the weed analogy though.  My neighbor's yard was full of dandelions.  Lazy bastard.

Me too! Plus all kinds of junk strewn through the yard and driveway.

[Av8ferg]

Interesting discussion. I don’t think there will be any overreaching regulations on classic cars in the coming years (in the US) and here’s why. Classic cars are a very tiny tiny slice of the cars on the road today. There will really be no measurable impact on placing major constraints on their use. They say “As California goes so does the rest of the nation”. The rules in CA regarding classics is they must not be modified from their original manufacture’s specs. This could happen. California would have banned these cars a long time ago but the litigation would been costly and they would have lost. To strip a citizen of a vehicle they legally purchased within the confines of the law at the time would not fly in court. They know every year less of these cars are on the road and one day most will be mostly garage queens. What is possible is a carbon or pollution tax you pay annually but I don’t foresee that anytime soon. There are bigger fish to fry in the climate change battle. My neighbor has a Tesla but I’m not sold yet. It will be the future, no question but I think the tech will boom soon and bring the cost and range up and that’s probably when to buy. Buying a Tesla today might be like buying the first smartphone (they sucked) compared to what they are today. Captain Obvious wouldn’t know. [emoji23]
I try to be a responsible citizen and use resources wisely. This is all you can do as one person. We work really hard at work to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of our flights. We’re narcotic about it. Today I’ll burn ~35,000 lbs of jet fuel flying from NJ to LA. If I can find a way to save 100 lbs I will, we always do that. Taxi on one engine etc.
Government is going to go for the big polluters not classic cars in my opinion. I’ve traveled all over the world. The US and Europe are the cleanest (populated) places on earth. Africa, Asia are disasters. Gas is cheap in the US. $1.72 at home today. I think this will change under the new leadership.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[siteunseen]

3 hours ago, Av8ferg said:

Buying a Tesla today might be like buying the first smartphone (they sucked) compared to what they are today. Captain Obvious wouldn’t know.
 

[Captain Obvious]

LOL. It's true. And I stand by my decision.  Haha!

[DC871F]

On 11/10/2020 at 8:48 AM, Av8ferg said:

Interesting discussion. I don’t think there will be any overreaching regulations on classic cars in the coming years (in the US) and here’s why. Classic cars are a very tiny tiny slice of the cars on the road today. There will really be no measurable impact on placing major constraints on their use. They say “As California goes so does the rest of the nation”. The rules in CA regarding classics is they must not be modified from their original manufacture’s specs. This could happen. California would have banned these cars a long time ago but the litigation would been costly and they would have lost. To strip a citizen of a vehicle they legally purchased within the confines of the law at the time would not fly in court. They know every year less of these cars are on the road and one day most will be mostly garage queens. What is possible is a carbon or pollution tax you pay annually but I don’t foresee that anytime soon. There are bigger fish to fry in the climate change battle. My neighbor has a Tesla but I’m not sold yet. It will be the future, no question but I think the tech will boom soon and bring the cost and range up and that’s probably when to buy. Buying a Tesla today might be like buying the first smartphone (they sucked) compared to what they are today. Captain Obvious wouldn’t know.
I try to be a responsible citizen and use resources wisely. This is all you can do as one person. We work really hard at work to squeeze every ounce of efficiency out of our flights. We’re narcotic about it. Today I’ll burn ~35,000 lbs of jet fuel flying from NJ to LA. If I can find a way to save 100 lbs I will, we always do that. Taxi on one engine etc.
Government is going to go for the big polluters not classic cars in my opinion. I’ve traveled all over the world. The US and Europe are the cleanest (populated) places on earth. Africa, Asia are disasters. Gas is cheap in the US. $1.72 at home today. I think this will change under the new leadership.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Back in the day I used to use several swimming pools of gas crossing the Pacific. 

If the average person knew what it took to move their rubber dog $^!# to them, some may not have bought it, and the fight against SUVs and cattle would seem every inane. But then again, when I was in Jr. High, were told of the impending Ice Age. So much for science....

 

[DC871F]

On 11/8/2020 at 3:04 PM, AK260 said:

So DC871F (actually, having just been watching the Rise of Skywalker, your handle sounds very Storm Trooper!) - apologies for my insomnia rant. I figure I’ve taken you off topic a little as your post is really about driving classic cars not all cars.

 

When I was working in India back in 2008/9, I could see all that you are saying first hand. So could they, as you couldn’t even take a good enough photo of the Taj Mahal in the summer given the haze of pollution. At the time, they started making some efforts by forcing the most common and polluting city vehicles (the three wheeled tuck tucks) onto liquid natural gas. In 2019 they launched their National Clean Air Programme - but as you point out, they have quite a hill to climb.

 

China has “recently” realised that the cost of pollution is too high and unsustainable, so it too has made strides - without spelling it out, here’s a good read ...

 

https://earth.org/how-china-is-winning-its-battle-against-air-pollution/

 

Their problem of course (much like the rest of the manufacturing world) is the heavy industries like steel are difficult to curtail as they bring jobs and prosperity.

 

Obviously time will tell how truthfully all these initiatives have been implemented.

 

I feel that given the stature of countries like the US and the likes of the European Union on the world stage they really need to be the leading lights on this issue and lead by example. One of many reasons why the Biden approach compared with his predecessor is very welcomed by those who are concerned for the future of the environment.

 

As for classic cars, in countries that care about air quality, it is inevitable that our cars will become curtailed in the areas they can be used. But that’s just the way of the future for all ICE cars.

Douglas DC-8. The DC-8-71F is a freighter version of this airplane, and with bigger motors.

Edited November 11, 2020 by DC871F

[Zed Head]

19 minutes ago, DC871F said:

told of the impending Ice Age. So much for science....

 

16 minutes ago, DC871F said:

Douglas DC-8. The DC-8-71F is a freighter version of this airplane, and with bigger motors.

Science made the DC-8 possible.  Science is about collecting data and applying rational thought to what it shows.  At the higher levels you just have to trust the scientists and the institution of science.  Like you trusted the guys that built your plane.  The engineers got their numbers from science.  The chemists made the fuel based on science.  The engine materials were developed using science.

I think that the basic problem most people have with the "global warming" issue is "why should I worry about what's going to happen 40 years from now?  I'll be dead".  It seems like the deniers are older and the worriers are younger.  Which makes sense, from a selfish perspective.  The older people don't have to care, because they'll be dead, and the younger people do, because they inherit the mess.

So, just like wearing a face covering in public so you don't get COVID and be a burden on society in the hospital, or pass it along so that someone else's life is affected, it's really about letting other people live a life worth living.  In the short-term or the long-term.

Edited November 11, 2020 by Zed Head

[DC871F]

15 minutes ago, Zed Head said:

 

Science made the DC-8 possible.  Science is about collecting data and applying rational thought to what it shows.  At the higher levels you just have to trust the scientists and the institution of science.  Like you trusted the guys that built your plane.  The engineers got their numbers from science.  The chemists made the fuel based on science.  The engine materials were developed using science.

I think that the basic problem most people have with the "global warming" issue is "why should I worry about what's going to happen 40 years from now?  I'll be dead".  It seems like the deniers are older and the worriers are younger.  Which makes sense, from a selfish perspective.  The older people don't have to care, because they'll be dead, and the younger people do, because they inherit the mess.

So, just like wearing a face covering in public so you don't get COVID and be a burden on society in the hospital, or pass it along so that someone else's life is affected, it's really about letting other people live a life worth living.  In the short-term or the long-term.

The key is to decipher alarmism and science, both elusive. It really seems the word science needs to be replaced by hypothesis.

"By 2010 the eastern seaboard will be inundates". Science or alarmism?

"if we dont do _______ by the year______ (this) will happen".

Hey look over there, its a wolf!

Whatever happened to the good ole ozone layer scare, Acid rain, etc? Not asking you to do any research BTW, but it may be a fun topic as well, as long as we can learn from it.

Edited November 11, 2020 by DC871F

[Zed Head]

On 11/9/2020 at 6:48 AM, DC871F said:

I have lived at the same beach for over 40 years and its quite the same as it ever was.

Mr. Gore predicted by 2010 that the eastern seaboard would be "inundated". Science or science fiction?

 

3 minutes ago, DC871F said:

The key is to decipher alarmism and science

I agree.  Somewhere between "I don't see anything, my beach looks the same" and "100 years from now" we'll be underwater, there's probably a sweet spot.

Al Gore is a politician, not a scientist.
 

[DC871F]

14 minutes ago, Zed Head said:

 

 a politician, not a scientist.
 

So are every other talking head in the media complex who brow beat what these politicians say.

There are plenty of opposing scientific views on the subject, but they dont make the cut in Prime Time.

But we now have a politician who says global warming is one of his first priorities. I can name a few that are more important, but they arent what Progressives deem important.

Edited November 12, 2020 by DC871F