« ForrigeFortsett »
duce contaminants; the nature of diesel exhaust; "average” emissions of motor vehicles from various sources to fix the target for emphasis on control; "average” driving patterns as part of a larger project to de velop standard test procedures, et cetera.
Because smog is basically a metropolitan problem, our California law provides for local option, and in our State today, all of our metropolitan areas have acted in favor of mandatory controls affecting some 742 million vehicles, or about 85 percent of the registered vehicles in the State of California. We believe that by having included the vehicles in the metropolitan areas that the degree of control of hydrocarbons will result in a satisfactory reduction in the present-day photochemical smog.
Our board of necessity must work with all levels of government, business, and the public at large in attempting to obtain coordinated action and ultimate control of the contribution of air pollution from automobiles as well as other sources. We have found full cooperation and support in the activities being coordinated by this board and its staff, and we anticipate that this will carry over into the coming years.
Of course, we are grateful to note the recent passage of Public Law 88–206, which will enlarge the attack on air pollution. It will certainly encourage and further support the activities of Californians as well as those from other States who are working on this problem. Certainly we must all agree that California does not have an exclusive market on smog. It is affecting other parts of the United States and will no doubt become more noticeable as time passes. The United States now has about 85 million motor vehicles on the road and that sum is increasing at the rate of nearly 5 percent per year. Time is short when one considers the magnitude of correcting the problem.
We will probably need some of your dollar support, possibly further legislation. There is no doubt that we will need your continued interest and support as we proceed in these next few critical years in our efforts to discover the best method of control of automobile pollution. With everyone working on the common objective of finding a solution, I, for one, am confident that it will be done. We cannot fail, we must and will win this silent, but increasingly more complex, battle.
I think that your board probably would like to know a little bit about this pollution control board, which was created here in California in 1960, the first of such boards in the country, probably in the world, and it is comprised of 13 members, 4 of which are constitutional-or I shouldn't say "constitutional,” but State-appointed officials.
The State director of public health, agriculture, highway, patrol, and motor vehicles are regular members of the board. Their terms do not expire and then there are nine other people appointed by the Governor for 4-year, overlapping terms.
This board, during its first year of operation, of course, had to organize a staff; had to develop their policies and procedures of how they were going to operate, and then through committee work and through use of advisory committees, establish the criterion under which these devices would be accepted for testing.
And during the period of time we were developing these procedures the device people were coming in asking us to take these devices for testing and to prove their device so they could get into the market.
Over a period of time, of course, we have gone through our shakedown cruise and we have had the experience of the automobile manufacturers putting on voluntary blowby devices on the 1961 and 1962 model cars sold in California and nationwide the manufacturers put them on 1963 model cars.
For the committee's hearing, I think it might be wise to say that so far we have approved 40 devices for new-car installation and we have approved 5 for what we call the after market installation, the used car.
The blowbys are those gases which escape from the combustion chamber past the piston rings down into the oil pan below and these gases represent about one-third of the pollutants which the automobile is responsible for. That is, the crankcase is about one-third of the amount. There are two types of crankcase devices. This happens to be one [indicating] that is a closed system and if I might get up, I will just point out a few things about this.
The early models that we approved had only one tube and had a valve and developments of newer models put on a second tube which takes care of all the blowby. This could not take care of more than a certain percentage of it and it depended upon a valve; if this valve became clogged or anything it would create some difficulty.
So the types that are now required on all new models are what we call the combination system, whereby if the valve, which is in here [indicating), becomes unable to handle the total Áow, then the rest of the flow comes up and goes through the air cleaner and goes into the clean side of the carburetor. This is the side, down here (indicating), where it has already gone through the carburetor and this (indicating] is returned down in the gas chamber itself.
Now, this indicating] is the blowby part that we keep talking about, the system that takes it from the motor. Now, when we talk about the exhaust devices we are talking about after it has gone through the motor and it is getting ready to come out the tailpipe, and we have some dozen different devices and systems which we are carrying out testing on now of the exhaust end of this.
The motor vehicle board established a criteria that said that these devices had to meet the State standard, which is 275 parts per million of hydrocarbon. Now, this was something that the device people thought that they could do real easy because they were testing them under their own testing procedure, but when we set up our testing procedure, we have found that it is very difficult to reduce the hydrocarbons under the full 12,000-mile testing procedure and keep them under 72 parts per million.
Likewise, we have to reduce the carbon monoxide to one and a half percent and this sometimes is difficult to do in a combination type system or device for a full 12,000 miles.
At the most recent meeting of the motor vehicle pollution control board, last Thursday, here in Los Angeles, our board instructed our staff to adopt the principle of averaging over 12,000 miles so that it is possible that some of these devices may be improved and certified during this calendar year.
If this is true and there are two or more of these devices set aside, then a year after that date the new model cars, as they come out, will have to have one of these devices installed on them to be sold in California and our law says the second year after that they would have to be installed on commercial vehicles, and when a used car is reregistered, in other words, when ownership changes, and the third year following that certification date it would have to be put on individuals' cars during the year preceding the time that they would get their next registration, their license registered.
Now, in California, as in many other things that we do, we have local option. I think you recall this morning the testimony was that the State law provided that any of the 58 counties could activate an Air Pollution Control District by the Board of Supervisors holding a hearing; making a determination they had a problem; and then creating a district.
This is true of our installation program on the so-called used cars. The legislature of this State has said that in those areas where air pollution control districts are established they may, by hearing, decide whether or not they wish to have these installed on the used cars and another piece of legislation that was also passed provided for a local option of whether or not the local area that had an air pollution control district would have installation-inspection stations.
These will be maintained and supervised by the highway patrol and this symbol here [indicating] is the type of a symbol which would go onto this type of station.
At the last board meeting there was a report given that there were over 4,000 of these stations that have already been approved in these 12 counties which have air pollution control board districts.
In our own little county where I come from, San Diego, south of here, we had 600 of these stations approved in our area.
This is the first time in California that there has been any compulsory installation of any type of device on a used car and this is the first time also that the State has required compulsory inspection. We have gone on the voluntary basis on safety inspections, such as brakes, lights, and other things.
Now, of course, we of the motor vehicle board are quite happy to see the Federal Government expand their interest and their work and their resources in the field of air pollution control because while we have been working on this subject a great-with a great deal of intensity over the past, well now, we are in practically the end of our fourth year, we find that we still have many questions and we still would like to know more about what will be the result after we get these devices installed on these cars.
I don't believe anyone told you this morning, but after our program is fully implemented at the end of 1965 on these used cars and these 12 counties, we expect to have the crankcase devices on 712 million vehicles, which is about 85 percent of the registered automobile vehicles in California.
We have found a great deal of satisfaction and gratification by having the unqualified support, not only of local government but also State government and the industry.
I am always amazed to hear people say that the industry isn't doing anything about it. Well, that is true that the industry doesn't say that it is their responsibility to develop these devices and to take them out and to test them and this, that, and the other, but with the exception of one device, the automobile industry has every one of these devices in Detroit under test and it wouldn't surprise me at all to find the
industry, now that we have taken the step we took last week, to voluntarily start installing some of these on some of their 1965 model cars and bring them out prior to the time that they will probably be required on the 1966 model cars.
I will be prepared to answer any questions. I don't know what you would like to ask me about the board and its operation, and if I am unable to answer some of the technical details, I am sure that Don Jenson, our executive officer, will be able to do a very effective job tomorrow.
Senator MUSKIE. Let me ask you this: You say by 1966 it is possible that these control devices will be standard equipment on cars, on new cars?
Mr. Askew. It is entirely possible that we will approve two or more devices this year; if we do this by July, chances are it would be on 1966 model cars. If it is after July, it will probably be 1967 model cars.
Senator MUSKIE. You are talking now about the exhaust control devices?
Mr. Askew. Yes; the exhaust control devices.
I failed to mention that there are a variety of devices. There are the catalytic type, there are the afterburner type, and then there are the systems type, which they were talking about this morning, the Chrysler kit, smog kit, as they referred to it.
Senator Muskie. Could you distinguish between the three types?
Mr. İSKEW. Well, a catalyst is a chemical which converts this chemically as it goes through the catalyst bed, the exhaust goes through the catalyst bed.
Senator MUSKIE. Something like a filter?
Mr. AsKÉW. A catalyst modities it without changing the catalyst, it stays there. It will eventually lose its strength and its ability to act, but it converts it.
This is about all I can say, a catalyst is something that enters into a reaction, but yet doesn't become a part of it.!:.
Afterburner is an incinerator-type, actually, whereby combustion, high temperatures, it burns up the excess hydrocarbons and when you have a lean running, as I call it, sometimes you have to auxiliary fire this with a gasoline stream.
And then the systems modification is anything that they would do to the engine that would cut down the hydrocarbons. The average car in (alifornia actually puts out, instead of what was said this morning, around 800, about 940 to 950 parts per million and by reducing the hydrocarbons down to 275 parts per million we would expect to roll back the ambient air conditions to what they were back in 1940. This is what the State standard is based on and if we do not do an 80-percent rollback, which is what we are trying to accomplish here, we probably won't roll it back to 1940 in the 1970 year. It may be 1945 instead of what it was in 1940.
These people in Los Angeles didn't tell you that between 1945 and 1954, at the end of it, there was a 6,000 percent increase in industry in this area and I am sure that with that there was about a 6,000 percent increase in their population and their automobiles in that 10-year period of time. It wouldn't be 6,000, because Los Angeles only doubles about every 10 years.
Senator MUSKIE. Now, the systems type of afterburner is the one that is involved in the Chrysler kit?
Mr. Askew. Yes, sir.
Senator Muskie. What types of devices do you anticipate you may be in a position to approve within, I think you said by June of this year?
Mr. Askew. Well, we have actually gone through first generation devices; we have had second generation devices, and we are on the third generation devices in some instances.
We have just started on the Chrysler kit and we have accepted some of them for testing and which they have not gotten around to the installation of these on 30 cars.
Our testing requires 30 of these devices to be put on cars and tested for a full 12,000 miles and this generally takes about 9 months time.
They are tested five times during this, at the beginning, 3,000, 6,000, 9,000, and 12,000 miles and at all these tests they have to be under this 275 parts per million on an average over the 12,000 miles.
Senator MUSKIE. In your judgment will this create a nitgrogen oxide problem?
Mr. Askew. There are many people who are continuing to raise this question, although the State department of public health got a very detailed discussion of oxides of nitrogen at the time they were setting the hydrocarbon standard and probably I should let Mr. Maga talk on this because it is his responsibility to set not only the ambient air standard but the exhaust standards.
At that time the experts were telling us that if we controlled the hydrocarbons that the oxides of nitrogen wouldn't be a problem; there are others who believe that we don't know what's going to happen and we best find out.
These are some of the unknowns that we are going into and that would certainly be helpful if through the resources of the new act some of these questions could be answered.
Senator MUSKIE. Would you want to comment on that, Mr. Maga?
Mr. Mags. The concern over oxides of nitrogen is something like this:
This photochemical smog problem you have heard about is a reaction that takes place between hydrocarbon emissions from motor vehicles, oxides of nitrogen, and sunlight, so that you might say there are three elements involved in here: the hydrocarbons, the oxides of nitrogen, the sunlight.
Now, no one has proposed to get rid of the sunlight, so your control effort would be directed against hydrocarbons or oxides of nitrogen.
Traditionally the control of air pollution started in the hydrocarbon field and you could see that if you could control either one, the hydrocarbons or the oxides of nitrogen, if you could eliminate them, for instance, completely, this would stop the reaction.
There has been a considerable emphasis on oxides of nitrogen control in recent years where a number of scientists in the fields of chemistry in air pollution feel the control of hydrocarbons may do something for air pollution but may not solve the problem. It is a fairly complicated issue.
I don't believe the control of hydrocarbons from motor vehicles is going to create more oxides of nitrogen. The motor vehicle pollution control board criteria indicates they would not approve a device that discharged or increased oxides of nitrogen to a large amount. So we