Ah, how to win friends and influence people... call them names if they
disagree or have a different point of view.  Do you wonder that people
give you a hard time? You constantly spout gloom and doom, but what
does it get you? What does it get anyone? Why not try to look at the
upside of life. There are people trying to make a positive difference.

Could the fact that the technologies which you cite were not
available, therefore the great leap in progress to halt pollution
could not have appeared until after they were developed? Or that it
took until people recognized the damage the pollution was creating to
give impetus to development of said technologies? Seems it's a case of
to all things there is a season.... or era.....

The catalytic converter, which has been found to produce pollutants of
it's own, was not a cure. If it had been, there would be no pollutants
emitted.

There is a point of no return in practically all things.... You
propose that we do nothing and in doing nothing we might attain that
point of no return when , no matter what might be developed, it will
be too late to save the environment?  That's like saying you sewer
line is clogging but do nothing until it backs up into your home.

As for the Third World, think of them as children. In their
development, they must also learn the lessons industrialized nations
have already learned. That there is a price to be paid. Like children,
simply telling them not to do something will not educate them. It will
not help them see the cost. Like a child on a playground who throws
down a wrapper, and gets sent to the principal's office for doing so,
Third World countries must, unfortunately, learn some lessons the hard
way.

Others learn more quickly. For example, when Brazil tells the world to
pay up if they want them to stop cutting down the rainforests. How
much sense does that make though? Like putting a gun to your head and
saying give me the money or I'll shoot myself.
--

Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
w/Black Std Interior, A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok;
Vintage 40 16" rims w/225/50ZR16 KDWS BF Goodrich
gForce Radial T/As, Cobra drop; surround sound
audio-video...
See my ride at....
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/003_May_21_3004.jpg
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/005_May_21_2004.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/davescar_7_11_05_002.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/Engine_rebuild_006.jpg

Well, Rich... let's dig a little and see where some of your logic or
information is flawed.

In nearly 40 years in the automotive trades, I have yet to see a CO2 filter
or CO2 cannister... I must assume that you are referring to an evaporative
emissions device that contains activated charcoal. These devices are
designed to absorb gasoline vapours while the car is parked and then return
them to the intake tract to be burned in the combustion chamber when the car
is running.

The earliest emission controls were indeed introduce in the late 60s... the
open PCV system replaced the road draft tube and some areas were treated to
thermactor or A.I.R. systems to reduce CO (carbon monoxide) emissions.

In Canada, catalytic converters were introduced in 1974.... this is when
Ford made the leap from breaker point ignitions to DuraSpark. These
catalytic converters do not "absorb" anything. Instead, they provide a
"catalyst" that, using heat and portions of the exhaust gases, reacts with
various compounds to convert them into something less harmful.... one of the
main thrusts was to neutralize oxides of nitrogen. These compounds react
with sunlight to form the brown haze we sometimes see in heavily populated
areas.

It is no secret that early attempts at emissions controls were, at the very
best, crude. Developement and the knowledge base were both in their infancy.
There were no North American produced cars that had any sort of "feedback"
system and carburettors were the norm. We only need to look at the snake pit
of vacuum hoses draped over the motors in cars of the period to see the
possibilty of malfunction or even misfunction. As time progressed, R&D
developed feedback carbs, feedback fuel injection and finally had a foothold
on various emissions devices that worked more like intended.

Slowly but surely, these systems have evolved into the high-tech systems we
see on modern automobiles. If you had your way, the engineers of the 60s and
70s could have waited for modern technology to deal with the concern....
they needn't bother because the future is gonna save our a.s.... If these
same engineers had sat on these collective a.ses, the engineers of today
would still be waiting for the future to save our a.ses..... not an EGR
valve in sight (wouldn't be able to see one anyway.... we'd all be looking
through that brown haze).

Sadly, these systems are still mere machines... they can and will suffer
from lack of maintenance, breakdowns and malfunctions.

So, on your premise, we should stop spending money on R&D because somewhere,
someday.... someone will wake up one morning and, without any knowledge -
without any knowledge base - without any concept... miraculously solve our
concerns. Rich.... it is the research and developement of past ages that
provides the controls we have today.... It is todays R&D that will provide
the  controls of tomorrow. Without R&D... there wouldn't be ANY R&D.

I picture Rich as being the ultimate glutton.... demanding his basic human
right to do things to excess - future generations be damned. After Rich has
finished sh.tting wherever and whenever he pleases... then we can try our
"futile" attempts at minimizing our impact on the environment..... but for
Gods sake, let's not make Rich behave responsibly.

Man... if people thought you were a self centered dick before.... I think
you have removed all doubt.

FWIW... if there are any "radicals" to be found in this conversation, I
doubt that any of them would offer assistance in the repair of one of these
terrible machines, I doubt that any of them would even think of saying that
zero pollution is a pipe dream.... I would imagine, though, that a radical
could be someone that refuses to look at th big picture.... someone that
turns a blind eye to known concerns that affect us all.... someone that
thinks a dollar is more important than quality of life...

   Any possible chance you had of ever looking even the slightest bit
credible, and have me even pretend to read and consider your argument,
went straight out the window with referring to myself or anyone else
here as a radical and/or a cretin. The day your intelligence measures
close to the majority of this group will be sometime during the same
week that Hell freezes over.

<PLONK!>

While under normal conditions, most people might conclude that if one
person holds a position and all others oppose, then the one is
probably in error. However... you'd be in august company with the
likes of Christopher Columbus.... if a number of his ships had not
fallen over the edge...
--

Spike
1965 Ford Mustang Fastback 2+2, Vintage Burgundy
w/Black Std Interior, A Code 289 C4 Trac-Lok;
Vintage 40 16" rims w/225/50ZR16 KDWS BF Goodrich
gForce Radial T/As, Cobra drop; surround sound
audio-video...
See my ride at....
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/003_May_21_3004.jpg
Feb 2004- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/005_May_21_2004.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/davescar_7_11_05_002.jpg
Jul 2005- http://207.36.208.198/albums/86810/Engine_rebuild_006.jpg