May: #9 package drops to 39% due to EPA?

Edited by Danny at Bill's request.

 

sheesh. well, back to my original plan to buy a garmin street pilot III

 

Does anyone have a specific reference for this? I do not think EPA regulates car headlights (much like there is no real control over other consumer products with toxic components such as monitors, circuit boards, etc.)

EPA can regulate disposal, but not content in consumer goods.

Until I see a specific reference - I tried to search the EPA site, but found nothing.

See this url for a press release on HID lamps. They are low mercury (some no mercury) lamps; high efficiency and long life.

http://www.sylvania.com/press/10312000d.html

(Even after editing, still doubting.)

 

:? But, wait... OK, I can understand limiting imports based on mercury (though the amounts seem very small to worry about, for something non-edible). However, why would a Prius have more Mercury than one of the latest tricked-out SUVs or mini-vans? Those have HID headlights; they have nav screens; they have DVD monitors in the rear part of the cars so the kids can watch the Disney movies umpteen times. I'd think those would be higher on the EPA's hit list, if they were going after high-mercury cars.

Sorry to be a Doubting Thomas, and sincere apologies for my comments on the veracity of select Toyota dealers, if warranted; but does anyone have a URL to a news article about EPA limits on auto imports due to mercury -- for a Prius or any other car? I've Googled for it, and been unable to find anything.

While there are plenty of situations where government regulatory agencies deserve to take the rap for incompetence, they also get convicted without a trial pretty frequently in the court of public opinion. I've worked for government and I've worked for corporations, and you know, there's not a lot of difference -- except government has to air its dirty laundry more publicly, in general.

Frankly, any large, institutionalized group of people tend to gravitate towards inefficiency and poor decisions. I think it may be a physical law. :roll:

 

EPA does not have the power to do whatever it likes, with no court order, etc. I am curious about the case you mention; do you know the name of the supplier of corn products, the river, what the metal was? Any details?

 

Nothing. It's bulldada used to mollify impatient customers.

How can you tell when a car salesman is lying? His lips are moving.

 

:iagree :iagree :iagree :iagree :iagree
:computer: :wave:

 

I don't post very often, so feel free not to believe me.

It is the EPA that is calling for limits on the amount of Package 9 production. I'm not sure on specifics, but I think it has to do with the overall weight of the vehicle.

Several years ago we couldn't get Corolla LE's with cruise due to EPA limitations. The servo added just enough weight to the car, that the EPA weight targets were not being met.

In the Chicago Region, the restriction on Pkg 9 was anticipated, so one months entire order was for that package. That actually made things tough for many of my customers because we are selling more Pkg 3 & 7.
Now a couple people are getting lucky and getting to leap-frog up the list while others are passing on the more expensive cars.

 

Do we yet have a source, other than someone's insistence that this is in fact true? How about a bulletin from the EPA, a link to their website? If this is true it didn't materialize out of thin air. The EPA is only concerned about vehicle weight when it classifies the vehicle, no? The mercury levels as sited by others seems plausible on the surface, but again...source documents?

 

http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/bnsdocs/hgsbook/auto.pdf

This url is an interesting piece (from several years ago) discussing the use of mercury in cars. The HID lamps use very little mercury. You can also find information on other uses of mercury in cars, etc.

Some HID lamps don't use mercury, or very small amounts. It may be that the HID headlights contain so little mercury that they are not considered hazardous waste. Standard fluorescent bulbs are considered hazardous waste due to the mercury content. I just bought some fluorescent tubes (household) made by Philips that contain so little mercury that they are not considered hazardous waste.

Just interesting, as we still have no documentation of how the EPA might restrict import and sale of package #9.

 

I have emailed OTAQ (Office of Transportation and Air Quality) at the EPA asking about this rumor (limiting package #9).

I will let you all know when/if I receive a response.

 

I don't understand where the mercury is in the Nav system. The HIDs I guess I can see would be a problem in large number like the batteries. But really, there must be only trace amounts unlike the grams of mercury in the tilt switches in recent big 3 cars.

So where is the Hg in the NAV?

jv <- glad I got my NAV...

 

The idea of EPA limiting pkg 9 strikes me as unlikely too. If there were some part of pkg 9 that was really dangerous to the environment why not just ban it completely.

The only vaguely possible thing I can imagine is perhaps there is some significant amount of mercury in the yaw sensors used in VSC. HID lights are only available on cars with VSC. Perhaps the real issue isn't the HID lights at all. HID lights themselves contain less mercury than normal home/office flourescent light tubes.

At any rate, I'm not seeing any press releases or news stories from the EPA crowing about how many dangerous Priuses they have saved us from.

This rumour seems to clearly have come from Toyota since there are now three reports of different Toyota dealers who have heard the rumor. Perhaps one of them could post the details on how they heard about it... was it a Toyota bulletin sent out, or was it via word of mouth from another Toyota employee?

 

I used to work in environmental policy, and though it's been a few years, and it's late, from memory....

--> The EPA is the US regulatory authority on hazardous substance control, both on the front end (Toxic Substances Control Act) and the back end (RCRA, what most people thing of as the Hazardous Waste Law).

--> This authority includes regulating both imports and exports, where international treaties are in effect or where we have decided to unilaterally restrict one or the other

--> Mercury is a known toxin with no safe level identified (actually I think its worst problem is that it is teratogenic, which is to say is causes birth defects)

--> Notwithstanding the fact that some uses of mercury (e.g. in compact fluorescents) actually decrease the overall incidence of bio-available mercury in the environment (in this case by reducing mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants by substantially more than the mercury in the tubes)... notwithstanding that, *any* new uses of mercury are scrutinized and can be restricted, I believe under TSCA. (Note that the actual problem (with cars, laptops, fluorescents, etc) is not in the production/use of the products, but in their eventual disposal, whereupon the mercury is released into the environment.

--> So, without bothering to hunt down the specifics of what's involved here, I suspect that the EPA is restricting imports of products containing mercury... and I suspect they are not similarly restricting domestically produced cars because they are domestically produced and there would be louder screaming. Also the specific authority the EPA has over domestic uses is different than their authority to restrict imports.

I think the mercury in the nav systems is a fluorescent backlight on the lcd panel, just like a laptop.

That is my best guess. If you live in Vermont, you might also notice that your laptops have labels on the packages warning you of mercury contents. This is required by state legislation, which is another topic altogether.

 

:lolup: :lolup: :lolup: :lolup:
ukeleft: OH PLEASEEEE! ukeright:
:crazyeyes: :crazyeyes: :crazyeyes:
ENOUGH ALREADY with no facts to this rummer can we just let it go to rest forever :!:
:computer: :wave:



R.I.P.

 

Wouldn't they also have to ban the #7 then?