• 76
According to the Los Angeles Daily News, California gas station operators have known since 2000 that they would have to install new nozzles on their gas pumps by tomorrow's deadline. And yet at least 2,000 of the 3,900 stations in the Southern California region and 60 percent of stations statewide have failed to do exactly that. The California Air Resources Board ruled nine years ago that gas pumps would have to be equipped with enhanced vapor recovery nozzles that capture and recirculate the gasoline vapors that inevitably escape while pumping gas.
Unfortunately, the narrow margins of gas retailing and high cost of the nozzles has made stations owners reluctant to spend the money. The equipment costs roughly $11,000 per pump.

Starting April 1, stations that haven't upgraded will start to face fines that will be ramped up toward the end of this year. Stations that haven't made the changes by the end of 2009 face closure.

[Source: Los Angeles Daily News | Image: Justin Sullivan/Getty]

I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.

    • 1 Second Ago
      • 6 Years Ago
      Having lived in L.A. for 46 years I have to say this is the dumbest State in the Union when it comes to over regulation. That being said, at least the weather is great, and the women are fun.
      • 6 Years Ago
      India will be putting MILLIONS of new cars on the road in the form of the dirt cheap Nano. This event will exponentially increase global emissions but California is worried about putting a vapor condom on fuel nozzles.

      If we are truly engaged in an epic fight to prevent earth devastationl, why has the Nano not been met with any fear?
      Autobloggreen actually pushes the Nano as an eco-friendly development - really? Maybe if it was swapped one for one for an H2 but this is not reality. Reality is millions of NEW vehicles on the street - exponential increase in fuel consumption, exponential increase in emissions, exponential increase in resources needed to build the vehicles. Not to mention this social impact in India - longer commutes, more driving, more consumption, more roads.

      I personally have no problem with the Nano or India driving as many cars as they wish. However, it puts into perspective how irrelevant some of the CARB measures are.
        • 6 Years Ago
        What we are seeing here is the typical Greenie's approach to the world. Ruin the developed nation's economies through taxation to prevent imagined problems, then demand that under-developed countries avoid their development and use of energy.

        Just look at the hell that Max's beloved greenies are putting Africa through. Deny them DDT so they can die from Malaria. Deny them policies that can control AIDS. Deny them the burning of their own coal so they cannot have sufficient energy and instead have illnesses from burning wood in their homes.

        I'm not about to cheer for China and India, but at least they are showing that they are smart enough to tell the Greenies where to go.

        Asia gets it. The Greenies are ruining the western economies, and it is just a matter of time before Asia will be able to just walk in and collect up all the energy and resources they want. California should go first.
        • 6 Years Ago
        "If we are truly engaged in an epic fight to prevent earth devastationl, why has the Nano not been met with any fear? "

        Tata's motivation behind the Nano is that people should have an affordable option to riding bicycles and horse carts. So, to be blunt, who the hell are you to dictate that 1 billion Indians shouldn't have that option?

        After the Nano you'll want to ban India's cows and horses because of all the methane in their farts.
        • 6 Years Ago
        "Tata's motivation behind the Nano is that people should have an affordable option to riding bicycles and horse carts. So, to be blunt, who the hell are you to dictate that 1 billion Indians shouldn't have that option?"

        I am no one to dictate that, and I NEVER did.

        Did you read my post? I dont care about the Nano or the Indians driving it. My point was that all the CARB efforts are moot in comparison.

        You even reinforce that point with stating "affordable option to riding bicycles and horse carts." I am all for that, because I dont think its going to ruin the planet. However this flys in the face of the entire anti-carbon movement.

        My larger point is this: If Climate Change is the most pressing problem...ever, why are the environmentalists not going ape over the Nano? The little car will do more ecological damage than Hummer ever could do.

        And Tata's motivation is not what you say. His motivation is to make money and that is an awesome goal, but don't confuse it with altruism.
        • 6 Years Ago
        That's the Syndrome of the needle in a haystack.

        "It won't make a difference because other keep doing it".

        It absolutely matters, America is the world's #1 waster of resources, we need to cut that down by as much as we can, it doesn't matter if it's big or small steps, because every step matters. Stop comparing yourself to India or China, 600,000 Chinese die each year of the effects of their pollution. Stop blaming others, and improve yourself!

      • 6 Years Ago
      Good, 4 gas stations at every intersection is too much anyway.

      • 6 Years Ago
      Comming from continental Europe, getting gas in North America's stations more often than not feels like returning 30-40 years back.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Yes because it costs about 1/3 as much.
      • 6 Years Ago
      California Love...................... California... knows how to party...
        • 6 Years Ago
        California! Is super cool to the homeless. Californya-nya-nya! is super cool to the homeless.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Well, it's a good thing that California's pushing for higher fuel-economy standards, because it's going to have fewer gas stations for all those cars now.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Old saying: "kitchen hot, get out."
      • 6 Years Ago
      When you fill up the tank you loose around 0,5 gallons of fuel, if you do not recirculate the fumes..
      Thats probably 5% of what you put through the nozzle every time you stop at the station.
        • 6 Years Ago
        .5 gallons of VAPOR maybe, but NOT .5 gallons of fuel escaping as vapor. The actual amout of liquid galoline you lose to vapor at a fillup is miniscule.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Great, even higher gas prices to pay for new pumps and fines.
      • 6 Years Ago
      So that is what all the fuss is about. I have seen countless stations in OC shuttered recently for weeks on end, only to re-open without any fanfare or disclosure. Also noted that once they re-open the price seems to gravitate upward a notch or two.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Interesting car website you've got there.... : )
      • 6 Years Ago
      Does the $11K per pump cost really justify the amount of captured gasoline vapors? I totally agree with 220V.
        • 6 Years Ago
        look at the enviro-crazies all up in a stir! hah. this is comical. i'm for helping/saving the environment as much as the next guy, but not at any cost, and not for something relatively insignificant on the global scale...

        rich, you think it's absolutely justified. i think it isn't. or maybe it is. in any case, i don't have the data to back it up, and neither, i suspect, do you. if you do, please offer that data along with your statement. that you think it is absolutely justified is YOUR opinion. don't state it as fact. and rich's comment about dollar value is a pretty common turn of phrase. if you don't like it, don't pay attention to it. no need to write a whole paragraph denigrating him.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Health has a dollar value. Pollution has a dollar value.

        If California were responsible enough to think with their wallets and not their fuzzy warm feelings of social justice perhaps they wouldn't be staring at deficits and tax hikes as far as the eye can see and the lowest bond rating of any state.
        • 6 Years Ago
        Thinking with one's wallet has never led to great things. It's not ONLY about money, it's also about health and pollution reduction.

        Or should we remove all catalytic converters from cars because we could save $100 that way? Americans are getting dumber and dumber every year, it's turning into a "freedom this...freedom that" nation of freedom-idiots.

        First there was the "Light bulb freedom of choice" bill proposed by one of these insane conservative fanatics, what's next? "Freedom of old-nozzle gas pumps" bill?
        • 6 Years Ago
        Absolutely justified. Even if the gas station owners pay out $11k per pump and then lose $1 for every gallon pumped, it's worth it.

        Benzines are a known source of cancer, and expecting everyone who pumps gasoline to breath in that crap just because you want your precious freedumb and cheap "gas" (which is a liquid) is about as socially irresponsible as it gets.

        Oh, and Dan: those things also have a Pound value and a Euro value. Possibly a half-chicken value and a someone-else's-wife-or-goat value. When you say "value" we can figure out that you mean "monetary value" without you having to qualify it with a currency.
      • 6 Years Ago
      Americans are spoiled with their cheap gas, yet they re against technological advancements.

      Many of us prefer crumbling roads, bridges, tunnels, energy infrastructure (only western nation that doesn't bury power lines underground) because updating it would cause Stalinist ;-) tax hikes.

      What's the point if a crumbling, outdated infrastructure adversely effects the economy?
      I guess they'd rather live in a lawless slum with more money in their pocket?
      • 6 Years Ago
      I was hearing about this on the radio yesterday- apparently (this was from a guy who represented gas stations, so take it with a grain of salt) CARB couldn't get the equipment right until 2005, and then it was only available to 10% of stations. It wasn't available to the rest until 2007, and then that whole recession thing happened. California does already have these systems on their gas pumps, but the upgrade is supposed to make them 98% effective instead of 95%. If all that is true, then it would paint a different picture.
    • Load More Comments