California to reduce carbon emissions by... banning black cars?!

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/03/25/califor...ing-black-cars/

Found that on another board this morning. I think it's finally time to load up the trailers and get off of the island. Wow. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/banghead.gif)

QUOTE

In a move that will likely get California's consumers in a huff, impending legislation may soon restrict the paint color options for Golden State residents looking for their next new vehicle. The specific colors that are currently on the chopping block are all dark hues, with the worst offender seemingly the most innocuous color you could think of: Black. What could California possibly have against these colors, you ask? Apparently, the California Air Resources Board figures that the climate control systems of dark colored cars need to work harder than their lighter siblings – especially after sitting in the sun for a few hours. Anyone living in a hot, sunny climate will tell you that this assumption is accurate, of course. In fact, legislation already exists for buildings that has proven successful at reducing the energy consumption of skyscrapers.

So, what's the crux of the problem... can't paint suppliers just come up with new, less heat-absorbent dark paints? According to Ward's, suppliers have reportedly been testing their pigments and processes to see if it's possible to meet CARB's proposed mandate of 20% solar reflectivity by 2016 with a phase-in period starting in 2012, and things aren't looking good. Apparently, when the proper pigments and chemicals are added to black paint, the resulting color is currently being referred to as "mud-puddle brown." That doesn't sound very attractive, now does it? Windshields, backlights and sunroofs are also slated to get reflective coatings starting in 2012.

When we first heard of this issue, an internal debate immediately began as to whether this might be an elaborate early April Fool's joke, but it isn't.

trackbird View Member Profile	Mar 26 2009, 12:05 PM Post #1
FRRAX Owner/Admin Group: Admin Posts: 15,432 Joined: 13-February 04 From: Ohio Member No.: 196	http://www.autoblog.com/2009/03/25/califor...ing-black-cars/ Found that on another board this morning. I think it's finally time to load up the trailers and get off of the island. Wow. (IMG:http://www.frrax.com/rrforum/style_emoticons/default/banghead.gif) QUOTE In a move that will likely get California's consumers in a huff, impending legislation may soon restrict the paint color options for Golden State residents looking for their next new vehicle. The specific colors that are currently on the chopping block are all dark hues, with the worst offender seemingly the most innocuous color you could think of: Black. What could California possibly have against these colors, you ask? Apparently, the California Air Resources Board figures that the climate control systems of dark colored cars need to work harder than their lighter siblings – especially after sitting in the sun for a few hours. Anyone living in a hot, sunny climate will tell you that this assumption is accurate, of course. In fact, legislation already exists for buildings that has proven successful at reducing the energy consumption of skyscrapers. So, what's the crux of the problem... can't paint suppliers just come up with new, less heat-absorbent dark paints? According to Ward's, suppliers have reportedly been testing their pigments and processes to see if it's possible to meet CARB's proposed mandate of 20% solar reflectivity by 2016 with a phase-in period starting in 2012, and things aren't looking good. Apparently, when the proper pigments and chemicals are added to black paint, the resulting color is currently being referred to as "mud-puddle brown." That doesn't sound very attractive, now does it? Windshields, backlights and sunroofs are also slated to get reflective coatings starting in 2012. When we first heard of this issue, an internal debate immediately began as to whether this might be an elaborate early April Fool's joke, but it isn't.

CrashTestDummy View Member Profile	Mar 26 2009, 06:40 PM Post #2
Veteran Member Group: Advanced Members Posts: 3,874 Joined: 3-July 04 From: Pearland, Texas Member No.: 385	They have hundreds of unemployed living in a tent city in downtown Sacramento, they are sending state taxpayers due a refund IOUs, and laying off state workers at an alarming rate, and THIS is all they can think of to work on? I think there are some folks in Sacrament who need to pee in a cup! Wow, just, wow. They should write a law that says you can't back out of the driveway before verifying all of your tires are properly-inflated. THAT would probably do more to reduce fuel consumption than the color of your car. ID10t's! This post has been edited by CrashTestDummy: Mar 26 2009, 06:42 PM