Readers responded online to reporter Jeff Nagel’s story “AirCare defenders hope for reprieve,” which was printed on Nov. 19.
It states in the article that vehicles manufactured in 2004 and newer are not being tested. I have a 2004 Tahoe and I had to get it tested. What gives?
This program is a duplication of the responsibility of the police. If a vehicle is noticeably smoking, they should issue a ticket and the vehicle should then be checked.
Seems to me that the most often offensive pollution comes from large truck and diesel vehicles. You can hardly breath when behind one of these.
Chuck Phelps, Abbotsford
Get rid of AirCare. We don’t need it here. There is a lot more pollution from burning garbage around here.
It’s just a tax grab. My vehicles have always passed. The $45 can go to a lot better use.
It is a strange test. My ’95 Camry – with 400,000 kilometres and a faulty EGR sensor – failed the test badly. I put some Sea Foam fuel treatment in the tank and took it for a quick run on the freeway… and the readings were back to historic levels. The “repair” cost me $15 – plus the extra test fee.
While I don’t like having to take the car in, I would wonder how many old beaters will be back on the road in the Lower Mainland when the testing is gone.
G Barry Stewart
This is ridiculous. AirCare does not work. I know: My car failed AirCare two years running here in B.C.
I moved to California and my car passed their smog test with no work being required, and no work was effectively done to my car after the last B.C. test.
So what does that tell you? That in B.C. dirty gas is sold.
If the authorities had called for cleaner gas, then all the cars would have worked more efficiently and produced fewer emissions than what the AirCare program has achieved.
And you know the claim that burning garbage will create pollution? In Switzerland, one of the Worlds cleanest countries, they burn garbage. Seems we need to learn a few things.
Air Care has outlived its usefulness as far as modern passenger cars are concerned. If they want to continue, it should be for pre-1995 vehicles and big trucks.
I’m a retired long-haul trucker, and the pollution in Los Angeles was greatly diminished when they started going after the big trucks.
Larry William Miller
Let’s have them check all those heavy trucks that are all over our roads, or is that not politically correct? It’s all about saving 100 union jobs paid for by “us,” nothing more.
It will be nice for a change to get rid of a little regulation, get rid of just a little “progressive” government intervention in our daily lives… which they infect in so many different ways each day.
Considering that Metro wants to burn garbage and pollute the Fraser Valley’s airshed, I seriously doubt their phoney commitment to cleaner air.
Their hypocrisy can only take them so far.
If AirCare were to continue, it would have to include all of B.C., including Vancouver Island. Pollution is pollution, and I’m sick and tired of Fraser Valley residents getting the shaft.
We have put up with AirCare for 20 years, and now we have the only two tolled bridges in B.C.
Yes, burning anything creates pollution. Then again, if burning garbage doesn’t create pollution, then burning fuel shouldn’t either eh?
There is absolutely zero credibility to anyone who argues to keep AirCare in its current form who does not also argue to extend the program to heavy vehicles that are not currently checked at all.