California Air Resources Board (CARB) --- Danger, Danger Will Robinson

[James_Douglas]

The moderator can move this if they wish, but I would suggest that it be left here so everyone will see it....

 

To all Classic Car Hobbyists, particularly in California. I have had reports that the CARB has sent surveys to randomly selected people that were pulled from the Department of Motor Vehicles Data base. People who have classic cars.

The survey reads to the trained eye as a foundational study to regulate classic cars and their use.

The problem is that the survey methodology is so flawed as to make the results worthless in the real world. It can however be used by unscrupulous policy makers to back up ideas that they want to implement.

The questions, abbreviated are as follows:

• In which county is your MY 1978 or older vehicle primarily operated?

• What is the current odometer reading (total mileage since the car was new) on your MY 1978 or older vehicle? Please specify, and use your best estimate if you are not sure:

• Approximately how many miles does your MY 1978 or older vehicle get driven in a year? Please specify:

• How often is your MY 1978 or older vehicle driven?

• How is your MY 1978 or older vehicle stored when not in use?

• When you store your MY 1978 or older vehicle for an extended period of time when it is not being used, what do you typically do with the fuel tank?

Each question has a list of answers to choose from.

The problem with this so-called survey is the methodology which is so bad is to be an insult to professional Transportation Survey Researchers. The survey is a random sample from the DMV database. Their assumption is that the survey respondents are a representative sample of all the classic car owners in the DMV database. In techno speak the small “n” represents the large “N”. In this case it does not.

As classic car hobbyists all know, there are people who have collections of 5 cars, 10 cars, 100 cars. If someone with a collection responds to the survey on one car in a collection it is possible that the particular car, which was pulled at random for the survey, is this hobbyist’s daily driver classic car or it could be a concourse car that is never driven.

Even if they pulled enough data to have a legitimate 95% - 90% confidence level, the lack of homogeneity of the hobby means that their conclusions will be junk.

I suggest that every classic car hobbyist in California contact their elected representatives and ask why with a budget deficit looming in California that the CARB is being allowed to spend taxpayer money on junk science. Ask they investigate shutting this kind of junk science down.

As an aside, in the 1990’s there was a push by CARB and some legislators to place restrictions on classic cars. They made, what at the time, were clearly false representations as to data they had backing up their wish list. When confronted with their nonexistent data they backed down. We should not allow them to create bad science data to do the same things now. Act!

James Douglas
San Francisco.

 

 

 

[Ivan_B]

A lot of information about science and surveys... Do the aforementioned reports have any information about how the sample for the given survey was established, besides the statement that it was somehow randomized, to back-up the arguments that the chosen research method is incorrect? As far as I recall, there was a whole college course just about surveying and sampling for social sciences

Edited August 4, 2023 by Ivan_B

[Bingster]

I was waiting for something like this.  Old classic cars to those people means unregulated emissions from an old engine, etc.  If there is a petition to sign let me know. Maybe this board can start one.  I doubt if many non-classic car owners would care about this issue.

[P15-D24]

I'm locking this thread as it ventures into the a gray area of political comment. I will leave it available so if you want to do your own research on the topic, or respond directly to government agency you have a starting point for contact.