We've seen plenty of tech over the years meant to mitigate our destruction of the environment -- from
greener autos to
Grateful Dead-themed cellphones -- most of which don't really ask us to tone down our consumer impulses all that much. But how about these new "Cool Cars" regulations recently adopted by the California Air Resources Board? By the year 2016, all autos sold in the state must have windows that prevent 60 percent of the sun's energy from entering the vehicle. To achieve this, windows are given a coat of glazing that contains microscopic specs of reflective metal oxide -- which will seriously hamper reception for your GPS, cellphone, and (this is of special interest to Engadget readers) white collar criminal-style work release ankle bracelet. As you can imagine, companies like Garmin are fuming -- although we suppose that if they play this right they can make a killing in the external car antenna business. It just goes to show you -- when it comes to environmental catastrophe, everyone's a victim.
[Via
AutoBlog]
posted October 13th 2009 3:27AM
Those of us with a Sunshield windshield have had this problem since the mid-90's. No one cared then. You learn to live it with.
Beside, I think too many people rely too heavily on their GPS. It's like they go stupid when they get one. The focus way to much on it and what it's showing then on driving. It's WORSE than a cell phone because they don't feel like it's wrong for them to look at a map while driving so they stare at the damn things and ignore everything else.
Hey, here's an easy fix for the problem. Put an antenna pass-through on the cars too. That's so obvious that you have to think the CA regulators didn't mandate too it on purpose.
Yeah so its kinda early still and I'm tired. I read that line as "white-collar criminal oxide which will seriously hamper . . " I need coffee.
"It just goes to show you -- when it comes to environmental REGULATION, everyone's a victim."
That is more like it, engadget.
Love that zima looks like a sponsor of this.
CARB (the CA Air Resources Board) Had about as much to do with clean air when I lived in that state as Bernie Madoff had with Robin Hood. CARB doesnt care about clean air, CARB cares about imposing control. When I was living in that state the archaic smog laws placed on auto owners made no sense. If you made ANY change to the fuel system on a car that was required to pass smog and CARB hadnt been br... errr paid for an exemption for that device for every year make and model car the Manufacturer . of the after market compnent wanted the device sold for, you were in violation even if the device could be PROVEN to reduce emissions. Case in point after market fuel injection has been availible for decades, it can be retrofitted on to older cars however if that Manufacturer didnt pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to see if your 75 Dodge Dart would pass emissions with the device on, you cant use it. Even if you take it in and they do a tailpipe sniffer test and show the device reduces emissions by 300%.
The energy has to go SOMEWHERE. Right? What doesn't get absorbed into a dark car goes where?
Darn Hippies, always effing things up for the end consumer in the name of the "environment" (or any other arbitrary cause). All their naive idealism is going to screw us all over someday.
I will be greatly disappointed in 2024 when I am in the market for a 2016 model car.
I'm all for this. I can leave my dogs in the car all day without cooking them.
The California car market is so big that this stupidity means that all cars sold in the US will have this by 2016. Everything tthat CARB has mandated is now on all US vehicles.
Not only inside GPS units but also radar detectors, E-Z Pass, I-Pass, Sun Pass, etc., etc., etc.
And guess who is going to pay for this technology.
I'm a huge fan of making things more environmentally friendly.
Pretty sure everyone driving with their windows down on the highway so they can figure out where they are going and so they can get cell phone calls will probably negatively impact their fuel consumption. Are you sure this isn't a proposal by the Oil Industry to get back at us for moving towards hybrid cars?
I'd like to call bs on this. A few months ago I got the windows tinted on my Prius. I tinted all the rears windows and hatch back in accordance with California state law.
When I got my tinting done I was given the option to spend an extra $80 to upgrade to ceramic based tint instead of metallic tint. Benefits of the upgrade are greater efficiency of the tint (keeps the car cooler than the same darkness level of metallic tint) and no interference with radio devices. I opted for the ceramic because I like efficiency (hence the Prius) and I also like gadgets (again, hence the Prius). I have built in bluetooth hands free as well as built in GPS in the car and I am an occasional ham radio operator. I have never had any problem whatsoever with the ceramic tint and my radio devices.
So why don't we hear people talking about using the ceramic based window treatment versus the metallic? Because it doesn't make for exciting headlines like "OH NOES, CALI TREE HUGGERS KILL FUN FOR EVERYONE AND PUPPIES!"
The CARB decision, unlike some of CARB's other decisions (Hydrogen vs. Electric, anyone?), is smart and well intentioned. Mass production of ceramic based tint will bring the price down, and smart engineering will solve the rest. I've often wondered why it wasn't already a requirement for all cars to come with some greater degree of window tint. Good tinting is one of the cheapest and easiest ways to make your car more comfortable and efficient regardless of whether it's a hybrid or a Hummer. Most SUVs come tinted - why not the rest?
You do know that even if your windows were made of solid lead it would have no effect on a bluetooth headset right? (unless of course you keep your phone outside of the car while driving)
The point is that:
* It makes no significant difference
* It is no business of the state government to tell me (if I was a Kalifornian) whether to put tint on my windows or not. That should be my choice, and what kind of tint I get (whether it's a dyed purple film all the way to a fancy ceramic film) should be my choice as well. Maybe California would be better off actually making a real budget.
This will cause the death of the Californian car market as everyone will go to other states to purchase vehicles that aren't under such clearly mislead regulations.
and we all know what that means: BAILOUTS!
Evidently you arent all that familiar with the draconian smog laws in california. If you bring a vehicle from out of state without 'california emissions' on it then you pay huge fees IF you can even bring it in.
@Zero, you're erroneous use of then and than and your and you're is killing me. Don't question other people's intelligence until you sort it out.
Also, you're the typical anti-anthropogenic global warming enthusiast. Someone says they don't believe man is causing and you state that of course this means that they don't want electric cars or fuel effient cars or alternative energy sources. That is far from the truth. I would wager everybody is in favor of alternative energy if done correctly, and not because a lobbyist paid the right price. Oil won't last forever.
Just remember that because X number of scientists believe it DOES NOT make it true. Question everything until there is hard fact and there hasn't been any inconclusive proof yet. In fact more solid proof disprooves it. If we as a society only believe what a majority of scientists believe and subjugate those that believe otherwise we'd still be riding around in horse drawn carts, the world would still be flat, the sun would revolve around the earth, the sun is actually a god, and dammit, if you leave meat out in the open, maggots will grow on it like magic. Question everything.
Not to mention if you have a built in GPS likely the antenna is not sitting inside the cabin. Garmin's argument was because of the handheld ones that are inside. Also, a HAM radio usually has an antenna outside the cabin as well. Pretty much everything you listed would not be affected by the metal tinting. Now if you said you can make cell phone calls from inside the car with all the windows up that's another matter.
Isn't this state bankrupt? I think they have their priorities all screwed up.
@ first i thought it was the ---Ghostbusters vehicle---
LaRouche links in the Engadget comments?
Anti climate change astroturf bullshit on a sciene/gadget site.
Fuck that.
Where are the Obama Nazi posts?
I live in Florida where everyone tints there windows because the sun is so intense.
I think the coating is a good idea, but in addition to mobile phone and GPS reception issue there will be problems with Toll Transponders like SunPass and EZPass. Apparently its already a problem with certain vehiles (see http://sunpass.com/windshields.cfm)
They use this stuff on the windscreen of many european cars already.
There is a small section of the windscreen left clear of the film so that you can stick your toll tag there and it won't effect the transmission.
I thought it was illegal for cars to have more than 50% of light blocked on the front windows of cars. And I believe most car windows have already reached 50% of light blocked.
energy is reflected, not light