Changes to motor vehicle emission inspection program recommended

CUTR recently released a report that recom- mends changes to Florida’s current motor vehicle emission inspection program that would result in substantially greater reductions in vehicle emissions, at a lower total cost, with much less inconvenience to the motorist. "Analysis of the Cost Effectiveness of Motor Vehicle Inspection Programs and Selected Transportation Control Measures for Reducing Air Pollution" results from a study undertaken with funds approved by CUTR’s Advisory Board from CUTR’s legislative appropriation.

Florida’s Emission Inspection Program

The emission inspection program was enacted by the Florida legislature to be required in six Florida counties that had failed to attain the National Ambient Air Quality Standard for ozone. Although all six counties (Dade, Broward, Palm Beach, Duval, Hillsborough, and Pinellas) have recently been redesignated as attainment areas, they are still required by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to demonstrate continued maintenance of acceptable air quality. The current emission inspection program is administered by the Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles, which conducts the program through private contractors. The program requires annual testing of all passenger vehicles owned by residents of the six counties. The test includes a visual check of the catalytic converter and the fuel cap. In addition, an exhaust probe, which measures concentrations of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons, is inserted into the tailpipe while the vehicle is idling. A number of technologies alternative to that being used in Florida are currently available:
  • The IM240 emissions test makes use of a variable speed dyna- mometer to test the exhaust emissions over a prescribed range of speed and acceleration conditions.
  • The acceleration simulation mode (ASM) test uses a dynamometer to test exhaust emissions at a fixed speed and load factor. Both of these alternatives measure emissions of oxides of nitrogen, in addition to carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons. Both the IM240 and the ASM tests are sufficiently better than the current technology to allow effective biennial testing.
  • Remote sensing devices are available that can measure emissions by shooting an infrared or ultraviolet beam through the vehicle exhaust plume.

Ancillary tests include the pressure test, which checks the fuel system for evaporative leaks, and the purge flow test, which checks the functioning of the evaporative emission canister.

Alternatives Evaluated

Six distinct alternatives were evaluated:
  • Maintain the existing program.
  • Continue the existing testing, but test biennially.
  • Conduct IM240 testing biennially.
  • Conduct IM240 testing plus pressure testing biennially.
  • Conduct ASM testing plus pressure testing biennially.
  • Continue the existing program plus remote sensing testing.

For comparison purposes, CUTR evaluated the alternatives as they might be applied in Hills-borough County. While the results are specific to Hillsborough County, it is believed that the general results are transferable to Florida’s other emission testing locations. CUTR estimated the costs associated with each testing technology:
  • the cost of conducting the test,
  • State oversight cost,
  • the vehicle operation cost and the driver time cost while driving to the inspection center,
  • the time spent at the inspection center, and
  • the average cost of vehicle repairs for vehicles that fail the test, offset by the anticipated fuel savings.

The effectiveness of each technology was taken as the reduction in emissions of oxides of nitrogen and hydrocarbons, the two principal contributors to ozone formation.

Analysis Results

The results of the cost-effectiveness analysis are summarized in Table 1, which indicates that the IM240 and the ASM technologies applied biennially are significantly more cost-effective than the current technology applied on an annual basis. The cost per ton of emission reduction were computed at $2,293 for IM240 and $2,210 for ASM, compared to $6,466 for the current technology.

The current failure rate of late-model vehicles is extremely low. If the three most recent model years were exempted from the inspection requirement, the cost would further reduce to $2,014 per ton for IM240 and $1,911 per ton for ASM.

Potential of Other TCMs

The cost-effectiveness of transportation control measures (TCMs) for reducing air pollution was also evaluated. Specific TCMs considered were:
  • a $2 per day parking surcharge in central areas
  • promotion of flexible/staggered work hours
  • implementation of HOV lanes
  • optimization of traffic signals
  • promotion of telecommuting
  • development and promotion of ridesharing programs
  • promotion of compressed work week programs
  • development of a system of park-and-ride lots

Cost-effectiveness estimates were based largely on a nationwide study performed for the National Association of Regional Councils and are representative of characteristics of a "typical" large urbanized area. To the extent they could be justified based on specific characteristics of Hillsborough County, adjustments were made to the national estimates.

Conclusions/Recommendations

The general conclusions of the study indicate that TCMs are good public policy; they reduce congestion and improve transportation system efficiency. However, their impact on emissions is likely to be modest. On the other hand, emission inspection programs yield substantial reductions in emissions and are comparatively cost effective.

Specific recommendations from the study include:

  • Florida should continue an emission inspection program using the ASM technology along with a pressure test, applied on a biennial basis, exempting at least the three most recent model years.
  • In addition, a supplemental roadside remote testing program was recommended as a deterrent against tampering.

In summary, the study recommendation appears to be the best of all worlds, a genuine "win-win" solution, which results in greater pollution reduction at lower cost and at much less inconvenience to the public.

"This analysis provides a comprehensive and thorough overview of vehicle emission inspection programs and their cost effectiveness," said Richard McElveen, Meteorologist in the Florida Bureau of Air Monitoring and Mobile Sources. "It is ‘must-reading’ for anyone responsible for making decisions affecting Florida’s current vehicle inspection program and should be a part of every legislator’s reference library."

For further information on this study, contact CUTR Deputy Director Ed Mierzejewski, mierzeje@cutr.usf.edu , or Research Associate Laura Lachance, lachance@cutr.usf.edu, or call (813) 974-3120.

Back to the CUTRlines menu

Please direct all comments and/or questions regarding this page to webmaster@cutr.usf.edu.

Left ArrowReturn to the CUTR Home Page