## ARB Report Finds Reflective Glazing to Meet Cool Cars Regulation Will Not Impact Certain Portable Devices

##### 22 November 2009

The California Air Resources Board (ARB) has published a report evaluating the potential electromagnetic interference on certain portable devices such as cell phones, global positioning systems (GPS) and ankle monitoring bracelets due to automotive reflective glazing as required under the “Cool Car” regulation . (Earlier post.)

The results indicate that there are no effects from reflective glazing, and thus the Cool Cars regulation, on monitoring ankle bracelets or cell phone usage in an urban environment. Effects on GPS navigation units were observed, but these were completely eliminated by placing the device or an external antenna within a “deletion window”—a relatively small section of the windshield manufactured without the reflective material.

Background. The Cool Cars regulation, which aims to reduce the need for air conditioning by reducing the heat gain of vehicles parked in the sun, was an early action item under AB 32 and adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARB) in June 2009. When fully implemented the regulation will require a 60% reduction in heat absorption through vehicle windows.

Cool Cars specifies that vehicle windows must meet certain standards for heat transmission. Based on these requirements, ARB expects reflective glazing to be installed on windshields in 2012 and on all windows in 2016, unless automobile manufacturers decide to use an alternate performance option for 2016 and beyond.

Reflective windows are known to attenuate electromagnetic waves, and in preparing the rule, ARB staff had researched what methods could be used to mitigate signal attenuation. Staff determined that a portion of the reflective material could be removed in order to facilitate operation of electronic devices.

However, concerns were still raised that devices such as global positioning system (GPS) monitoring ankle bracelets, cell phones, and GPS navigation devices will not operate as intended in vehicles with reflective glazing. ARB initiated a test program to evaluate the potential effect on these devices.

Testing. ARB tested three types of devices: GPS monitoring and ankle bracelets using both GPS and cell phone signals; GPS navigation devices, evaluating time to first fix (TTFF) and navigation/tracking ability; and cell phones, using both CDMA and GSM networks.

ARB tested manufacturer-installed reflective windows in vehicles from Mercedes-Benz, BMW and GM. Overall, staff found that:

• Reflective Glazing had no effect on monitoring ankle bracelets or cell phones.

• GPS navigation devices are the most affected, with the largest effect observed in the TTFF with all around reflective glazing.

• Effects on GPS navigation devices were completely mitigated by use of deletion window (about 4% of the window area in the test), when placing the device in the window or placing an external antenna in the window.

ARB said that automakers will be required to indicate both with words and graphically in the owner's manual the location of the deletion windows.

Other devices such as transponders and garage door openers were not tested. ARB staff said it expected those devices to behave similarly to the GPS devices in that effectiveness will be enhanced by placement of the device in the deletion windows.

Resources

Once again an intrusive government regulation that will accomplish next to nothing.

Why?

Because not every Californian is as stupid as the dumb greens and Bureaucrats think. They ALREADY have sun filters and window glazes on their cars. A random check of the cars in any California parking lot will find that it is almost impossible to find a car WITHOUT the glazes and window tinting films there already.

Much ado about nothing. Merely more justification for now useless bureaucrats to keep their sinecures.

Though I disagree with Stan Peterson imbecile views in general, I have to admit that this regulation is unnecessary and counterproductive, there is mileage regulation already so what's the point to regulate the air conditioning efficiency. Why not regulating the sound system efficiency then ?

Let's remove all regulations and go back to coal burning home furnaces, open sewages, open garbage dumps, open wood fire places, steam locomotives, farm horses, whale oil lamps, unpaved roads, and close all those expensive public schools, hospitals, library, arenas, vaccination centers, filtered clean water plants, public roads, and all churches and charity organisations while at it. It may help to solve the world ever growing population in less than one century?

If the world was to listen to objectors and those in constant denial, we could be driven back 1000 years with revival of major plagues etc.It would certainly be another world.

Apparently Stan hit a nerve.
I agree with him also
And I agree that "there is mileage regulation already"

And there are too many unthinking people that think opposition to any regulation is just "constant denial"

I was intrigued that they found that:

"Reflective Glazing had no effect on ankle .. bracelets or cell phones.

•GPS navigation devices are the most affected .."

Making indows block cell phone signals is probably unworkable, but allowing only caller ID - but no 2 way or at least no texting, is tempting.

My kids continue to, not just call me, but text me when they can assume I am driving.

This is the danger of building these large government infrastructures. They need to find stuff to do. Why not make this a dealer option alone and let the car owner decide if they want to spend less energy dollars on air conditioning? Or buy a $10 mylar windshield reflector at Pep Boys to accomplish the same thing. That would mean less bureaucrats. [sarcasm mode on] Yes of course by all means, let's make such people can, at all times, still use their cell-phones while driving. I mean we all know the only thing more dangerous than a nitwit talking on a cell-phone while driving is a nitwit driving while trying to figure out why his cell-phone isn't working. [sarcasm mode off] Come on. It would be so easy to use a roof top exterior antenna for GPS + Cell Phones + Radio + TV etc. It would even improve the signal in most cases. Holding a cell phone in your hand (and potentially using it) while driving is against the law in our area. The penalty is$300. Evidence with/from the new road side camera stations used to catch speeders and bad drivers is enough. No on-site policing is required.

Hands free systems and 10% over the speed limits are allowed.

"Making indows[sic] block cell phone signals is probably unworkable, but allowing only caller ID - but no 2 way or at least no texting, is tempting."

Explain to me how this works: You expect a window to intercept a cellular transmission with a built in RF circuit that can tune to your particular phone (whether it is on 850 or a PCS (1800/1900) frequency), decode the TDMA or CDMA to pull out the proper signal, pull apart the transmitted packet to find the voice data separately from the caller ID, retransmit the Caller ID to your phone and then block the remainder of the message? Suuuuure...

Censorship of data, manipulating data, hiding data - is the first love of fascists. Fascists find it far easier to use trickery and manipulation to get their way - than to educate people on legitimate issues. They are basically lazy bureaucrats without any understanding of human nature. It is entertaining to watch them crash and burn.

Tom,
Something about apples not falling far from the tree?

"And there are too many unthinking people that think opposition to any regulation is just "constant denial""

"My kids continue to, not just call me, but text me when they can assume I am driving."

Merely pointing out.

reel,
The dealer and buyer will be equally pissed at changing the windscreen for the other one and there is no financial benefit , only cost to do so.
The $10 screen will kill the fuel economy and probably breaks the regulatory laws in doing so. It certainly wont be cost effective over the life of the vehicle. It's good to see your loyalty and faith in the usual suspects is so misplaced. Sober up arnold. If you get windshield reflector - please use it only when parked. And "Merely pointing out" what? That calling/texting someone who is driving is equivalent to answering while driving? Nope. I can explain how making windows block cell phone signals MIGHT work: Presently these reflective windows block (or attenuate) GPS but not cellular transmissions - without tuned circuits. This may be mostly due to the signal/noise ratio but I believe also due to the frequency range. Trees (lack of line-of-sight) easily blocked the GPS signal to older GPS receivers (newer receivers are much better) but never affected analog or digital cell phones. I suppose the metallization could be patterned to form a reflective surface for cell phone frequencies but I believe the attenuation required is too high. Or the cell phone companies would be required to transmit a enable signal that would be blocked in a car. BUT - as ai_vin succinctly points out “the only thing more dangerous than a nitwit talking on a cell-phone while driving is a nitwit driving while trying to figure out why his cell-phone isn't working.” [Or while trying to defeat the blockage.] AND - I also said that it was probably unworkable. Tom, Let me explain. Straight face. Lets premise this with an assumption that where you live ,as where Harvey - " Holding a cell phone in your hand (and potentially using it) while driving is against the law in our area. The penalty is$300."
If not against the law, against logic quote you
"My kids continue to, not just call me, but text me when they can assume I am driving."

Ai vin -
"I mean we all know the only thing more dangerous than a nitwit talking on a cell-phone while driving is a nitwit driving while trying to figure out why his cell-phone isn't working."

And sulleny - I've long given up trying to figure this one - who knows what this refers to.
"It is entertaining to watch them crash and burn."

Then Tom I noted and tried subtly to point to this observation tongue in cheek.

Tom -
"Apparently Stan hit a nerve.
I agree with him also
And I agree that "there is mileage regulation already"

And there are too many unthinking people that think opposition to any regulation is just "constant denial"

With a humorous but 'often true?' phrase
" the apple never falls far from the tree"
This bit refers to the habits of parents being followed by their progeny.

A little harmless observation of a contradiction in your argument that dislikes regulation but at the same time dislikes when 'the kids ' phone you up in these (possibly illegal) but nevertheless by your own admission dangerous circumstance.

This is the observation I make.

As for window tint or not. I stand by my sober assessment that the front glass is factory fitted and if such as heat reducing options are available in say Ca, that to specify none would require a special order or the replacement of the factory fitment to whatever the customer requested.

Surely that makes no sense and is so absurd as to annoy the hell out of every customer and dealer that tried to cater to. I mean really P****d off. Off course if the puchaser had an issue with tint on the side and rear glass, a little kerosine will make removing the film easy.
I hoped my mumblings would be easy to decipher.
No offence intended.

Aha, I think I understand.

My conclusion is (like most others) that we do not need a law requiring window tinting.

A little off the subject, maybe require all cars to include a device that disables 2 way cell phone communication but lets both sides know why.

If you think your message is important ("come back, you jerk, you forgot your wallet - and your pants") the caller could "redial" 2 or 3 times and the nitwit who would otherwise be talking on a cell-phone while driving, is forced to pull over and get out; away from his car.

Not so good, and more laws are to be resisted, but maybe better than with dangerous, preoccupied nitwits driving while talking or (lord help us) texting.

And we would readjust to this inconvenience – and learn to watch out for those zombies on cell phones stumbling around by the side of the road.

Regulations such as these: the last refuge of poor educators.

And what about those hands free phones that come built in or as after-market add-ons?? Hopeless bureaucrats lookin' for sumthin to do.

Tom,
You are a good 'sport' and dont take a criticism to heart, that's good.

In my writing here, there is a creative license for metaphor, fantasy, vis concepts, and real life experience. I.E. I will refer to the 'kids' when the post gets a little 'out there' as kids can get away with anything. I might be referring to myself, someone else etc.

There are generally so many Laws AND Regulations
that it can be hard to function on a daily basis.

I differentiate between interference and protection to evaluate the article.

There are very many (often understrength) laws that protect us all on a daily basis. These could be unhelpful to those who could say make more money if that law did not exist.

In a life threatening situation, no one will pay too much attention to the applicable law or regulation and that is understandable. I.E. A starving person will be understood helped and rarely punished in many countries if they steal bread (these days) unlike those transported to the colonial territories 2 centuries ago.
There are even cases of cannibalism and necrophilia where rescuers look the other way in the understanding of a higher priority.

The best well known example IMO of a 'Dysfunctional' law designed to minimise harm to society esp the youth, are the drug criminalisation laws.

IMO these laws enable high profits, corruption and incentivise the rebellious 'red belt' nature of teenagers making it an attractive challenge. The cost to society become overwhelming and we end up in the state driven mess that IMO would be easily resolved with an educative approach. 'Kids and others aren't stupid'

There are many contributers to this site who object to regulation on the basis that 'it is'.
They may object to criteria pollution laws that cause higher fuel consumption, cafe type laws that either reduce (or enable) fuel consumption and have mitigation costs.

There are many Regulations that are benign. this reflective glazing air conditioning load reduction Regulation eets my definition of a benign and useful Regulation.

If I had a bunch of front screens sitting in the parts shed (I wish) you can be sure that with a similar climate to Ca, the ones I would place the highest value on as the most desirable will be the very reflective one that reduces air con loads (maybe a broken or undergassed unit doesn't use much fuel anyways) whilst making the driving experience more pleasant and saves money by reducing fuel consumption.

Evidence based analysis will show many laws that really dont work and need repealing. But I understand the 'republican' 'freedom to pursue anything' capitalist doctrine perpetuates itself via dogma. This mentlity suggests that no law can ever be good when it inhibits the opportunity to make money.

This leads to the no tax no carbon tax, no CO2 "issue"
dogma that becomes mindless and unrelenting with the proponents lost in self harming objectionism.

The "holy cows" like drug laws are sacred and the rationale (or irrational) adherence is lost in the religious mantra similar to cultural discrimination.

Other peoples caught in this 'human nature' category include ethnicity, sexual orientation, class distinction, people with disability including mental illness. In fact nearly everyone is catered for when you think about it.

Sounds like a Fascist State?

So for suleny's benefit, the hopeless bureaucrats have plenty they could be doing and there are many citizens that wait patiently for stronger protection. It' not the wild west but if it was, there wouldn't be any overpopulation issue and we could all have it pretty much as we want it.

There you have it.

Umm, well, OK; I was just thinking that we already require MPG with CAFE, and that should make regulations, for better tinted windows, unnecessary.

And maybe make cell phones not work in cars.

The comments to this entry are closed.