Slashdot Mirror
EPA Prepares To Roll Back Rules Requiring Cars To Be Cleaner and More Efficient (nytimes.com)
Coral Davenport and Hiroko Tabuchi, reporting for The New York Times: The Trump administration is expected to launch an effort in coming days to weaken greenhouse gas emissions and fuel economy standards for automobiles, handing a victory to car manufacturers and giving them ammunition to potentially roll back industry standards worldwide. The move -- which undercuts one of President Barack Obama's signature efforts to fight climate change -- would also propel the Trump administration toward a courtroom clash with California, which has vowed to stick with the stricter rules even if Washington rolls back federal standards. That fight could end up creating one set of rules for cars sold in California and the 12 states that follow its lead, and weaker rules for the rest of the states, in effect splitting the nation into two markets.
Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, is expected to frame the initiative as eliminating a regulatory burden on automakers that will result in more affordable trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles for buyers, according to people familiar with the plan. An E.P.A. spokeswoman confirmed that Mr. Pruitt had sent a draft of the 16-page plan to the White House for approval. Further reading: EPA to its employees: Ignore science when talking about climate change (ArsTechnica)
Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, is expected to frame the initiative as eliminating a regulatory burden on automakers that will result in more affordable trucks, vans and sport utility vehicles for buyers, according to people familiar with the plan. An E.P.A. spokeswoman confirmed that Mr. Pruitt had sent a draft of the 16-page plan to the White House for approval. Further reading: EPA to its employees: Ignore science when talking about climate change (ArsTechnica)
In the spirit of Good Friday, I'm not going to call you a dumb sonofabitch.
http://time.com/money/4702421/...
OK, you're a dumb sonofabitch.
https://www.giss.nasa.gov/rese...
You are welcome on my lawn.
California already has stricter emission standards that have held up in court (for new cars, you can still bring a "Federal standard" used car into CA if it exceeds 15,000 miles on the clock).
Some counties ban alcohol sale, others allow it year around. Some states allow AR-15s, others ban them from sale. States don't have an obligation to allow a given item to be sold in their state or city.
If it was a real issue you would not be a using a computer, if it was a real issue the people getting paid to push it would not be traveling around in private planes, if it was a real issue the people who say it is an issue would at least do minimum things like volunteer recycling.
All of those are not being done, so really how much it global warming an actual concern?
"American" cars outside the US are often very different than those sold in the US. US automakers have subsidiaries in quite a few non-US countries, and the cars they make are tailored to local markets.
1. Cut taxes adding another trillion to the national debt we spent years rallying against. Make sure 80% of tax reduction goes to top 1% all the while giving a massive one finger salute to our children.
2. Gut any environmental regulation our billionaire buddies want
3. Give Putin locations of US nuclear submarines
4. Allow traitors to covertly change republican party platform to be PRO-Russia
5. Allow traitors who will now likely spend the rest of their lives in jail to run your campaign
6. Install a traitor into the role of national security advisor
7. Publically invite hostile foreign nations to attack your political opponents
8. Hire a bunch of low life scum to work in your administration having no chance of ever obtaining security clearances.
9. Install Manchurian leaders to destroy any congressionally mandated agency you disagree with.
10. Trump's own wife wants nothing to do with him.
Actually, Obamacare/ACA plans are severely restricted from rating people for anything other than 3 factors:
(1) Age.
(2) County of residence.
(3) Smoking status.
In any case, the ratio between highest rate and lowest rate can't exceed 3:1 in a given state. Lower in some states that set their own limits -- NY state is 1:1.
If anything, Obamacare has made insurance LESS intrusive on private lives.
Several states follow California
Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico , New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia.
So it's not quite 49 to 1.
Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
Yes and no. Trucks, SUVs, crossovers, and vans were finally included in CAFE by legislation passed by the Bush admin, but they use a "vehicle footprint" formula to adjust their ratings. Despite that, only passenger cars are included for the purposes of the federal "gas guzzler" tax. Everything else is excluded.
Small trucks are kept out of the US market by a 25% tariff known as the "Chicken Tax". Many of these available in other markets will get about 35mpg and can carry 1500 pounds of payload. Because the US has a protected truck market, the manufacturers have nice fat profit margins on trucks and gives them another reason to promote them more than their other vehicles. It's fucking ridiculous.
The right feeds the left, or haven't you looked at the political demographics of the US farming communities?
Those farming communities are heavily reliant on "liberal" areas to fund their existence. That's why CA only gets back 80-someodd cents of every tax dollar, while "farming" states turn a profit on federal taxes.
So I think the evil liberal commies could afford to take some of your subsidy and use it to buy food on the global market.
Wow, you're a douche aren't you?
"Exotic transmission", like the ZF 9 speed that's caused problems due to harsh shifting in every implementation.
Start/Stop is obnoxious, period. Did you really need someone to tell you that? It'd be one thing if the feature could be perma-disabled, but that's not an option in any mainstream vehicle.
Most turbo implementations are lousy, they either lag way too much and feel slower than their N/A equivalent, or have no little to no top end. They *ALL* consume more fuel than their N/A equivalents if they're actually used. Turbocharging is really a shockingly stupid approach to fuel economy, as it results in a lower static compression ratio, and runs rich when under boost; if the EPA used an even half reasonable test it would be demonstrated as such. Turbos are good power adders in certain implementations, and that's what they're good for, period.
The auto companies are not interested in what their customers want? Are you even serious with that statement. Seriously go find a nice tree branch and hang yourself from it. You're really too stupid to bother replying to any more than I already have.
That's true. It also makes trucks very dangerous since the majority of drivers aren't in trucks. If a car is an accident with a truck, they will be on the opposite end of that equation and will have a much worse time during that accident.
Then of course trucks block sight lines, making it much harder to see what's ahead. They take up more space. Are more sluggish to respond. And my personal favorite, have large tires and high backends that allow them to pickup things/rocks in the road and fling them at the cars behind them... since... you know.. there's no mudflap requirement for trucks.
One of my least comfortable positions on the road is behind a pickup truck. I'd rather drive behind a semi with big fat mudflaps than a pickup truck / SUV / jeep without.
No, not "only because." Another big reason is because of these new laws requiring child safety seats. Try getting your triplets into a regular car. Ain't happenin'. You need an SUV or van for all those huge child safety seats, esp. when you can't put any in the front because of the accursed air bag (I've NEVER been in a situation where an air bag would have done me the slightest bit of good, and I've been driving for 54 years.) So, you get kids, and want to go somewhere as a family all in the same vehicle, can you say "SUV?" I knew you could...