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.
"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.
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.
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.
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...