Slashdot Mirror


Trump Administration Plans To Freeze Obama-Era Fuel Standards (theverge.com)

The Trump administration plans to freeze Obama-era fuel-efficiency standards starting in 2021, according to a report from The Washington Post. The report says the Trump administration "would go even further by restricting a state's ability to set its own fuel standards, which would be a strike against California and its strict state-specific emissions rules," reports The Verge. From the report: The proposal has been reportedly drafted by the Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, and the plan right now is to freeze standards for cars and light trucks at levels set for the year 2021 and keep them their for five years. The Obama administration's rules, which involved a partnership with California and car makers, set standards at 50 miles per gallon for cars and light trucks by 2025. Obama also, through the Clean Air Act, granted California a waiver to set its own, higher standards. That way, if automobile manufacturers wanted to maintain a presence in the lucrative California market, they'd have to abide by the new rules. The Trump administration now says a separate law overrules that arrangement, The Washington Post reports.

7 of 306 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Waivers and Eexecutive Actions by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Informative

    Obama tried compromise, didn't seem to work with the obstructionists in Congress. Con-gress, the opposite of pro-gress.

  2. Re:Corporate rights by VeryFluffyBunny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And there I was thinking that the Republican party were all about giving states more freedom and independence.

    --
    Debate is a form of harassment. Do not question my truth.
  3. Re:maybe it will at least help sales of electric c by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Informative

    1. Lithium is not a "rare earth".
    2. Lithium is not a conflict mineral.
    3. Lithium is extracted from salt flats or brine. Neither process uses either children or slaves.

  4. Re:Waivers and Eexecutive Actions by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The vast majority (> 95%) of actual peer-reviewed research supports the theory that human activities cause global warming. The differences between the research are how much effect there will be, and how quickly it will happen.

    Also, the oil industry is polluting in other ways (water with hydrocarbon contamination, anyone?). And a sizable fraction of gasoline used goes on the ground, into the groundwater, or evaporates into the air. The less oil and gas we avoidably use, the better it is for us all, regardless of global warming theories.

  5. Re: Waivers and Eexecutive Actions by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 5, Informative

    Congress no longer represents the people on the West Coast and the Northeast. It's heavily weighted towards the interests of less-populated central states. Remember, they get two Senators even if they have 1/10th the population of a Texas, New York, New Jersey, or California. This isn't representative government as much as a tyranny of a landed minority.

  6. Re:maybe it will at least help sales of electric c by Khyber · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Lithium is extracted from salt flats or brine. Neither process uses either children or slaves"

    Lithium is also extracted from lepidolite, which is in fact extracted in many countries with slave labor (which is incidentally children looking for lithium-borate gems within those lepidolite bodies.)

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  7. Re: Waivers and Eexecutive Actions by mellon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Actually, if you are a scientist with credentials, getting funding to study how global warming doesn't exist is really easy. Just like it used to be really easy to get funding to study how smoking doesn't cause cancer. There's a lot of money to be made proving that carbon pollution isn't a problem. Would that it were so.