Slashdot Mirror
California Leads States In Suing the EPA For Attacking Vehicle Emissions Standards (theverge.com)
California, along with seventeen other states, announced a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency today over its recent rollback of Obama-era vehicle emissions and fuel economy standards. The states argue that the EPA "acted arbitrarily and capriciously" in overturning the previous administration's decision. The Verge reports: The standards in question were drawn up in 2009 and adopted in 2012. They laid out a path for automakers to reduce overall greenhouse gas emissions by reaching an average fleet fuel economy of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2024. Since the program was charting a course that stretched out more than a decade into the future, it was written into the rules that the EPA would have to perform a "mid-term evaluation" before April 1st, 2018. This review would serve two purposes: assess whether automakers were on track, and then use that information to determine if the last section of the standards (which apply to model year 2022-2025 cars) were still feasible.
The EPA, under Barack Obama, kicked off this review process ahead of schedule in the summer of 2016 when it published an extensive 1,200-page technical assessment that analyzed whether the standards were working. In January 2017, the outgoing EPA wrapped this evaluation and determined that the bar was not set too high. In fact, it argued, automakers were overwhelmingly compliant. The Trump EPA's decision in April did not set new standards -- it simply argued that there were problems with the existing standards. In the meantime, the agency and the Department of Transportation are currently working together to craft and officially propose new standards. But the previous standards that the EPA said were inappropriate will technically remain in place until that happens.
The EPA, under Barack Obama, kicked off this review process ahead of schedule in the summer of 2016 when it published an extensive 1,200-page technical assessment that analyzed whether the standards were working. In January 2017, the outgoing EPA wrapped this evaluation and determined that the bar was not set too high. In fact, it argued, automakers were overwhelmingly compliant. The Trump EPA's decision in April did not set new standards -- it simply argued that there were problems with the existing standards. In the meantime, the agency and the Department of Transportation are currently working together to craft and officially propose new standards. But the previous standards that the EPA said were inappropriate will technically remain in place until that happens.
Not to let the facts get in the way of hyperbolic partisanship, but...
(1) The Obama decision was made with input from (and the endorsement of) car manufacturers.
(2) Long term plans and regulations, as a matter of both law and public policy, are not subject to the chief executive's whims. This makes sense, because how would business proceed if regulations were substantially overhauled every 4 years?
(2a) Just because someone doesn't like a deal, doesn't mean it wasn't accomplished and cannot be backtracked on.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
California politicians are responsible for turning a prosperous equitable place into the state with the nation's largest homeless rate, the nation's craiziest housing prices, and the nation's most insane building codes.
Actually, Hawaii has the nation's highest rate of homelessness, per state, but that number can be misleading. For one thing, it counts homeless individuals that were bussed from other states to get rid of them. With a relative few choosing the better weather. The housing in California is a mixed situation of demand combined with a local law, Prop 13, that discourages sales on the free market. The building code in California is actually sane and reasonable, for local conditions, just like Miami-Dade in Florida.
I get it though, you hate California, even to the point of railing against them for Reagan era policies. That's why you lost 2 million votes there. They sense how you want to abuse them, and blame them, because to you they are the enemy.
Remember the good old-fashioned screw-in light bulb? They made them illegal, no matter what the technology of the bulb.
That's wrong on two counts. Three even. Maybe four. The classic Edison base is entirely legal in California. You aren't even intelligent enough to specify that it is the incandescent bulbs of a certain type that needs to meet an efficiency standard, but hyperbolically exaggerate it into a false claim.
Of course, it is an international standard, enacted across the world, so wrong on that count too.
But hey, pull a Michelle Bachmann and buy your kids a pallet of light bulbs to feel good about sticking it to the man.
As for Tesla...it's easy to get 0 gallons per mile when you don't make any cars. They've been in business for the better part of a decade and they have made fewer cars total than Ford, GM, Toyota, or VW sell in one year. Actually strike that...fewer cars than the big boys sell one type of in a given year. Because it's fantasy, not technology. Take away the government subsidies for Richie Rich to buy them and they'll probably be down to zero in short order.
Nope. Tesla actually takes less in subsidies than those companies, not even counting the trade manipulations which lead to the various tax schemes. Or the injuries we pay for the pollution they caused. Just look at the price of leaded gasoline, let alone VW's diesel fraud. And that was after they got millions from Tennessee.
Meanwhile, the big 3 would rather build a 50,000 base model truck than efficient and affordable electric cars, so who wants to take advantage of people? Hmm. Who wants government handouts? Hmm.
Tesla, however managed to make a car that outperforms them with a single factory and without the exploitation of a dealership network.
New LED light bulbs fit into my old fixtures just fine. They're all screw-in. The price has gone way down since the first days of LED bulbs, and they last a lot long than my old incandescent bulbs used to.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Total number of executive orders:
G W Bush: 291
B. Obama: 276
R. Reagan: 381
Avg number of executive orders/per year:
G W Bush: 36.4
B. Obama: 34.6
D. Trump: 55
The EPA set overly high emissions standards to begin with, the EPA now is just settling on a more realistic goal and letting that sit for a few years so companies can adjust
Nope. Electric cars are the future because they don't put out any pollution. Get with it, you rube.
It was the original goals that were an attack on the auto industry,
LOL! Who needs to attack the auto industry when they needed to be bailed out by a democratic congress and president?
The only thing being attacked here is people who profit from polluting the environment.
You're super when it comes to bullshit but not so much with common sense.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.