Slashdot Mirror
The Oil Industry's Covert Campaign To Rewrite American Car Emissions Rules (nytimes.com)
When the Trump administration laid out a plan this year that would eventually allow cars to emit more pollution, automakers, the obvious winners from the proposal, balked. The changes, they said, went too far even for them. But it turns out that there was a hidden beneficiary of the plan that was pushing for the changes all along: the nation's oil industry. From an investigation by The New York Times: In Congress, on Facebook and in statehouses nationwide, Marathon Petroleum, the country's largest refiner, worked with powerful oil-industry groups and a conservative policy network financed by the billionaire industrialist Charles G. Koch to run a stealth campaign to roll back car emissions standards, a New York Times investigation has found. The campaign's main argument for significantly easing fuel efficiency standards -- that the United States is so awash in oil it no longer needs to worry about energy conservation -- clashed with decades of federal energy and environmental policy.
"With oil scarcity no longer a concern," Americans should be given a "choice in vehicles that best fit their needs," read a draft of a letter that Marathon helped to circulate to members of Congress over the summer. Official correspondence later sent to regulators by more than a dozen lawmakers included phrases or sentences from the industry talking points, and the Trump administration's proposed rules incorporate similar logic. The industry had reason to urge the rollback of higher fuel efficiency standards proposed by former President Barack Obama. A quarter of the world's oil is used to power cars, and less-thirsty vehicles mean lower gasoline sales.
"With oil scarcity no longer a concern," Americans should be given a "choice in vehicles that best fit their needs," read a draft of a letter that Marathon helped to circulate to members of Congress over the summer. Official correspondence later sent to regulators by more than a dozen lawmakers included phrases or sentences from the industry talking points, and the Trump administration's proposed rules incorporate similar logic. The industry had reason to urge the rollback of higher fuel efficiency standards proposed by former President Barack Obama. A quarter of the world's oil is used to power cars, and less-thirsty vehicles mean lower gasoline sales.
Story at 10, after local dog learns to ride skateboard. He's so cute, we just keep putting the video on repeat.
The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
You know, it's one thing for Republicans to lie to our faces about this stuff, fraud and treason etc, but when a trusted business sector like Big Oil lies, that kind of betrayal is truly inexcusable. (Unless well-paid to excuse it, of course.)
You are making a wonderful world for my grandchildren.
Air infused with toxic carcinogenic combustion byproducts.
The Obama administration set way too harsh goals for emissions in the coming decades, Trump is just rolling them back a little bit (not even to what they were before).
In the end it will not matter as electric car adoption will more than make up for any extra emissions from rolling back the rules.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
No one seemed to give a rats ass when lobbyists seek to raise visa caps or completely ignore illegal immigration.
I guess it depends on who gets paid or benefits from changing voting patterns.
"When the Trump administration laid out a plan this year that would eventually allow cars to emit more pollution, automakers, the obvious winners from the proposal, balked. The changes, they said, went too far even for them."
Sorry lying Kendal, we know you're not QUITE illiterate and this is just more of your patented head-up-ass dishonesty. You cried too much wolf, even for a known traitor. Blow.
im mean it wouldnt be hard. think of the benefits to humanity.
Kendall is job 1.
But, but what about "enhancing shareholder value", that is what Milton Friedman and the Chicago School of Economics have taught our business leaders is their ONLY ethical concern.
Could it be that our entire business educational system has been corrupted by people who do not care if "people" live or die?
Maybe, Milton Friedman was the real Terminator
Conveniently omitting to mention pollution and greenhouse gas emissions as remaining concerns.
Kill them. Kill them all before they kill us. It is clearly THE moral thing to do.
THERE WILL BE CONSEQUENCES FOR YOUR LIES NAZI INCEL FAGGOT KEN DOLL
Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
The American auto industry is barely moving forward on EVs -- not that they're the be all to end all, but c'mon. The tech has been around longer than gas-powered vehicles and yet, even with modern lithium-ion batteries, car companies don't offer more than two models each -- most only offer one.
It's going to take regulation to force their hand; that seems obvious. With the current administration kowtowing to big business, though, we won't be seeing any movement on this for at least another two years.
If you are *truly* an environmentalist you wouldn't want to risk further environmental damage from continuing to try and force other people into behaving environmentally responsible. The reason is because this clearly doesn't work. Big government or UN action has mostly failed. The last decent bit of legislation that made any real difference was the Clean Air Act in 1970. It's technology that has the best chance of preventing or mitigating negative effects of climate change. I'm an environmentalist, but I feel like I keep company with a bunch of idiots and facists who can only see one way to fix the problem: forced government coercion. Why not convince folks to switch to greener tech because it's *better*, rather than trying to ram it down their throats as a tax? The latter has a legacy of 40+ years of failure and division. Isn't it time to try something new? Just going by success/failure it appears conservation and green-research would be money and effort much better spent.
Oil prices are going up, you're obviously stuck in a time warp from 2 weeks ago. EV is going down all the time. Trucking and shipping are moving to EV investments also. Everything will go EV, it's better all around.
Go figure, dinosaur is unhappy with progress, aww.
30 MPG city and 40MPG highway are GOOD targets. We were able to hit them decades ago, but only with lower performing engines, unusual aerodynamics, or reduced vehicle speeds. Today these ratings are possible in a car cruising at 65-90 mph with a fraction of the dangerous pollution emitted of the vehicles from the 70s to 80s which hit those numbers.
Without making engines which are effectively one use (which the majority of the new high efficiency engines are turning into) this amount of rollback will allow vehicles that don't turn into garbage when someone doesn't change the oil, has a radiator leak, etc. Personally, I would like to see some of the thermoplastic parts regulated against and replaced with polymer coated metal designs, for safety and long term maintenance reasons. The modern plastic intake manifolds have a bad tendancy of exploding if a car ever backfires, and cooling system parts made out of the same material have a tendency to critically fail if overheated or used past their lifetime, unlike the older metal parts, which could corrode and even fail catastrophically, but generally only as a result of corrosion rather than a combination of age and heat cycling, which the modern ones are notorious for doing.
Source: Time as a mechanic with a LOT of thermoplastic related repairs, including a few engine replacements directly caused by thermoplastic failures. No use in having an engine that theoretically lasts 400k miles if a key part of it failing drops that number to 50-100k.
So if automakers think it goes too far what is the problem? They will just make vehicles according the to the spec they see fit. No issue then making the standards low if automakers plan to exceed them.
The reason the automakers said that, is because they have bought a little too deeply into the kool-aid that emissions in the U.S. must be reduced, while ignoring what the rest of the world is doing. So they are just upset at thought someone MIGHT go lower then they had planned..
In the end, the real collusion is auto-makers trying to hamstring competition by crafting regulations that newer companies cannot follow. too bad for them Tesla figured out a way around that plan.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Consider that automakers would have to make an entirely different set of vehicles for Paris accord countries (like Canada) and the U.S.
Then consider automakers would have to make different cars for states with strict standards and cars violating those standards would not be allowed in the state as they would not be grandfather claused.
Then consider that if automakers were to have 6 years to bring new fuel guzzling designs to market before (worst case scenario) Trump leaves office. And since almost universally, republican president = Democrat Congress and vise versa. So, within 6 years, either the executive or the legislative branches will be in opposition to the new regulations.
So, any car company who would take advantage of this opportunity would be run by idiots with no foresight. This would be corporate suicide. I mean I am sitting here laughing my ass off wondering who would invest years of R&D in a new drive train that would almost certainly be made illegal within weeks of it reaching market and could not be sold or operated in more than a small region.
Any leasing company willing to back these cars would be criminally incompetent and any banks willing to finance these vehicles would be suicidal.
I mean, who thinks these things up?
Even if you don't care about CO2 and global climate change, there's still the localized issue of actual air pollution in cities especially which kills. I drive a plugin electric and notice gas fumes and other nasty things in the air from cars.
"If you are *truly* an environmentalist you wouldn't want to risk further environmental damage from continuing to try and force other people into behaving environmentally responsible"
-Retard tries hand at logic, fails, news at 11
Your lede is incorrect. "When the Trump administration laid out a plan this year that would eventually allow cars to emit more pollution". He's relaxing FUTURE standards, not current standards. Unobtainable future standards.
Sorry lying Kendal, we know you're not QUITE illiterate and this is just more of your patented head-up-ass dishonesty. You cried too much wolf, even for a known traitor. Blow.
"When the Trump administration laid out a plan this year that would eventually allow cars to emit more pollution, automakers, the obvious winners from the proposal, balked. The changes, they said, went too far even for them."
"With oil scarcity no longer a concern," Americans should be given a "choice in vehicles that best fit their needs," read a draft of a letter that Marathon helped to circulate to members of Congress over the summer
And?
Of course those who sell oil have the most incentive to make arguments. Doesn't automatically make the arguments invalid.
Implying that "oil scarcity" is the reason behind these regulations seems like such an obvious straw man that at first I figured everyone would see through it immediately... but then I realized this letter was targeted at Congress.
#DeleteChrome
Call me skeptical, but if the automakers had really balked, they'd simply continue moving towards better and tighter emission control standards exactly as if they *had* been legally required to do so, regardless of any legislation that may be permitting them to implement workable solutions at a cheaper financial cost here and now. I know of no law that *requires* cars to pollute a certain minimum amount, after all.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
We have a culture where we tolerate lying when someone is trying to make a quick buck.
Businesses should tell the truth? Why do you hate capitalism? insert other facetious arguments here, etc
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
Bobbied = trolling moron exhaust breather, disregard.
The choice isn't between oil and no oil. There is a middle ground where we regulate industry, control pollution, and use resources in a way that compensates everyone for the damage it causes. Wild west, zero responsibility bullshit isn't a serious business model even if idiots are serious about defending it.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
"Businesses should tell the truth? Why do you hate capitalism? insert other facetious arguments here, etc" - See lying faggot Kendall below, he'll be happy to walk us through his bullshit forest he invented for this...
Some common sense emissions rules out of DC. Unreal
Bobbied = trolling moron exhaust breather, disregard the idiot. (https://news.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=13053288&cid=57799714)
Too many grandchildren is THE basis of future pollution and resource scarcity. Everything else is just a tailpipe in the wind.
Congress does CAFE because they are cowards. A car with higher efficiency can be driven more on the same gas. It does not reduce consumption by existing cars. If you genuinely believe in the cause, the only thing to advocate is taxation of fuel. A tax increase for the social cost of gasoline is something like $3.80 a gallon, more than doubling the current price. C'mon true believes, don't put off saving the planet for decades, bite the bullet and advocate that tax increase.
Fun fact: if Big Oil hadn't done this, we'd be paying half as much for filling our tanks, and those of us who would have already transitioned to $6000 EVs made in China and Taiwan would be paying between 1/10th and 1/40th as much, plus paying half the maintenance fees.
You got ripped off big time.
(caveat: I have invested and owned direct stocks in fossil fuel firms (oil,gas,ethanol,coal,biomass) and in automobile and airplane firms)
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
Is dumber than the time he lied about having "acres" of marijuana that he operated, or all those lies he told about hiring people or having a real job lol. This faggot is here every day, being a dumb bitch.
Maybe he and Kendall should elope and ride off into the lying faggot sunset of their wasted lives?
It seems to be impossible to read any post expressing a conservative viewpoint without the word "tax" appearing at least once in it.
Boy, you guys seem to really, really hate taxes, don't you ? In fact, you're beginning to sound like a broken record.
But still, I'll try to give an answer to your question:
Why not convince folks to switch to greener tech because it's *better*, rather than trying to ram it down their throats as a tax? The latter has a legacy of 40+ years of failure and division.
Because the former has a legacy of tens of thousands of years of failure and division. Special interest groups (particularly the filthy rich ones, like the oil industry) will always make sure that fails. Always.
But I'll agree with you on one thing though: We really should try something new.
At least you tacitly admit you're a spineless traitor, are going extinct on the merits... I couldn't agree more, see you in prison Trump traitors!
https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/13/politics/donald-trump-national-enquirer-settlement-stormy-daniels-karen-mcdougal/index.html
with CAFE
"When the Trump administration laid out a plan this year that would eventually allow cars to emit more pollution, automakers, the obvious winners from the proposal, balked. The changes, they said, went too far even for them."
Yeah, they supposedly said that.. but coming from a biased New York Times article, I'd take that portrayal with an entire salt shaker.
Succ
"Republican fraud doesn't see a problem with lying or fraud, news at 11" - But you won't see the news, because your faggot ass is going to FEDERAL PRISON, TRUMP TRAITOR! Awww.
And he sure as fuck doesn't control DOJ/FBI or ADX FLORENCE, lol. https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/421043-senate-votes-to-end-us-support-for-saudi-war-bucking-trump
Everytime I drop in, I see your idiocy.
Still haven't learned how to write a trollbot?
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Sorry lying Kendal, we know you're not QUITE illiterate and this is just more of your patented head-up-ass dishonesty. You cried too much wolf, even for a known traitor. Blow Putin's cock when you see it.
"When the Trump administration laid out a plan this year that would eventually allow cars to emit more pollution, automakers, the obvious winners from the proposal, balked. The changes, they said, went too far even for them"
I mean granted, they both start with the letter E, but other than that they are completely different concepts. Even this lunkhead at NYT should've been able to grasp the difference.
Yes Trump administration sought to reduce the fuel-efficiency requirements. Yes the oil industry lobbied hard for it, more fuel used by people = more money for them. But this is a fuel EFFICIENCY issue. Not emissions. Emission means air pollution. You can have an inefficient car that gets very low miles per gallon, and yet have a very clean tailpipe that does not contribute to smog.
Another repubtard screaming fake news even tho it was directly quoted.
Notning new. Ignore reality, blame foreigners and blacks, give all your taxes to big business, it will never fail.
Quit using any of the following products then idiots.
https://www.innovativewealth.com/inflation-monitor/what-products-made-from-petroleum-outside-of-gasoline/
The roads you drive on, to the computer you are bitching and moaning on. All use oil.
Quit being hypocrites and shut the fuck up. You quite obviously can't offer alternatives to oil in any of these process's. So you are nothing but fucking hypocrites.
"A middle class was not possible until the energy freedom that oil provided" Instantly debunked bullshit, next?
Not going to happen. Too bad you are so busy calling people fags that you couldbt bother to read the constitution. Maybe more time reading the constitution ans less pillow biting with your shaved pet hampster.
They cant even try him criminally for state crimes until after his terms are up. See paula jones sex assault case vs bill clinton.
You wont even be able to secure a conviction of impeachment, which is not a jail sentence trial. It takes a super majority in the SENATE to do that.
and yet have a very clean tailpipe that does not contribute to smog.
Until you redefine 'air pollution' to include the products of perfect combustion. Then, the more fuel you burn, the more emissions you produce.
Since the goal is to get the maximum amount of performance out of a certain quantity of fuel burn (not to burn a certain amount of fuel), there should be no conflict between improving efficiency given that performance delivery. As long as the regulators are honest about their goals. But if the agenda is to reduce the performance (and utility) of vehicles, then they will invent more regulations to handicap them. Until (they hope) we all just give them up and become content with breathing bus exhaust.
Let me know when any EV is cheaper than my gasoline powered vehicle and works in all the same situations.
My IC vehicle is 18 yrs old. Liability insurance only. Runs perfectly all these years. I bought it new with 26 miles on it.
I generally fill up the tank every 6-12 weeks.
Why would I get some other vehicle when I probably have another 10-15 yrs on the current one before any major overhaul is needed.
I'm not stupid and I don't need to keep up with people in California.
"Businesses should tell the truth? Why do you hate capitalism? insert other facetious arguments here, etc" - See lying faggot Kendall below, he'll be happy to walk us through his bullshit forest he invented for this...
Road tax revenue does not have to come from a tax on any particular fuel and you damned well know that, ya deceptive cunt.
ORANGE TIDE BAD!
CONSEQUENCES ARE COMING FOR YOUR LIES NAZI INCEL KEN DOLL FOR YOUR ENTIRE FAMILY
Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING. Filter error: Don't use so many caps. It's like YELLING.
And luckily you're an old fuck, so you won't be around much longer. If you're gonna be a dick, I can be a dick too.
This is called "balance". President Obama leaned way to the eco side and made rules known to drive industry in a direction. The idea is good, which is better fuel economy, but how it is written would make a number of vehicles unable to be made. There is only so much energy you can pull our of gas. President Trump disagrees with how this should be and is changing it.
Why do people think it's so horrible. My opinion is the goal set by President Obama were unrealistic and with no avenue to get there, which I also thought was done on purpose. Just the same as his coal power plant requirements, which would have just shut them all down. Ok, good get rid of coal, that'a a good thing, so what is your solid plan to replace them and future growth? Ah, right. Chant Solar, Wind really loud and power will fall from the sky. In other words, no plan. This is the same. That vehicle has to get super great fuel economy. How do we get there? Make non ICE cars, without a plan for infrastructure and how this will cripple the power grid if rolled out without expanding capacity. Oh well.
There great part is everyone can have an opinion, but I would just like to see a plan. Don't care which president we're talking about.
Trump needs to say, "If you like your emissions rules, you can keep your emissions rules."
What was that again about only Republicans lying?
ALL designed to facilitate commerce - except AGW. That bitch be an equal opportunity hottie. AGW will disrupt ALL.
You and me alone can't stop AGW but sure as hell the collective WE can stop commerce that feeds it. Money matters; its all that matters. Spend unwise, waste your life - waste a planet; Woke, spend wisely, stop AGWcommerce save a planet - save a life.
"A middle class was not possible until the energy freedom that oil provided" Instantly debunked bullshit, next?
It was so instant that I missed your evidence that debunked it.
Guardian - George Monbiot. Great article on the puppeteers that rewrite the rules as they wish.
The average selling price of a new car in the US is $35k. A new Nissan Leaf is going for $31k (local dealer, before incentives or tax credits). So you can already get an EV at a lower price than the average new car. ICE cars have been increasing in price; EVs have been decreasing.
Once there are enough EVs on the road, battery replacements will become commonplace, and prices of used EVs will become very affordable.
Thank you President Trump for our booming economy, oil independence, and major companies like Apple bringing back billions of dollars that went overseas due to leftist demonrats and rinos expecially BHO! Keep America Great! Support Trump and conservative Republicans!
No, he's right, a middle class was made possible first by coal.
You'll never see such a plan, because that would be socialism. We can't have that, can we? It would mean interfering with the 1%:ers right to profit at the cost of the rest of the society, after all.
Right. Like saying "since Carbon Monoxide is so cheap, we really don't need to restrict it."
90 percent of old ice in the Arctic is already gone, which leads directly to a positive feedback loop in the north. Greenland can't melt fast enough.
The only upside to what's happening is that Mar a Loco will soon be under water....
It wasn't just Friedman. You can add William Meckling and Michael Jensen to that list.
A case could be made that the US should restrict exploration and production domestically, as well as keep progressing with auto efficiency standards. The list of oil producers after the US is pretty consistent with a list of our adversaries. Why not use their oil in the present, and leave ours in the ground for the years when oil begins to become more scarce?
Ideally we would be looking out for the long term well being of the United States of America which is why whether it's Facebook or Marathon Oil, we should not, cannot, let corporations dictate governmental policy. Corporations goals are geared towards the short term wealth of a very few people, and do not have the long term interests of the nation at heart.
02 Russia ...
03 Saudi Arabia
04 Iraq
05 Iran
06 China
02 Russia
03 Saudi Arabia
04 Iraq
05 Iran
06 China
11 Venezuela
13 Nigeria
14 Angola
Seems like Meckling and Jensen were more into corporate structure and executive compensation, respectively. Meckling fawned over the greater perfection of the Corporation over any individual or small group of experts, and Jensen won a Nobel Prize for his theories on "financial economics" even though he is best known for promoting tying executive compensation to stock valuations via stock options.
So, yeah the have all played a role, but the redefinition of business ethics by Friedman enables these incredibly powerful and self-centered organisations that Meckling and Jensen defined to become incredibly dangerous, if not innately sociopathic.
Did you get to keep your plan? I sure as hell didn't, and neither did my 80,000 coworkers.
The Trump admin is NOT rolling out rules to INCREASE emissions. They are eliminating rules Obama put in place but diid not order into effect until AFTER HE WAS GONE that would have gradually ramped-up regulations to [probably] unattainable levels.
If the Trump admin does everything on emissions they propeosed, the emissions levels allowed for cars will be right where they were when the God-King Obama was in office. This fraudulent wailing about Trumps car emissions policies is exactly like the treatment of Clinton's "clean water" rules during the GW Bush admin in which Clinton set new rules to kick-in after he would be out of office, then Bush got in and stopped those rules (leaving the water regs right where they were under Clinton) and then the leftists all started screaming that Bush was for lead and arsenic in drinking water.
It's impossible to have civilized policy discussions when leftists are so insanely dishonest. The English language contains no mechanism for such conversations between people in the real world and those in the Twilight Zone.
If Americans wanted fuel efficient vehicles, they'd buy Prii.
With oil prices down, the sales of Prii are down, and SUVs are up. I would think Americans would be more concerned about the potential end of cheap oil, but I was wrong.
When we increased the efficiency of burning coal guess what, we used more. That can be said about a huge number of other things we consume. As we increase the efficiency the usefulness tends to increase significantly faster that the efficiency gain. So we have more efficient engines now, the result has been moving from driving a car to an SUV. Then we drive the SUV even further. If the ICE cars become less efficient then the cost advantage of electric cars will actually increase to the point no one will buy a new ICE car.
This is so stupid for the oil industry to push it's either fake news or the oil industry has really lost anyone who has half a brain and all that's left is stupid psychopaths.
One part of Gasoline requires 14 parts of Oxygen
https://jacoboneal.com/car-eng...
Casteism
No, socialism is how you end up with mass murder and people not able to feed themselves as the voluntary transactions which used to fuel society break down.
I never kept my plan, it changed and got more expensive each year. That was BEFORE Obamacare. And the promise was "you can keep your doctor" which 99% of people like me did.
In the 1990s, cars were allowed to use a lot less fuel than they are today. But, Federal emissions rules were rewritten in the 1990s at the behest of, you guess it, California, to decrease the efficiency of gas motors by approximately 30%.
The new rules implemented in the 90s required cars richen their fuel/air ratio to reduce NOx emissions, which in theory should have led to less smog in LA, which is what California was after, but of course we all know how that worked out since NOx emissions aren't what cause smog.
in any case, rather than eat crow, California doubles down on this ridiculous argument every time vehicle emissions come up, while in the meantime our cars are forced to emit 30% more CO2 than they need to.
You don't really need evidence for a prima facie absurd statement, there's been a middle class since before "oil" would've referred to whale oil.
Donâ(TM)t know where you got that info but itâ(TM)s wrong. I had a normal plan with normal coverage for me and my family, but lost it. IIRC, there were a bunch of gotcha rules and one of them made by plan illegal.