"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
10/28/2019 at 18:41 • Filed to: None
0
17|
"ttyymmnn" (ttyymmnn)
10/28/2019 at 18:41 • Filed to: None | 0
| 17 |
General Motors, Fiat Chrysler, Toyota and other auto giants said they were intervening on the side of the Trump administration on Monday in an escalating battle with California over fuel economy standards for automobiles.
Their decision pits them squarely against some of their peers, including Honda and Ford, who this year reached a deal to follow California’s stricter rules.
The automakers that are siding with the Trump administration, led by the industry group Global Automakers, say that the federal government, not California, has the ultimate authority to set fuel economy standards for passenger cars and trucks.
It represents the latest dramatic twist in one of the Trump administration’s most consequential rollbacks of regulations designed to fight climate change.
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
For Sweden
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 18:49 |
|
You know when you parents are fighting and you just wish they would agree so you can finally do some homework?
VajazzleMcDildertits - read carefully, respond politely
> For Sweden
10/28/2019 at 18:50 |
|
You don’t have headphones?
|
For Sweden
> VajazzleMcDildertits - read carefully, respond politely
10/28/2019 at 18:57 |
|
You need electricity to have headphones
ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable)
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 18:58 |
|
Guess that rules them out for my next vehicle purchase.
Everyone should be working toward reducing our environmental impact as much a feasible. And on a corporate level that means making cleaner cars regardless of whether a state or the Feds has the higher standards.
jimz
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 19:02 |
|
Boy, I’m glad I don’t have kids because I have no idea how I would explain this insanity to them.
can I just hit fast-forward to 2024 and hope for the best?
|
VajazzleMcDildertits - read carefully, respond politely
> For Sweden
10/28/2019 at 19:04 |
|
I can’t really argue that.
|
ttyymmnn
> ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable)
10/28/2019 at 19:07 |
|
I don’t necessarily have a problem with wanting one standard for the whole country. I just don’t want it to be Trump’s EPA that sets that standard.
dogisbadob
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 19:13 |
|
GM killed the electric car. What did you expect?
They have to keep pulling out of markets because they can’t compete.
|
ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable)
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 19:15 |
|
Yup. Their case for a single standard isn’t wrong. It’s just the wrong time to make it.
Also, I'd be totally okay with the Feds just adopting CA standards nationally. Maybe not everything CARB does, but the rest of the country needs stricter rules and tougher enforcement of them (coughrollingcoalcough)
slipperysallylikespenguins
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 19:15 |
|
As much as I don’t like the current staff of the EPA for reasons other than emissions, one standard makes way more sense in every possible way.
For a state with so much debt and red tape for everything, there is not a single reason for them to invest in their own standards. They really need to let some stuff go.
daender
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 19:23 |
|
I’m more surprised and upset that Toyota is siding with Trump. Welp, so much for buying a Toyota whenever the Tacoma dies.
Spanfeller is a twat
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 19:27 |
|
Companies never self regulate... at least this goes a good length proving that concept is impossible to achieve.
carcrasher88
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 20:15 |
|
Makes me quite curious as to where Nissan, Mitsubishi and the European brands would side in this...
|
ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable)
> carcrasher88
10/28/2019 at 20:31 |
|
VW has sided with CA already.
Shift24
> ttyymmnn
10/28/2019 at 21:07 |
|
I get GM and FCA but Toyota is a surprise.
Its interesting considering H onda sided w ith Cali (Though the have a decent size HQ there) and the Prius pretty much was the car symbol for California
coqui70
> ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable)
10/28/2019 at 21:27 |
|
Yep - I’m done with them - a shame too I was lusting for the new ‘Vette. GM had one chance to get it right after the bailout ... and just built more trucks.
dieseldub
> ADabOfOppo; Gone Plaid (Instructables Can Be Confusable)
10/29/2019 at 00:55 |
|
Note: this is about fuel economy standards, not emissions.
You CAN have a clean burning guzzler... you just have higher CO2 output due to burning more fuel. Fuel economy regs are a very indirect and rather poor way to regulate CO2 anyway. CO2 is not directly regulated because it’s not a pollutant, but is a climate change concern.
And again, let me repeat, corporate average fuel economy rules are not a very effective way to regulate efficiency or CO2. So, every time I hear something about this battle, I just roll my eyes. The lack of technical understanding by some journalists and the greater public at large on the topic is astounding.
Just because something drinks fuel doesnt mean it's inherently dirty by way of the regulated pollutants, which are CO, HC, NMOGs, NOx and Particulates.