• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

E.P.A. Prepares to Roll Back Rules Requiring Cars to Be Cleaner and More Efficient

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
An important thing to remember is that a lot of these environmental changes Pruitt is trying to make will never actually happen. They are subject to the same rule making process that the original regulations were and that requires Pruitt to justify his position in light of the best available science. That will be... challenging. It’s very likely they will be held up in court for years if they ever pass at all, and then with any luck a new president and a new congress can eliminate the few that remain with the CRA.
 
fskimospy said:
An important thing to remember is that a lot of these environmental changes Pruitt is trying to make will never actually happen. They are subject to the same rule making process that the original regulations were and that requires Pruitt to justify his position in light of the best available science. That will be... challenging. It’s very likely they will be held up in court for years if they ever pass at all, and then with any luck a new president and a new congress can eliminate the few that remain with the CRA.
Click to expand...

An under appreciated factor in why the agency has seen a number of legal reversals of attempts to kill rules. The law requires such decisions not to be arbitrary and guess what lol.
 
K1052 said:
I wonder if they'll be subjected to the bowling ball test.
Click to expand...
brycejones said:
Just as frightening as the Bowling Green massacre.
Click to expand...
Perhaps the new Trump test will be bowling balls with cheeseburgers perched upon them for the slalom course. If a car can traverse this maze without knocking a cheeseburger off it receives a passing grade. Of course this test must performed at a KY test track in or around BG.😛
 
fskimospy said:
An important thing to remember is that a lot of these environmental changes Pruitt is trying to make will never actually happen. They are subject to the same rule making process that the original regulations were and that requires Pruitt to justify his position in light of the best available science. That will be... challenging. It’s very likely they will be held up in court for years if they ever pass at all, and then with any luck a new president and a new congress can eliminate the few that remain with the CRA.
Click to expand...

what is currently happening, though, is that Pruitt has issued a pause on all of the regulations while "under review," which is, essentially, unprecedented. Most of these pauses have been defeated by state-federal courts, however, and regulations ordered to continue while "under review."

The point is that Pruitt knows full well that he has no standing on any of this, but is doing it anyway. It's pettiness and only ever meant as a personal handout to his buddies in the Industry. Note that EPA meetings have gone to something like 98% represented by the energy industry, with the rest for actual environmental groups. This isn't really the EPA. The strategy is that while these policies remain under review, and for whatever "pause" remains in effect for whatever duration, he is saving his buddies a couple of million at a time to ignore upgrades and cleaning, so they can get out of their positions while the getting is good. Obviously these are typical GOP "savings through heavy debt burden." The money "Saved" by ignoring prevention today, come back 10, 30, 100 fold a few years later due to the cost of cleaning up pollution and contamination that should never have existed to begin with. Very typical of all manner of uninformed GOP economic standards. I'm getting rich now...through serious debt! yay, responsible!

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2018/04/02/scott-pruitts-dirty-politics
 
I think that if USautomakers wanted to delay some of the MPG requirements or get waivers for certain vehicle types then they should've gone with that route and presented evidence of why the targets were unobtainable, or why US automakers were at a competitive disadvantage (I.e. China giving their automakers an unfair advantage on battery components, limited battery manufacturing in US, etc.) But that's not what is happening. They have an R&D disadvantage compared with German and Japanese automakers, who have more aggressively pursued EV research beyond subcompacts and mild hybrids. They need more time to catch up, but would prefer to keep selling the same ICE tech across their fleets because that's where they are profitable. That's what this rollback is all about... preserving the profitability of their light trucks and commercial vehicles.
 
You want to help stop the madness. Join groups that take the government to task a lot. I would add Greenpeace and the ACLU. You might have to do some more research I remember the Sierra club being a litigious machine at one time. I chose two, the Sierra Club for green stuff and the ACLU to battle Trumpification.

https://www.outsideonline.com/2144781/6-best-environmental-groups-donate-better-world

"Environmental Defense Fund
Mission: The Environmental Defense Fund is perhaps the most wide-ranging organization on this list, working to provide solutions under the broad categories of climate change, oceans, wildlife and habitats, and health. The EDF works with other organizations, businesses, government, and communities to create incentives for positive environmental actions; help companies become better environmental stewards; influence policy; and keep tabs on emerging issues
Top Programs: Climate and energy, oceans, ecosystems
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 79.1
Charity Navigator Score: 94.48

Natural Resources Defense Council
Mission: The Natural Resources Defense Council seeks to protect the basics—air, land, and water—and to defend endangered natural places, with an eye toward how these long-term decisions affect humans.
Top Programs: Climate, land, wildlife, water, oceans, energy, food, sustainable communities
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 83.6
Charity Navigator Score: 96.35

American Rivers
Mission: American Rivers protects wild rivers, restores damaged rivers and the wildlife they support, and conserves clean water for people and nature, with an eye toward recreationists as well.
Top Programs: River restoration, federal river management, clean water supply
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 74.9
Charity Navigator Score: 88.18

Trust For Public Land
Mission: The Trust for Public Land creates parks & protects land for people, ensuring healthy, livable communities for generations to come. Works to ensure that everyone has access to nature within a 10-minute walk from home.
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 84
Charity Navigator Score: Not yet rated by CN, but given an A from Charity Watch

Sierra Club Foundation
Mission: The Sierra Club Foundation is the fiscal sponsor of the Sierra Club’s charitable environmental programs, and promotes efforts to educate and empower people to protect and improve the natural and human environment. The Sierra Club is the principal, though not exclusive, recipient of SCF’s charitable grants.
Top Programs: Beyond Coal, Chapter and Group Education Project, Our Wild America
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 88.5
Charity Navigator Score: 94.08"
 
fskimospy said:
An important thing to remember is that a lot of these environmental changes Pruitt is trying to make will never actually happen. They are subject to the same rule making process that the original regulations were and that requires Pruitt to justify his position in light of the best available science. That will be... challenging. It’s very likely they will be held up in court for years if they ever pass at all, and then with any luck a new president and a new congress can eliminate the few that remain with the CRA.
Click to expand...

That and there's the technological aspect. It's hilarious to watch Trump fans here act as if car makers will significantly change course, like they'll decide this whole electric car thing is too troublesome and go back to making 20MPG sedans. Er, no. The changes the Obama-era EPA wanted are going to happen in the next several years -- it's just a question of whether or not companies will face consequences if they're slightly late.

That and there's the Trump camp's perpetual fantasy that these policies will somehow stick, that Pruitt's moves won't be undone the moment Democrats regain control of the White House. Car manufacturers aren't about to ditch EVs knowing that Pruitt's corruption and anti-science censorship will likely be gone in 2021.
 
UNCjigga said:
) But that's not what is happening. They have an R&D disadvantage compared with German and Japanese automakers, who have more aggressively pursued EV research beyond subcompacts and mild hybrids. They need more time to catch up, but would prefer to keep selling the same ICE tech across their fleets because that's where they are profitable. That's what this rollback is all about... preserving the profitability of their light trucks and commercial vehicles.
Click to expand...
QFT. I guess they still haven't learned.
 
UNCjigga said:
I think that if USautomakers wanted to delay some of the MPG requirements or get waivers for certain vehicle types then they should've gone with that route and presented evidence of why the targets were unobtainable, or why US automakers were at a competitive disadvantage (I.e. China giving their automakers an unfair advantage on battery components, limited battery manufacturing in US, etc.) But that's not what is happening. They have an R&D disadvantage compared with German and Japanese automakers, who have more aggressively pursued EV research beyond subcompacts and mild hybrids. They need more time to catch up, but would prefer to keep selling the same ICE tech across their fleets because that's where they are profitable. That's what this rollback is all about... preserving the profitability of their light trucks and commercial vehicles.
Click to expand...

But that would require both this administration and the auto industry to be able to understand the difference between short term profits and long term competitive advantages. They are going to focus on the short term and end up right back where they were the next time gas prices spike.
 
If you want cleaner air and better fuel economy, stop ethanol from being added to gasoline. Ethanol is only a subsidy to support the Corn Industrial Complex.
 
Thebobo said:
You want to help stop the madness. Join groups that take the government to task a lot. I would add Greenpeace and the ACLU. You might have to do some more research I remember the Sierra club being a litigious machine at one time. I chose two, the Sierra Club for green stuff and the ACLU to battle Trumpification.

https://www.outsideonline.com/2144781/6-best-environmental-groups-donate-better-world

"Environmental Defense Fund
Mission: The Environmental Defense Fund is perhaps the most wide-ranging organization on this list, working to provide solutions under the broad categories of climate change, oceans, wildlife and habitats, and health. The EDF works with other organizations, businesses, government, and communities to create incentives for positive environmental actions; help companies become better environmental stewards; influence policy; and keep tabs on emerging issues
Top Programs: Climate and energy, oceans, ecosystems
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 79.1
Charity Navigator Score: 94.48

Natural Resources Defense Council
Mission: The Natural Resources Defense Council seeks to protect the basics—air, land, and water—and to defend endangered natural places, with an eye toward how these long-term decisions affect humans.
Top Programs: Climate, land, wildlife, water, oceans, energy, food, sustainable communities
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 83.6
Charity Navigator Score: 96.35

American Rivers
Mission: American Rivers protects wild rivers, restores damaged rivers and the wildlife they support, and conserves clean water for people and nature, with an eye toward recreationists as well.
Top Programs: River restoration, federal river management, clean water supply
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 74.9
Charity Navigator Score: 88.18

Trust For Public Land
Mission: The Trust for Public Land creates parks & protects land for people, ensuring healthy, livable communities for generations to come. Works to ensure that everyone has access to nature within a 10-minute walk from home.
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 84
Charity Navigator Score: Not yet rated by CN, but given an A from Charity Watch

Sierra Club Foundation
Mission: The Sierra Club Foundation is the fiscal sponsor of the Sierra Club’s charitable environmental programs, and promotes efforts to educate and empower people to protect and improve the natural and human environment. The Sierra Club is the principal, though not exclusive, recipient of SCF’s charitable grants.
Top Programs: Beyond Coal, Chapter and Group Education Project, Our Wild America
Percent of expenses spent on programs: 88.5
Charity Navigator Score: 94.08"
Click to expand...

Any idea which one of these is the most sue happy against the current admin? I want my money to go towards suing these bastards.

thilanliyan said:
QFT. I guess they still haven't learned.
Click to expand...

Too busy funding dividends and buy-backs than funding R&D.
 
UNCjigga said:
I think that if USautomakers wanted to delay some of the MPG requirements or get waivers for certain vehicle types then they should've gone with that route and presented evidence of why the targets were unobtainable, or why US automakers were at a competitive disadvantage (I.e. China giving their automakers an unfair advantage on battery components, limited battery manufacturing in US, etc.) But that's not what is happening. They have an R&D disadvantage compared with German and Japanese automakers, who have more aggressively pursued EV research beyond subcompacts and mild hybrids. They need more time to catch up, but would prefer to keep selling the same ICE tech across their fleets because that's where they are profitable. That's what this rollback is all about... preserving the profitability of their light trucks and commercial vehicles.
Click to expand...
I really think it's about selling more oil, damn the environmental effects of CO2.
 
It's corn based ethanol here. My 2014 Camaro SS with the 6.2L V8 gets 3 mpg better gas mileage when I fill up at a local station that sells ethanol free gasoline vs E10. So it goes from an average of 22 mpg (360 miles per tank) to 25 mpg (400 miles per tank). I'd always fill up there but the lines are long and at times they run out of fuel because of the demand. 10 cents more per gallon than the ethanol contaminated fuel, but the $1.60 a tank is well worth it (overall $3.40 savings per tank).
 
Cepak said:
If you want cleaner air and better fuel economy, stop ethanol from being added to gasoline. Ethanol is only a subsidy to support the Corn Industrial Complex.
Click to expand...

That would help too. It's the same reason why corn syrup is in everything in the US instead of sugar. Welfare for the corn lobby.
 
ElFenix said:
exactly what land did obama steal and exactly what posters here cheered said land stealing?

i want you to be specific. links to posts.
Click to expand...
No, it was in reference to the National monuments in Utah in Obama's term. I don't give a rats ass if you want links or posts. Look them up yourself.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
No, it was in reference to the National monuments in Utah in Obama's term. I don't give a rats ass if you want links or posts. Look them up yourself.
Click to expand...

Seriously how are we going to know wtf you are talking about. This thread is about cafe and Pruitt not Obama and Utah


Cheese and rice you are just stupid

johnny-carson-carnac-large.jpg
 
imported_tajmahal said:
Do you really think the planet gives a mouse fart about the emissions of the United States vehicles? Seriously?
Click to expand...

Yes

"Power plants have been the biggest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States for more than 40 years. But according to new data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration, transportation has now claimed the top spot.

The U.S. transportation sector — which includes cars, trucks, planes, trains, and boats — now emits 1.9 billion tons of CO2 annually. The electric power sector emits 1.8 billions tons."

https://e360.yale.edu/digest/transportation-replaces-power-in-u-s-as-top-source-of-co2-emissions
 
imported_tajmahal said:
No, it was in reference to the National monuments in Utah in Obama's term. I don't give a rats ass if you want links or posts. Look them up yourself.
Click to expand...
in other words you're completely full of shit, just as i thought. go lie your ass off somewhere else.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top