[Kraven]

http://ktla.com/2017/03/15/trump-to-ease-federal-fuel-economy-rules-california-regulations-could-require-higher-fuel-economy-standard/

Interesting article...California may be the tail that wags the dog here. CA emissions standards are adopted in 12 other states, about one third of the country lives under CA rules. The increased fuel economy standards put in place by the Obama administration may live on as CA has an exemption that allows it to set emissions standards that directly impact fuel economy. Automakers may be forced to continue on the path set by the previous administration regardless of what Trump does.

 

[CYAOPEC]

Putting politics aside, a long drawn out fight with California would not be productive for the new administration.

 

[Sisters Of Mercy]

It is impossible to put aside politics. Politics are what inspired Obama to simply double the fuel standards. It was his way of flying his middle finger at Republicans. He might as well have set the standard at 100mpg for the entire fleet. It would have been equally unobtainable.

Does anyone think Ford and GM at wasting any time trying to get their entire fleets up to over 50mpg? Did anyone notice oil is at $47 a barrel? Buyers want SUV's and tall cross-overs. California isn't going to make Ford or GM quit building vehicles people want to buy. And if my math is correct, 12 states is not equal to 1/3rd of the number of states, even using Obama math (wait, he thought we had 57 states, so 12 would be way less than 1/4). 12 divided by 50 = .24, right?

We own a Volt and an old Nissan Maxima that will be retired next year. Despite all the great deals on used Volts, when we factored in the price of gas and the fun factor of driving a 300+ horsepower Ford Edge Sport that is also AWD, the decision is to pay more to get 17mpg in town and 24mpg on the highway, and tons of fun driving in the mountains. I think California should make everyone ride bikes to work, if they are so concerned about emissions.

 

[freshcut]

And if my math is correct, 12 states is not equal to 1/3rd of the number of states, even using Obama math (wait, he thought we had 57 states, so 12 would be way less than 1/4). 12 divided by 50 = .24, right?

States yes, but the population of the 12 states is certainly about 1/3 of the total population of the US, especially considering CA is 10% alone.

 

[Henry_FL]

I see state emission standards being revoked in the near future, with the trifecta of republican control ( US house, senate , president ), the Clean Air Act more Orwellian parts can and very likely will be repealed as part of the deconstruction of the EPA. CA may think it can do as it pleases, but with a few signatures that can be all undone, there is a new boss in town and you are going to see so big changes.

 

[Fyodor]

I see your Mr. T. on the news tonight in Ypsilanti howling about the evil of CAFE regulations, while getting his picture taken grinning beside a Volt and a Bolt.

 

[Coppersnowboarder]

The Republicans are going to lose the majority in the Senate and House in two years, so measures against the destruction of our planet through global warming are likely to be sustained. The only way Donald Trump is going to bring jobs back into American manufacturing is by supporting expanded production of electric vehicles and electric hybrids along with other new domestic technology such as the generation of clean energy. I heard that only about one in seven lost manufacturing jobs was due to exporting production to foreign countries. The remainder of losses was due to changing technology, including robotics. If you want to become part of high value added production, start cultivating marijuana in a grow house.

 

[llninja]

Putting politics aside, a long drawn out fight with California would not be productive for the new administration.

I predict California might be the first to secede from the union. They're already acting like their own country anyway, being first with many environmental laws 10+ years before anybody else. They realize first hand that water and clean air is oh so important. Remember when car dealers had specs for cars in the 49 states and special numbers for California vehicles. Now I think manufacturers are building for all 50 states to the toughest standards

 

[Kraven]

States yes, but the population of the 12 states is certainly about 1/3 of the total population of the US, especially considering CA is 10% alone.

Yes, Mercy your math is good but read what I wrote again. Freshcut has it correct...

Also, it is very true that people want SUVs/Trucks/Crossovers. I saw the February auto sales numbers and sales of those vehicles were about 2/3 of all vehicles sold. So there is definitely demand for big gas guzzlers. The biggest problem remains financial, in that the manufacturers make more profit on these vehicles so marketing dollars and sales efforts are allocated to them. EVs like the Volt, Bolt, TM3 and other smaller options are probably the right type of vehicle for most of the population, but Americans are trained to like big vehicles. In So Cal you see many Range Rovers with single occupants, same with other SUVs. The amount of fuel required, per capita, to move the average American around is pretty high I'd guess.

 

[DonC]

It's funny. Two weeks ago all the talk was about quickly rolling back the standards and revoking CARB's waiver. Now it's working with industry in 2018 and with California. Seems like reality is setting in. The reality is that the EPA rule on CO2 is final and the final determination on the Technical Review has been issued. Changing that will be time consuming and subject to many legal challenges, many of which will likely be successful.

But those challenges pale in comparison posed by the CARB waiver. It's valid until 2025 and there is no statutory authority for revoking it. Moreover, California's agreement with the EPA and NHTSA provide that CARB can revert to its more stringent standards if the EPA and NHTSA soften their standards.

I see state emission standards being revoked in the near future, with the trifecta of republican control ( US house, senate , president ), the Clean Air Act more Orwellian parts can and very likely will be repealed as part of the deconstruction of the EPA. CA may think it can do as it pleases, but with a few signatures that can be all undone, there is a new boss in town and you are going to see so big changes.

Well you need 60 votes in the Senate to amend the Clean Air Act. Given the problems passing Trumpcare, which only needs a simple majority in both houses, this is obviously out of reach. There may be a new boss, but the boss is a disorganized and ineffective mess who seems on course to make make Jimmy Carter look effective. Too much tweeting and not enough leading, which is probably the price you pay for electing a narcissist.

I disagree about seeing a lot of changes. I see almost nothing changing. The president doesn't control much on the economic side. The last jobs report was a perfect example. Workers with a college degree or better gained 573,000 jobs. All other education classes lost 121,000 jobs. Same pattern as before. During the last year those with at least a bachelor's degree gained 1.6M jobs; those without LOST 330,000 jobs. Only the trend is accelerating, with more and more jobs going to well educated non-white workers living in urban areas and uneducated whites living in rural areas losing jobs at an alarming rate. From all the "Make America Great Again" talk, I gather that this is not the plan?

 

[DonC]

Also, it is very true that people want SUVs/Trucks/Crossovers.

For purposes of meeting CAFE and other emission regulations it doesn't matter if people buy SUVs or compact cars. Under the current rules every vehicle gets its own footprint, with bigger vehicles having lower targets. If manufacturers sell more SUVs and fewer compact cars their fleet average goes down. If they sell more it goes up. But the rules are agnostic on what type of vehicles you sell.

 

[DonC]

I predict California might be the first to secede from the union. They're already acting like their own country anyway, being first with many environmental laws 10+ years before anybody else. They realize first hand that water and clean air is oh so important. Remember when car dealers had specs for cars in the 49 states and special numbers for California vehicles. Now I think manufacturers are building for all 50 states to the toughest standards

Ronald Reagan created CARB and the Clean Air Act specifically allows California to regulate pollutants and emissions. It also allows other states to adopt California's standards. States which account for about 45% of all vehicle in the US have done so.

So why would California want to leave? LOL

 

[BAZINGA]

Fasten your seat belt, it's going to be a bumpy flight........

 

[llninja]

There may be a new boss, but the boss is a disorganized and ineffective mess who seems on course to make make Jimmy Carter look effective.

Although the public perception was that Jimmy wasn't effective, from a military planning standpoint, many of the stealth programs that are now declassified were started during his presidency and he firmly supported them because it was a real technical advantage for the US. If you recall, Ronald Reagan made a political play to bring back the B1 program only to discover after becoming president the true reason the B1 was cancelled, because there was a Uber top secret unacknowledged active b2 program. But he couldn't say "nevermind" without giving something away, we the US spent billions brinigng back the B1 program to make good on his campaign promise. Then there was the Star Wars satellite defense program....that program did not work at all technically, but it did bankrupt the USSR as we easily outspent them.

 

[llninja]

Ronald Reagan created CARB and the Clean Air Act specifically allows California to regulate pollutants and emissions. It also allows other states to adopt California's standards. States which account for about 45% of all vehicle in the US have done so.

So why would California want to leave? LOL

To save Yosemite from getting sold off to resort developers and to keep the land from getting raped and air and water from being polluted after the EPA is dismantled. So maybe a bunch of states might join Cali in USexit.

 

[caronjeff]

The world is awash in cheap oil. Of course those in power have as job #1 keeping the revenue flowing from the worlds common population to the oil barons. Oil has always and will always be the definition of power at the top.
Now clean water shortages will be the real test for society. Pumping oil, fracking chemicals, soil erosion etc. all threatening clean water supplies. 200 million American vehicles all spending $50 a week or more on fuel. That amount of money flowing to the oil barons. Of course the sale of large SUVs and trucks is what's pushed.

 

[Jmaj]

To save Yosemite from getting sold off to resort developers and to keep the land from getting raped and air and water from being polluted after the EPA is dismantled. So maybe a bunch of states might join Cali in USexit.

Notice that CA didn't turn down federal $$$ to fix the dam in Oroville. All hat and no cattle, the old rancher's saying goes.

 

[alfon]

I'm 66 years old. When I was in public school in the 1950's and 60's, just by reading Popular Science magazine I would have thought by now we would be driving nuclear powered cars. Hard to believe that after all those years we are still using petroleum for 99.9% for transportation use. Yet other areas such as electronics is another issue. For instance now we can store 10,000 photos in an area the size of a fingernail, 60 years ago they would have placed you in a mental ward with such talk....

 

[CYAOPEC]

It is impossible to put aside politics. Politics are what inspired Obama to simply double the fuel standards. It was his way of flying his middle finger at Republicans. He might as well have set the standard at 100mpg for the entire fleet. It would have been equally unobtainable.

Does anyone think Ford and GM at wasting any time trying to get their entire fleets up to over 50mpg? Did anyone notice oil is at $47 a barrel? Buyers want SUV's and tall cross-overs. California isn't going to make Ford or GM quit building vehicles people want to buy. And if my math is correct, 12 states is not equal to 1/3rd of the number of states, even using Obama math (wait, he thought we had 57 states, so 12 would be way less than 1/4). 12 divided by 50 = .24, right?

We own a Volt and an old Nissan Maxima that will be retired next year. Despite all the great deals on used Volts, when we factored in the price of gas and the fun factor of driving a 300+ horsepower Ford Edge Sport that is also AWD, the decision is to pay more to get 17mpg in town and 24mpg on the highway, and tons of fun driving in the mountains. I think California should make everyone ride bikes to work, if they are so concerned about emissions.

Uh, the news standards only work out of 42MPG based on fleet average, and as another poster said each vehicle gets their own footprint. While 12 states do not equal 1/3 of the country the 496 counties that voted for HRC comprise 64% of the nation's GDP in contrast to the 2600 that voted for Trump and only comprise 36% of the GDP.

 

[Bacardi]

He mentioned Detroit and California by name...Expect some sort of "everybody wins compromise" however it plays out...Perhaps something along the lines of if a vehicle is large/heavy enough it's exempt from fuel standards...