Mar 16

Trump Extends For One Year MPG Rules Review Obama Had Tried To Lock Down

 

As expected, the Trump administration said today it would re-open review of tough federal mpg and emissions standards that had been finalized under the Obama EPA.

For the past few months clouds have been brewing over what the New York Times reported could lead also to an attack on California’s right to set its own clean air rules, and advocates have been lining up to preemptively counter the perceptive attack.

Under the new U.S. EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, who like Trump questions man-made climate change, the agency will allow automakers another year to make their case on why rules should be weakened.

At present, federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) rules call for an ostensible “50 mpg” or more on average by 2025, although that is done under simplified testing, and the real number on window stickers may average in the high 30s. Today the average is about 25-26 mpg.

A White House official told reporters today that the carmakers doing business in the U.S. were right to decry what was perceived as a power play by the Obama administration. Under Obama’s orders, the EPA moved ahead of an April 2018 deadline to lock in final determination of a “midterm review” for 2022-2025 rules.

A total of 18 automakers had petitioned Trump to reconsider, and as a letter by the Auto Alliance to Pruitt observes, they feel they were handled improperly.

Excerpt from a letter by the Auto Alliance to Scott Pruitt, Trump’s new EPA administrator who has a history of opposing the EPA in his prior career.


Meanwhile environmental and consumer advocates have said they want a “place at the table” in what may be an intense struggle between ideologically and politically divided factions.

Among those wasting no time to comment today was Shannon Baker-Branstetter, policy counsel for Consumers Union.

“The Administration should reconsider today’s action. The EPA finalized the standards after a thorough study of costs and benefits,” said Baker-Branstetter. “A decision to withdraw the standards is nonsensical, as it would merely funnel more money to oil companies at consumers’ expense and halt the progress that can be made in both savings for consumers and vehicle efficiency. The standards already take the cost into account, and the record shows that they are a reasonable, cost-effective approach to improving fuel efficiency and lowering consumers’ expenses.

“EPA conducted a robust review of these standards for nearly two years, taking into account the input from automakers, including thousands of pages of technology and cost assessments, and concluded that the standards were appropriate,” Baker-Branstetter continued. “By rejecting the EPA’s final determination now, its new Administrator is signaling the agency plans to weaken the standards instead.”

As for California, Mary Nichols, chairman of California’s Air Resources Board said she would consider fine-tuning rules to a point.

“We’re not going to refuse to participate in the newly-reopened review process,” Nichols said in a phone interview. “We’ll be there and we’ll be active.”

This said, Nichols does not believe California should be expected to cease its own stance in favor of clean vehicles.

How things might affect Tesla which defiantly stands as an all-electric carmaker also remains to be seen.

“We have the technical and legal ability to run a program that recognizes where electrification of vehicles is headed,” she said. “We’re trying to put together a mix of incentives and regulations to move the entire industry in this direction. This is what we’re going to do.”

It is believed a major legal fight will ensue if Trump makes an unprecedented attack against California. The state – which influences as much as 30 percent of the U.S. car market – otherwise does stand as a de facto rulemaking body. Automakers recognize this, and the Trump administration does too, so even if EPA rules were reduced, carmakers would still have to design, market and sell vehicles made for California rules.

SEE ALSO: Will US Consumers Benefit From Strong MPG Regulations?

That, to some, is a threat that will need to be eliminated, though today’s announcement did not touch on this.

But while others have called the Trump EPA’s initiative an attack, a moderate tone is otherwise being issued. Automotive News reported U.S. Rep. Debbie Dingell, a Michigan Democrat and former GM executive said carmakers don’t want to gut EPA rules.

Rather, the review will allow automakers to air views they feel they were deprived of initially by Obama’s heavy handed maneuver to lock in rules before leaving office.

This story that touches on hundreds of billions of dollars, and that stands to affect the kinds of cars Americans will buy into next decade is only now just beginning.

HybridCars.com

This entry was posted on Thursday, March 16th, 2017 at 5:55 am and is filed under General. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

COMMENTS: 46


  1. 1
    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College

    +8

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (7:23 am)

    Anything apparently potentially a setback is really a strong opportunity for even more stringent re affirmations for even better and stronger OEM electrifications and even stronger profitabilities for GM and shareholders. IF it is aggressively done right across the board!

    This one year is the best gift Donald could have provided, because the higher you aim, the higher you land. AND, when American residences benefit massively by keeping 90% of foreign petroleum debt from draining budgets, the electrification of our cars and light trucks is paid for handily.
    The entire grid is made STRONGER by increased capacities and by simple load subtraction when needed, second by second as I’d written before.

    I can’t emphasize enough that electrification will have America winning all manner of economic efficiencies, and now, we have a full year to relentlessly prove this case!

    Just yesterday, when I was in my favorite hardware store here in Elgin Texas, a manager who got reassigned back to this chain location asked for my advice for a car for his daughter which needs to have collision alert and lane keeping.

    I said; “Our Volt has that”.

    He was puzzled. “What’s that??” He said.

    “It is an electric car.” I replied.

    “Whaaa??”

    “It is an electric car that goes 45 miles, then automatically changes over to gasoline from a small 8 gallon gas tank to go another 320 miles, so you plug it in every night for that first 45 miles every day. The 2014 Volt we bought ten months ago has 23,000 miles on it so far this year, and with TXU Energy, they love Electric Car customers and give $30 off the $36 charging cost when you hit 800 kilowatt hours a month. So that means our Volt goes for a half a penny a mile!”

    “WHAAAAAAAT?? I’ve never heard of it”
    “I didn’t know they made one?” “WHO???”

    “GM”, I said.

    “I’m an electrician, can it charge at 240?”

    “Yes, in 3 hours and forty five minutes”

    “I want one!” “We can spend $16,000”

    “Get a GM Certified pre owned, and it may only have 5,000 softly-applied miles on the engine, and 35,000 on the electric motor, which last forty years.”

    “Then I want one for me, and I want one for my daughter”.

    “Would you like to see what it looks like?”

    “Yessss!”

    When I showed him all the refined technologies, he instantly recognized the functions quickly on the main driver information display and the center stack display.

    Then I gave him Corey Welch’s card and referred him to AutoNation Chevrolet in North Austin.

    So, getting back to our one year opportunity to relentlessly make our case;
    There needs to be a second relentless push to empower OEM’s into full electrification of *everything,* because to renew prosperity in America, American Ingenuity is the only way to go.

    The question that Donald needs to ask sternly of all American OEM’s so that they don’t risk asking for less than they need, is;
    “What do you OEM’s really need to do this right, not half-ass, but right?”

    Then make it so.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  2. 2
    Mark Z

    +13

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Mark Z
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (7:42 am)

    If the auto industry wants unified emissions standards in all 50 states, make the California emissions standard for the nation. Clean air for everyone. Sell the US made cars in China to help clean up their air pollution and sell them the required fuel as well. Everyone wins!

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  3. 3
    bro1999

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    bro1999
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (8:08 am)

    If Hillary had won, none of the automakers would have made a single peep about trying to reverse the EPA’s final ruling.

    But Cheeto Jesus winning the election changed everything.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  4. 4
    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (8:48 am)

    I have to admit that this one year could make electrification marketing actually go far faster because the high “heat in the kitchen” brings the weight of the huge financial gains “front and center” with renewed “angles of attack” for *proving* these economies.

    These economies could not have been proved at the outset, because something could have gone wrong, which potential GM has thoroughly worked out of these designs over the last ten or so years, so now, the actual reaping of the reliability sustaining credit has finally completed because of these five years of extremely reliable and economic performances.

    These five years of use have proven this, and the general public has completely accepted these reliabilities and efficiencies as strongly and completely standardized.

    From anyone’s perspective, personally saving $250 to $450 dollars a month is something at first they may doubt, but our jobs as contributors ought to be to paraphrase for the many listeners’-perspective ways (especially out there in person) the listener gradually understands these very powerful economic benefits.

    When I was finishing up my US Air Force (Security Service) tour of duty, (technology counter-intelligence investigations) there was a suggestion I had that wasn’t being understood as beneficial.
    So, I designed a positive attributes matrix, where, in understanding that there may be five different perspective points of view to dismiss any good idea, what I did was this;

    I defined five main powerful positive attributes of the idea,

    Then, I paraphrased each of those five different ways in anticipation of potential dismissal by the five different perspective points-of-view.

    Then, I took the resulting 25 exponentially-expanded “advantages” and went down the alphabet for reasons “A.” Through “Y”. “Z” wasn’t used, so that the last letter would be used for the readers’ reason. So, the reader would “have the last word.”

    After I had gotten out of the service, I was “chased down” to be given a check for the suggestion, because the squadron I was assigned to used the idea, and paid me the suggestion award.
    Two months later, I was chased down again to be awarded another check for the same submission because the idea was utilized US Air Force-wide.

    Lesson;
    Be relentless in the number of ways you can explain any good idea, and situations will present themselves where any perspective will have a more than willing ear.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  5. 5
    MnVikes

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MnVikes
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (8:50 am)

    Unfortunately President Trump is learning that the Swamp is much larger and deeper rooted than he could ever imagine.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  6. 6
    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College

    -7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (9:08 am)

    The biggest message which ought to be understood with Donald, is, [(and may the reader excuse the directness)],

    “CUT THE SHIT!”

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  7. 7
    MotoBCT

    +6

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MotoBCT
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (9:32 am)

    MnVikes:
    Unfortunately President Trump is learning that the Swamp is much larger and deeper rooted than he could ever imagine.

    Our President sold himself as a strong negotiator to the American public. In his book ‘The Art of the Deal’ he spoke about his negotiating skills and how he amassed wealth and power.

    The President was hired to do a job and he will have four years to demonstrate his ACTUAL skills and strategy (as have the other presidents that preceded him). If he does not have the discipline, knowledge, or willingness to study these critical subjects (emission standards, etc.), he should make a hard decision and do what is best for the country. Sometimes people determine they misjudged a new role and it is not a good fit for their temperament.

    No matter who voted or did not vote for President Trump, I hope everyone can objectively watch his performance and be prepared to answer the question ‘ Are we as a nation better off today than we were four years ago?’ when his 4-year term ends.

    The ‘brand’ USA has taken a bruising in the global marketplace over the past six months and I hope this will not permanently affect how Americans are perceived (for the worse) globally.

    https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/2864336/people-are-less-interested-in-visiting-the-us-since-trumps-inauguration/

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  8. 8
    Taser54

    -2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Taser54
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (11:17 am)

    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College,

    3 posts out of 7? Perhaps you need to dial it back.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  9. 9
    DonC

    +4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (11:30 am)

    Revoking the CARB waiver would not only be unprecedented, it would be a total loser. There is no statutory basis for revoking the CARB waiver. Without administrative authority it would need Congress to act, which in turn would require 60 votes in the Senate. Given that the Trumpettes can’t get 50 votes in the Senate on healthcare, much less tax reform or anything else for that matter, 60 votes on something like this is obviously out of reach.

    In fact reopening the technical assessment will be a legal loser. Trump is a not a very bright disorganized mess, and he’s surrounded himself with ideologues. The injunctions on the immigration ban, which is really an area where Trump has his best chance of legal success, are just a foreshadowing of how revisiting the EPA rules will work out.

    MnVikes:
    Unfortunately President Trump is learning that the Swamp is much larger and deeper rooted than he could ever imagine.

    Seems like Trump is the most corrupt president we’ve seen in more than a hundred years. Not sure what swamp he intends to drain.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  10. 10
    HVACman

    +11

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    HVACman
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (11:34 am)

    Reducing EPA emissions/CAFE mpg standards goes counter to Trump’s other major energy policy: An America-First Energy Plan.

    Here is the introductory paragraph from that plan, right from whitehouse.gov:

    “Energy is an essential part of American life and a staple of the world economy. The Trump Administration is committed to energy policies that lower costs for hardworking Americans and maximize the use of American resources, freeing us from dependence on foreign oil.”

    With Trump, on this very first paragraph of his policy, I believe we all completely agree.

    Improved vehicle mpg and electrification of the US domestic vehicle fleet are EXACTLY in-line with the stated Trump energy policy above. What lower-cost energy for driving is there for hard-working Americans than electricity? What energy source is a more domestic resource than electricity? What better way to free us from dependence on foreign oil than to STOP BURNING IT?

    https://www.whitehouse.gov/america-first-energy

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  11. 11
    MnVikes

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MnVikes
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (11:38 am)

    DonC:

    Seems like Trump is the most corrupt president we’ve seen in more than a hundred years. Not sure what swamp he intends to drain.

    I’ll just say that I respectfully disagree with you and leave it at that. 😎

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  12. 12
    Streetlight

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Streetlight
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (12:30 pm)

    Let’s see…surely we all marvel at how accurate weather reports are. If you’re in the 60’s or older surely either you or someone you know has stories of how lucky to be able to recovery from a serious medical issue. Or simply you marvel at a hybrids SI-ICE’s efficiency’s approaching diesel’s ~40%.

    What these marvels have in common…the R&D behind all this are instruments developed by exactly the same test equipment and high-level software. That is, we benefit and indeed expect accurate weather, medicine & industry advances. And these are the same instruments collecting the data showing our progress on pollution.

    So here’s T’s administration without an iota of evidence these data are in error, but still claim these data were either collected in error or analyzed in error. Bypassing the work of thousands of technicians over 50 years.

    California wins—hands down.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  13. 13
    MotoBCT

    +7

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MotoBCT
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (12:42 pm)

    Streetlight,

    Something has happened to our society (backlash, brainwashing, ????) where many discount the work and effort of highly trained and educated professionals over someone who simply has an opinion. What has changed?

    What is even more disturbing is very few collectively call this out as problematic and reject uneducated opinion over educated (demonstrated) knowledge. The only thing I can surmise is with so many voices talking (blogs, cable, radio), people have lost the ability to discern who has the authority to speak on topics and when others should defer.

    This does not bode well for the future

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  14. 14
    solo

    -4

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    solo
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (12:53 pm)

    Frankly I’m glad the government put a halt on these new regulations.
    For anybody to say these regulations save the consumer money in the long run is juggling numbers to suit their ideology.

    The added complexity of cars due to these government regulations is pushing the cost of buying and maintaining a car through the roof. Look how many cars are leased today because nobody can afford to buy one. When I was young, a 3 year loan was standard and a 4 year loan raised eyebrows (people would say you are buying something you can’t afford). Today, a 5 or 6 year loan is quite common.

    As far as green house gasses go, frankly I don’t believe the ‘scientific community’ when they say it’s all man made. 1: They get paid by left leaning governments around the world to do these studies and those governments expect a specific answer for their money. 2: These are the EXACT same scientists who told me the world was cooling back in the 1970’s and we were looking at another global ice age in my lifetime. 3: Even if the scientists are correct, there ain’t much we can do about it other than draw straws and 90% of the population has to self-terminate like Arnold in “Terminator 2”. If you could measure all the green house gasses we have saved (fuel we have not burned) with all the fuel economy improvements in the last 4 decades, all the extra home insulation, all the solar panels, etc. I bet the it would be far less than 1%.

    If you really want to save the planet do the following:
    1: Don’t subsidize people’s children through tax incentives, welfare, etc.
    2: Encourage governments to pursue nuclear and nuclear fusion technology.
    3: Don’t buy goods from places like China/India/Mexico, etc., that have NO emissions or green house gas regulations. (Tax their imports to the point where it’s cheaper to build those goods at home).

    Do me 1 more favor, DON”T Tell me electric cars are cheaper to maintain because they don’t have a gas motor. Look at Tesla as an example. Every early Tesla has had it’s ‘power unit’ (Electric motor and reduction gear) replaced under warranty because they all failed due to BAD ENGINEERING. And what about all the other problems that plague cars, electric, electronic, mechanical, brakes, suspension, bearings, steering. Cars break down and need repair. All my cars go to the shop for non maintenance repairs. Of all of the failures I experienced in the last 20 year and at least 35 cars, none have been for an internal engine/transmission breakdown. Maybe I was lucky.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  15. 15
    Kdawg

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Kdawg
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (1:05 pm)

    HVACman: What energy source is a more domestic resource than electricity?

    Speaking of domestic energy, I thought this was a cool tool by Google to let you look at solar for your house. Just type in your address.

    https://www.google.com/get/sunroof#p=0

    Google’s New Tool Says Nearly 80 Percent of Roofs Are Sunny Enough for Solar Panels

    The company’s Project Sunroof lets you look up your house and helps you decide whether to invest in your own clean power plant.

    sunroofimage4.width-1600.jpg?sw=600&cx=86&cy=1&cw=1404&ch=789

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  16. 16
    George S. Bower

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George S. Bower
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (1:18 pm)

    DonC:
    Revoking the CARB waiver would not only be unprecedented, it would be a total loser. There is no statutory basis for revoking the CARB waiver.

    We’ll see DonC.

    I’ll lay money that he will try and we end up in court.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  17. 17
    George S. Bower

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George S. Bower
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (1:28 pm)

    MotoBCT:
    Streetlight,

    This does not bode well for the future

    That’s my feeling as well. The only thing that will start to change peoples minds is another 2-3 deg C of warming.

    Yesterday we were up at our “summer house” in Pine, AZ. This is in the pines at around 5800′. Middle of march and it’s 75 F and we were wearing shorts. We don’t usually move up till May. The place was full of people from Phx driving around on their quads. You would have thought it was Memorial day.

    Yeh, yeh I know it’s just changes in short term weather. It’s been warm this early before.

    Most of the Ice will melt before homo sapiens wakes up and realizes the scientists were right….and the politicians were wrong.

    There is something wrong with a population that takes advise on science from politicians.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  18. 18
    MnVikes

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MnVikes
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (1:37 pm)

    MotoBCT:
    Streetlight,

    Something has happened to our society (backlash, brainwashing, ????)where many discount the work and effort of highly trained and educated professionals over someone who simply has an opinion.What has changed?

    You mean like Jonathan Gruber?
    Or Nancy Pelosi who said we had to pass the bill to find out what’s in it but now has to read every word before she votes?
    Or climate scientists who falsified data?

    Which highly trained and educated liberals am I suppose to bow to?

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  19. 19
    Streetlight

    -2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Streetlight
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (1:42 pm)

    MotoBCT:Streetlight,
    What is even more disturbing is very few collectively call this out as problematic and reject uneducated opinion over educated (demonstrated) knowledge.The only thing I can surmise is with so many voices talking (blogs, cable, radio), people have lost the ability to discern who has the authority to speak on topics and when others should defer. This does not bode well for the future

    Factually a good part of T’s political base distinctly is in chaos. Likewise his & confederates incredibly obvious conflicts-of-interest stonewalling are crumbling. Now whether federal indictments are forthcoming is another issue. T does have a rock-solid 30-35% base that would believe he’s the Second Coming or believed him if he said the Earth was flat.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  20. 20
    MotoBCT

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MotoBCT
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (1:53 pm)

    MnVikes,

    Thanks for sharing your thoughts. I don’t have the luxury to live in an all or nothing world where I discount an entire area of thought / technical knowledge because a few people are not 100% honest.

    Lying is not exclusive to whether one is liberal or not (you know this to be true)

    Dinesh D’Souza indicted for campaign finance fraud
    http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2014/01/dinesh-dsouza-indicted-for-campaign-finance-fraud-181784
    http://images.politico.com/global/2014/01/23/dsouza.html
    http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/anti-obama-christian-scholar-dinesh-dsouza-resigns-affair/story?id=17511042

    Most people judge a person based on the totality of the life and not a single misstep.

    Back to the topic for today…
    We all witnessed the VW TDI scandal and to what lengths a large company will go to not meet established emission standards while their competitors were able to do so.

    A long-term transportation strategy for the US (that is not written by the auto manufacturers) is what is needed for our country and citizens.

    Vehicles stay on the road for much longer because they are better built and generally less prone to breakdowns if routine maintenance occurs. Therefore, we need to ensure emission standards reflect these longer usage periods.

    Today, the discussion is too far skewed to ensuring auto manufacturers can sell 10 million plus cars around the globe each year despite pollution in large city centers world-wide (Paris, London).

    So I stand by what I said and find it sad that people with proven experience / knowledge are challenged by people with an opinion and not much more.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  21. 21
    Kdawg

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Kdawg
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (2:28 pm)

    George S. Bower: That’s my feeling as well. The only thing that will start to change peoples minds is another 2-3 deg C of warming.
    Yesterday we were up at our “summer house” in Pine, AZ. This is in the pines at around 5800′. Middle of march and it’s 75 F and we were wearing shorts. We don’t usually move up till May. The place was full of people from Phx driving around on their quads. You would have thought it was Memorial day.
    Yeh, yeh I know it’s just changes in short term weather. It’s been warm this early before.
    Most of the Ice will melt before homo sapiens wakes up and realizes the scientists were right….and the politicians were wrong.
    There is something wrong with a population that takes advise on science from politicians.

    Essentially…

    fine_zpsue8jdgcw.jpg

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  22. 22
    George S. Bower

    +2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George S. Bower
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (2:42 pm)

    Streetlight: Factually a good part of T’s political base distinctly is in chaos.

    Senate Panel finds no evidence of trump wire tap:
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/senate-intel-committee-leaders-say-they-see-no-indications-trump-tower-was-under-surveillance-1489687160

    Trumps revised travel ban blocked:
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/hawaii-judge-blocks-trumps-revised-travel-ban-1489618057

    Republicans push back on Trumps proposed budget cuts:
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/republicans-push-back-on-some-of-trumps-proposed-budget-cuts-1489684573

    Senate says current house health plan will not pass the senate

    Flynn found to be taking payoff from russian firms:
    https://www.wsj.com/articles/mike-flynn-worked-for-other-russian-companies-besides-rt-documents-1489683618

    Whew boy. The list goes on.

    On the Health plan:
    My wifes private health isurance thru blue cross now costs 840$/month. Trumpcare is predicted to raise that premium. Ouch.

    Fortunately I can afford the 840 …but how many can?

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  23. 23
    George S. Bower

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George S. Bower
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (2:44 pm)

    Kdawg,

    too funny

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  24. 24
    MotoBCT

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MotoBCT
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (2:47 pm)

    George S. Bower,

    How Time Flies – Four More Years Before Date Soylent Green – Did We Jump the Shark?

    Soylent Green Documentary – A Look at the World of Soylent Green
    https://youtu.be/qyizAHAbPII

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  25. 25
    Kdawg

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Kdawg
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (2:55 pm)

    George S. Bower: Whew boy. The list goes on.

    Don’t forget the $30 billion wall.. (smh)

    George S. Bower: On the Health plan:
    My wifes private health isurance thru blue cross now costs 840$/month. Trumpcare is predicted to raise that premium. Ouch

    I liked John Oliver’s bit on Trump Care, worth a watch as he breaks it down (in his usual comedic manner).
    https://youtu.be/Ifi9M7DRazI

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  26. 26
    DonC

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (3:03 pm)

    George S. Bower: Most of the Ice will melt before homo sapiens wakes up and realizes the scientists were right….and the politicians were wrong.

    I think what you meant to say is most Republican politicians were wrong.

    George S. Bower: I’ll lay money that he will try and we end up in court.

    I don’t think they get to that stage because I doubt they’ll make it to the point of the EPA being able to change the CO2 targets. The TAR took two years to put together. To vacate that assessment would require definitive data as to what has changed. And CARB, as the article mentions, is a party of these proceedings with the ability to challenge and introduce evidence of its choosing.

    The CARB waiver would be a very short court case. The Clean Air Act requires that the EPA grant California a waiver if certain conditions obtain. Once granted, there is no statutory authority for revoking the waiver. To have any chance, the EPA would likely first have to engage in rule making which likely wouldn’t work. Then it would have to show that the waiver was incorrectly granted, a task made impossible by both history, the Act itself, and the science.

    Keep in mind that CARB standards rule are in effect in markets where about 45% of vehicles are sold. It was, after all, Massachusetts not California which won the Supreme Court case that directed the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  27. 27
    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College

    -2

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (3:09 pm)

    Hi Taser54 at post 8,

    Here’s my philosophy for my post #6:

    It comes out of one of my degree majors; (Psychology);

    If you treat someone like they are crazy, guess how you will perceive their philosophies as un-improvable?

    But if you leave a door open that allows for someone to fill the need to be open minded, and realize what is in fact, the very best deal for Most Americans by far, then guess what may highly likely happen if your facts are provable on a wide scale for vast numbers of Americans!”?

    This is a parallel to Einstein’s pholosophy that if you see the world as hostile, it will be hostile back.
    If you see the world as essentially not hostile (“facilitating” would be my word), then it will not be hostile back.
    So in constantly re-reinforcing the factual terms of this as “the BEST DEAL” for many concerns packaged neatly, then who is to argue with it except the dishonest and corrupt?

    We have run out of time to not push electrification hard and fast, no matter who is in office. No longer do we have time for lamentations of the election results.

    THERE JUST IS NO MORE TIME LEFT TO ARGUE!

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  28. 28
    bro1999

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    bro1999
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (3:23 pm)

    Kdawg: Don’t forget the $30 billion wall.. (smh)

    I liked John Oliver’s bit on Trump Care, worth a watch as he breaks it down (in his usual comedic manner).
    https://youtu.be/Ifi9M7DRazI

    Colbert got some people together that were experts in their fields as far the components and manpower necessary to build a 2,000 mile long wall.

    They determined it would cost upwards of $2 trillion dollars all said and done. Perhaps it could be built with only $1 trillion if everything went according to plan.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  29. 29
    Sheldon

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Sheldon
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (3:32 pm)

    I don’t think they get to that stage because I doubt they’ll make it to the point of the EPA being able to change the CO2 targets. The TAR took two years to put together. To vacate that assessment would require definitive data as to what has changed. And CARB, as the article mentions, is a party of these proceedings with the ability to challenge and introduce evidence of its choosing.

    The CARB waiver would be a very short court case. The Clean Air Act requires that the EPA … Keep in mind that CARB standards rule are in effect in markets where about 45% of vehicles are sold. It was, after all, Massachusetts not California which won the Supreme Court case that directed the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases.

    Excellent points Don. There is some hope that Scott Pruitt and Donald Trump can’t undo the hardwork done by the EPA… Thanks for all of your posts Don!

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  30. 30
    DonC

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (3:38 pm)

    George S. Bower: Fortunately I can afford the 840 …but how many can?

    One of the ironies is that Trumpcare will take health care away from his supporters. So much for “covering everybody”.

    The main disconnect is between standard Republican policy, which is to advance the interests of the rich, and the Republican base, which is by and large uneducated white people living in rural areas. This works because the base is so delusional that they believe they are getting LESS than their fair share from the government when in fact they are getting MORE. Not very charitable of me, but I’m rooting from Trumpcare to pass. At some point people should bear the consequences of their stupidity.

    You can see why this isn’t going to change from the February jobs report. Trump thinks this was a great report. And it was … for workers over 25 with at least a college degree. That group added 573,000 jobs. For the Trump supporters not so much. All other groups LOST 121,000 jobs. This just continues the trend of job growth for educated non-whites living in urban areas and job losses for uneducated whites living in rural areas. So much for “making America great again”, at least for these folks.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  31. 31
    Loboc

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Loboc
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (3:43 pm)

    Much ado about nothing.

    Trump won’t affect global EV sales no matter what he does (except maybe throw the entire world into a great depression.) The EV cat is outta the bag. I won’t go back even if I need to custom build my next car/truck. And I know a few folks that think like me.

    AFAIK, Trump is for smaller government meaning that State government will have more power not less. California will do what it does and fight in federal court if needed. I doubt it will be needed.

    Healthcare, defense, employment, taxes and immigration are WAY bigger fish to fry than messing around with the EPA. Cut their funding and call it a day.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  32. 32
    DonC

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (3:45 pm)

    Not sure how many noticed, but most of the pictures from the event show Trump in front of a kinetic blue Chevy Volt. So complaining about the CAFE standards while standing in front of a vehicle that obliterates them. So much for the contention the standards are impossible to reach. Perfect metaphor or something else?

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  33. 33
    Kdawg

    +3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Kdawg
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (4:04 pm)

    Dan Petit/Petit Technical College: THERE JUST IS NO MORE TIME LEFT TO ARGUE!

    I disagree. 😛

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  34. 34
    Dan

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dan
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (4:04 pm)

    Edit #27, last line;
    …SINCE IT WILL BE THE EVIRONMENT THAT WILL BE HOSTILE BACK!

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  35. 35
    Kdawg

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Kdawg
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (4:09 pm)

    Loboc: AFAIK, Trump is for

    Who knows? I don’t think Trump knows. I don’t think he even has the capacity for such thoughts. He can barely string a few words together let alone put a strategy together for the country. He would have been better off staying in the entertainment industry, sipping lemonade at Mar-a-Lago w/his model wife, than trying to run the free world.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  36. 36
    MotoBCT

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MotoBCT
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (4:18 pm)

    Kdawg: He would have been better off staying in the entertainment industry, sipping lemonade at Mar-a-Lago w/his model wife, than trying to run the free world.

    That ship has already sailed. A 21st century Gilligan’s Island with our version of Mr. and Mrs. Howell III.

    So many supporters of our president will feel cast adrift when they find out their new health plan will be non-existent or cost more and cover less.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  37. 37
    George S. Bower

    -3

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    George S. Bower
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (4:25 pm)

    DonC: Not very charitable of me, but I’m rooting from Trumpcare to pass. At some point people should bear the consequences of their stupidity.

    Me too. I think they will sink their own ship with Trumpcare.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  38. 38
    Kdawg

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Kdawg
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (5:06 pm)

    DonC: Not sure how many noticed, but most of the pictures from the event show Trump in front of a kinetic blue Chevy Volt.

    This is probably the closest he will ever get to a Chevy Volt. I wonder if Obama ever bought his Volt, like he said he was going to when he got out of office?

    TrumpVolt_zps0buj99bx.jpg

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  39. 39
    Eco_Turbo

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Eco_Turbo
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (5:17 pm)

    If gasoline goes to less than $1.20 or so a gallon during the next year, I guess auto companies will have to start pushing the performance advantages of electric drive. Savings then come in through the back door.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  40. 40
    Eco_Turbo

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Eco_Turbo
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (5:22 pm)

    MotoBCT: So many supporters of our president will feel cast adrift when they find out their new health plan will be non-existent or cost more and cover less.

    I can’t quite figure out how more competition will make prices go up. Seems there’s a lot of Kool-Aide being served out there.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  41. 41
    Dan

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Dan
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (5:30 pm)

    Taser54
    I didn’t mean to specifically address the caps to you, just for an overall emphasis is how I always use them.
    Looks like I got the moderation subroutine a little too excited when that last edit attempt was blocked and I had to add the modification
    separately.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  42. 42
    MotoBCT

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MotoBCT
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (6:06 pm)

    Eco_Turbo,

    Maybe I understood the affordable care act wrong.

    1) In order to get more people to have insurance (who cannot get insurance) those making over approx. $250K were being asked to pay more taxes to fund this effort.
    2) Those with low income would have their insurance subsidized
    3) For many with the cheapest plans, it would serve as a catastrophic plan for major health needs with high deductibles but was better than zero insurance
    4) Pre-existing conditions would be covered
    5) Pharma discounts were not in-play because there was too much push back from the lobbyist and the supporters therefore it was left off the table
    6) The doctors are not crazy about the ACA because this will put constraints on their ability to charge higher rates because the ACA process and marketplace have put caps on many plan costs

    The Trump Plan – As currently understood does not require mandatory insurance therefore those who do not have plans will show up at emergency rooms and pass those costs to society-at-large through higher premiums for all of us

    There is no incentive to curtail risky behavior because folks will just use the emergency room for their health needs and no insurance

    Those making 250K + will stop being taxed more to provide those who don’t have insurance credit so they can be covered.

    The Trump plan (from what I read) does not guarantee insurers will offer low cost affordable plans that will cover preexisting conditions. Because they are not mandated to do so, who / what will require insurers to offer more affordable health plans?

    The Trump plan speaks to competition but I saw nothing that will require pharma to compete that will result in lower costs to consumers

    What have I missed?

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  43. 43
    DonC

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    DonC
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (6:26 pm)

    MotoBCT: What have I missed?

    Under Trumpcare you can sign up for insurance after you get, say cancer. So if you’re healthy you don’t sign up until you’re not. But that drives premiums way up for everyone else.

    Older people would also pay more. Under Obamacare the largest difference between the youngest and oldest covered insured was 3X. Trumpcare raises this to 5X.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  44. 44
    MotoBCT

    -1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MotoBCT
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (7:11 pm)

    DonC,

    Thanks

    How hard is it to put this information in front if the American public and let them see who will pay the final price for repealing the ACA?

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  45. 45
    Eco_Turbo

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    Eco_Turbo
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (7:48 pm)

    What’s happening in healthcare has been known about for decades. When I was in school in the seventies, it was known that after the turn of the century, the population would get to the point that 75% would be either too old or too young to work or be disabled. To me the travesty is why nothing was done about it back then, when it would have been a lot less painful. If I remember correctly, Democrats were in control of almost everything until recently. You can say this, you can say that, but the fact is that the population is getting older and it would be a lot easier to handle if something had been done decades ago. eg: requiring insurance companies to charge an extra $10 a month back then to go to a fund for what’s happening today. I’m not sure who would benefit from a bankrupt government.

      (Quote)  (Reply)


  46. 46
    MotoBCT

    +1

     

    Vote -1 Vote +1

    MotoBCT
     Says

     

    Mar 16th, 2017 (8:18 pm)

    Eco_Turbo,

    When I was in school in the seventies, it was known that around the turn of the century globalization would result in a leveling of standards of living across the globe and the expectation of obtaining a family sustaining job with a HS diploma in the USA was not going to be possible.

    For many Americans who hoped for the best and prayed the worst would not happen are now caught squarely in this global fight for jobs and profits. Many are desperate and afraid and will tie their dreams to anyone who will speak to their plight.

    What is worse is the ability of politicians to not be honest about what the future holds. Just follow the money and you will see who benefits from globalization.

      (Quote)  (Reply)

Leave a Reply