Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thanks for the reasoned response. The infrastructure would be a daunting task, but I guess anything is possible. It all depends on battery technology. With modern engine management, and particulate control, I just don't see the need for electric cars. Much of that electricity is generated by coal.
Nationwide, coal accounts for about 30% of electric generation. My guess is that recharging stations are going to heavily invest in solar panel arrays.
The auto industry does not support this move. It is little more than pandering to the ignorant of the country. Current standards were hammered out by all the stakeholders involved (not ordered out of the blue by Obama). They set out a blueprint and a certainty for industry that went all the way to 2025. By getting rid of them, especially with a likely illegal temporary order, is simply introducing a chaotic regulatory environment that makes planning and product development a nightmare for manufacturers. A whipsaw regulatory environment is to no one's advantage.
Link please.
It's good to finally see some common sense coming out of DC. The 54 mpg standard just wasn't close to being achievable in just 7 years. Of all the stupidity to come out of the Obama administration, this was perhaps the dumbest. Go back to the early 70s-EPA and shortly after CAFE standards were initiated, while the technology didn't exist to support them. We ended up with crap cars with bandaids and yards of vacuum tubing, valves and compressors to try to meet the emission standards. The result was utterly gutless cars that got terrible fuel economy. It took 30 years for the technology to get to the point that it could meet the emission standards-along with pound after pound of weight and crap added on for safety equipment. Still our cars until the last few years got little better fuel economy of the cars of the 80s.
If you want to see fuel economy go up-adjust the EPA regs that are aimed at killing diesel engines-as Europe does. Diesel is an inherently more efficient engine-yet the EPA has taken aim at them and formulates standard aimed at killing diesel. While ignoring the fact that the CO2 emissions of diesels is lower than a gas motor.
"trump needs to stay out of California and let California handle it themselves."
And TAKE ALL THE FED MONEY WITH HIM.
Ca could NOT exist WITHOUT the amount of fed money they get.
Even WITH it they are in BIG financial trouble.
The Federal Government could not exist without the tax money it gets from California. The people of that state pay more federal taxes, than the state receives back. This is true for most blue states, which subsidize the red-state paradise.
It's incredible to me that we think we can control global temperatures. Man is nothing in the grand scheme -- as George Carlin said in a famous comedy routine - one more attempt to control nature....
Here is the entire routine... profanity warning. Don't like it...don't watch.
It's good to finally see some common sense coming out of DC. The 54 mpg standard just wasn't close to being achievable in just 7 years. Of all the stupidity to come out of the Obama administration, this was perhaps the dumbest. Go back to the early 70s-EPA and shortly after CAFE standards were initiated, while the technology didn't exist to support them. We ended up with crap cars with bandaids and yards of vacuum tubing, valves and compressors to try to meet the emission standards. The result was utterly gutless cars that got terrible fuel economy. It took 30 years for the technology to get to the point that it could meet the emission standards-along with pound after pound of weight and crap added on for safety equipment. Still our cars until the last few years got little better fuel economy of the cars of the 80s.
If you want to see fuel economy go up-adjust the EPA regs that are aimed at killing diesel engines-as Europe does. Diesel is an inherently more efficient engine-yet the EPA has taken aim at them and formulates standard aimed at killing diesel. While ignoring the fact that the CO2 emissions of diesels is lower than a gas motor.
We had no interest in more efficient cars evidently Europe had the technology, we did next to nothing back in the 1970’s while Japan passed us in every respect. How does creating more CO2 equate to common sense and what was the problem Pruitt is looking to solve. We never did anything to increase standards from the 1980’s until recently, it wasn’t a technology problem.
Last edited by Goodnight; 03-31-2018 at 05:45 PM..
EPA poised to scrap fuel economy targets that are key to curbing global warming
Pruitt is looking at relaxing the California inspired mpg mandates for auto manufacturers. This is driving up the cost of vehicles at an enormous rate, and following California’s lead on anything for the rest of the country doesn’t seem very smart.
Oh, yeah, right. After all, the cost of vehicles - especially in a society where people like to constantly buy new ones, never keeping them until they wear out - is a far more important factor than public health and safety.
We had no interest in more efficient cars evidently Europe had the technology, we did next to nothing back in the 1970’s while Japan passed us in every respect. How does creating more CO2 equate to common sense and what was the problem Pruitt is looking to solve. We never did anything to increase standards from the 1980’s until recently, it wasn’t a technology problem.
First, Japanese cars are nothing special, these days. In fact they tend to be pretty bland (perhaps excepting Mazda and Nissan) and are no better than domestics from a fuel efficiency or quality standpoint. In the 80s we were still suffering from the emissions controls added to meet the mandates from the 70s. Again, it took another decade before the electronic controls and fuel injection systems were up to snuff to handle those demands. And again-if we were concerned with CO2, we would be promoting diesel engines which produce less CO2 than gas motors. Instead we have an EPA that writes standards aimed at killing diesel. I hope the Trump admin will correct that.
We had no interest in more efficient cars evidently Europe had the technology, we did next to nothing back in the 1970’s while Japan passed us in every respect. How does creating more CO2 equate to common sense and what was the problem Pruitt is looking to solve. We never did anything to increase standards from the 1980’s until recently, it wasn’t a technology problem.
First, Japanese cars are nothing special, these days. In fact they tend to be pretty bland (perhaps excepting Mazda and Nissan) and are no better than domestics from a fuel efficiency or quality standpoint. In the 80s we were still suffering from the emissions controls added to meet the mandates from the 70s. Again, it took another decade before the electronic controls and fuel injection systems were up to snuff to handle those demands. And again-if we were concerned with CO2, we would be promoting diesel engines which produce less CO2 than gas motors. Instead we have an EPA that writes standards aimed at killing diesel. I hope the Trump admin will correct that.
As far as gas engines-we don't need CAFE standards telling us what vehicle to drive. Those that want a small, lower performing vehicle that has great fuel economy and meets their needs, especially for a single driver, fine. Families or people with the need to move larger items regularly, or those that need to drive in snow should be able to buy the vehicle that meets their needs. The government has no business setting these standards, let alone standards that we don't have the technology to meet. We already mandate thousands of dollars and hundreds of pounds of extra "stuff" just to meet our safety standards.
First, Japanese cars are nothing special, these days. In fact they tend to be pretty bland (perhaps excepting Mazda and Nissan) and are no better than domestics from a fuel efficiency or quality standpoint. In the 80s we were still suffering from the emissions controls added to meet the mandates from the 70s. Again, it took another decade before the electronic controls and fuel injection systems were up to snuff to handle those demands. And again-if we were concerned with CO2, we would be promoting diesel engines which produce less CO2 than gas motors. Instead we have an EPA that writes standards aimed at killing diesel. I hope the Trump admin will correct that.
As far as gas engines-we don't need CAFE standards telling us what vehicle to drive. Those that want a small, lower performing vehicle that has great fuel economy and meets their needs, especially for a single driver, fine. Families or people with the need to move larger items regularly, or those that need to drive in snow should be able to buy the vehicle that meets their needs. The government has no business setting these standards, let alone standards that we don't have the technology to meet. We already mandate thousands of dollars and hundreds of pounds of extra "stuff" just to meet our safety standards.
The problems in the 70’s and 80’s had nothing to do with CAFE, we built inefficient cars that were inferior. No one is prevented from purchasing a larger vehicle.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"The sky is falling! The sky is falling!"
