Obama to Let States Restrict Emissions Standards

[Puzzler]

Source: New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Obama on Monday will direct federal regulators to move swiftly to grant California and 13 other states the right to set strict automobile emissions and fuel efficiency standards, two administration officials said Sunday evening.

The directive makes good on an Obama campaign pledge and marks a sharp reversal from Bush administration policy. Granting California and the other states the right to regulate tailpipe emissions is one of the most dramatic actions Mr. Obama can take to quickly put his stamp on environmental policy.

The presidential orders will require automobile manufacturers to begin producing and selling cars and trucks that get higher mileage than the national standard, and on a faster phase-in schedule. The auto companies had lobbied hard against the regulations and challenged them in court.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/26/us/politics/26calif.html?_r=1&hp

[Thrill]

1. He's trying to hit all his promises early

[apnu]

26. Yeah, he knows that he'll get bogged down soon.

Like all Presidents do. The time to strike with change is in the beginning, just after an election. Once the people and government settle into a routine, stagnation follows. Its the way of government -- all government in all times.

[AlinPA]

2. Yes. Great move.

[Lionel Mandrake]

15. Those of us in the LA area can breathe easier -

eventually, that is.

Hooray for President Obama!

[madville]

3. We really need one standard

This will just give car companies another excuse to raise prices. They will be complaining about having to setup cars and do R&D for 14 different sets(13 different state standards, one federal standard) of emissions standards. Just have one strict federal standard and be done with it, just like the states shouldn't mandate the oil companies make a unique recipe of unleaded gas for their state, just have a strict national standard and make it more simple.

Why does government always have to make things so damn complicated and inefficient?

[ProgressiveProfessor]

6. The anarchist me wants to see some good sized car company drop CA as a market

When the dominoes fall on that, be interesting to see where things line up. It already happens for some options and with some motorcycles.

[cosmicone]

8. Won't happen

California is a very big market. Besides, who would want a car that cannot be moved to California if the eventuality arises?

The other way is more plausible. The automakers will be forced to build cars that are legal in 50 states.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

12. I know. There were 49 state vehicles and motorcycles. Importing them to CA was painful

However, it could be done.

We do need on national standard, and I don't think urban California is the right driver for it. I now live *outside* of the SoCal Air Management district but can not avoid its hegemony. I see no reason that the rest of this nation should have to as well

[david13]

19. NOT

if the standards are lower.
For years there have been 2 standards, 49 state cars, and California cars, which have a HIGHER standard.
The truth is that is exactly how it is now. You cannot bring in an out of state car.
dc

[depakid]

9. No company is in a position to drop one of the largest car dependent markets in the world

[cosmicone]

7. They are in no position to raise prices. n/t

[JBear]

13. It is more than complaining about it...

Keep in mind that the emissions standards we are currently playing to are extremely strict. Having a two tiered system really does cost a LOT of money to sell to. One of the reasons we have not seen the influx of diesels here is because of the higher restrictions CARB states have placed on them.

I would like to go one step further and call for unification of our standards with Europe's standards. That makes it MUCH more likely that we will see a focus on efficiency. Imagine being able to design to the two largest car markets in the world with ONE emissions standard. BIG COST REDUCTION!!!

:bounce:

[usregimechange]

17. Agreed, but this is somthing he can do now.

[bjobotts]

20. This is big.Yours is not the only state but you can barely breathe now

[bjobotts]

21. No matter what the car companies "charge", the environment demands change

[TommyO]

25. Car manufacturers will design towards the most restrictive standards

They will not produce fourteen different vehicles to meet Federal and then individual state requirements.

[Politicalboi]

4. We need alternative fuel

I'm tired of hearing about MPG or cleaner air when we can start using another fuel instead. When are we gonna start this? To do this is just going to be more taxes for fuel that still pollutes the air.

[Captain Hilts]

5. Yaay! A win for California. Does the ruling cover British Columbia?

JUST kidding!!

[cosmicone]

10. Yes

it also covers Gotham city, Metropolis, Liliput, Brobdingnag, Wonderland and Atlantis!

[zogtheobvious]

14. You forgot Caprica City.

:)

[Best_man23]

24. What about Sagitara?

[zogtheobvious]

27. The only thing worse...

The only thing worse than a Cylon is a Sagittaron.

:rant:



;)

[eggplant]

11. Seen the Subaru PZEVs?

If I was willing to buy new, these look really interesting. $100 added to the sticker, 90% less crap out the tailpipe, identical performance.

Alas, stick shock being what it is, I'll have to wait a few years to get one. We're currently contemplating updating one of our '98s to an '06.

[david13]

16. The problem

with one standard is that it is the LOWEST standard. We have reaped the benefit of having a HIGHER standard here in California and I am glad to see that we will now continue to be able to do so. If some of the wide open and un populated states like Montana or wherever want to have a lower standard, ok, I guess, but here in Los Angeles we need the higher standard.
To see the proof, compare Los Angeles to Mexico City.
Do that one month each and you will only want HIGHER standards.
dc

[babylonsister]

18. I love the frame. Share the weight of this. nt

[droidamus2]

22. Good idea

Of course the auto companies will bitch about having to make cars to different standards but at closer inspection that argument does not standup. Yes the cars might cost a little more but all they have to do is make cars that meet the strictest standards (California?). The problem with the single federal standard is that when you get an administration in place i.e. Bush that does not support cleaner, higher mileage cars as a goal then they just have to lower the one standard to allow their friends in the auto industry to make 'dirtier' cars and trucks. Another point is if the auto industry would seek to exceed all established standards as a matter of policy then would we really need the standards in the first place. Like other pollution legislation and laws these standards come to be because the industry being regulated has shown in the past that having a cleaner product and industry is not high on their priority list if it means cutting into their profits.

[polichick]

23. Oh boy - I'm doing another happy dance!

[Belial]

28. This is awesome.. Imagine a car company making 50

different engines for each state.. Gee.. Wonder what that will do to the cost of cars?

[sutz12]

29. BS...

You make one car that meets the most stringent standard and you sell it everywhere.

Gawd, the idiotic RW talking points you hear. :shrug: