Israel Hamas War the Widening Middle East Conflict

[rooster59]

California sets vehicle pollution rules in rebuke to Trump

By Peter Henderson

 

FILE PHOTO - A smog testing facility sign is shown marking a garage as a certified testing station for vehicles in Encinitas, California September 23, 2015. REUTERS/Mike Blake/File Photo

 

RIVERSIDE, Calif. (Reuters) - California on Friday approved vehicle pollution targets that the Trump administration last week put on hold, setting up a potential face-off between federal and state regulators that could be expensive for automakers and a headache for consumers.

 

California Air Resources Board members criticized the auto industry for asking federal regulators to reconsider vehicle emissions targets for 2022-2025. The board then in a unanimous vote finalized the vehicle pollution rules for the state, set a mandate for zero-emission sales over the same time period, and ordered its staff to start work on targets for after 2025.

 

Board Chair Mary Nichols invited the auto industry to suggest implementation changes that would not undermine the program's goals. She also questioned the automakers' intent in asking for federal intervention if they did not want to undermine California's authority.

 

"What were you thinking when you threw yourself on the mercy of the Trump administration to try to solve your problems?" she said.

 

California has a long reputation as an environmental leader, and state officials say they will lead the defense of that and other liberal issues against President Donald Trump. The state is allowed to set its own air quality rules, with federal approval, and about a dozen other states follow its lead in whole or part.

 

A two-track emissions regulatory system would leave consumers with potentially higher prices and could complicate their ability to move cars between states.

 

Board member Hector De La Torre compared a potential split between federal and state regulators to a divorce. "If a divorce is going to happen at some point, we are going to litigate that divorce strongly," he said.

 

A White House official, anticipating the California vote, told Reuters the Trump administration was committed to protecting jobs and providing consumers with affordable cars.

 

“We are disappointed that California has chosen to refuse our good-faith offer to work together with all relevant stakeholders on this important matter,” the person said.

 

California regulators said they would cooperate with federal regulators who are reviewing the federal tailpipe emissions standards. John Bozzella, president and chief executive of the Global Automakers industry alliance, focused on the potential for cooperation, rather than the Board's criticism.

 

"I think we are where we want to be, which is working together," he said. "We're committed to a national program."

 

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-03-25

 

 

[mamypoko]

Sic'em Jerry 

[Traveler19491]

I do find it interesting that the conservative ideologues are all about "states' rights"...right up to the point where those same states' rights interfere with what they want to restrict, like who you can marry, where you can pee, what you can do with your own body, what you put into your body (like what you are forced to breathe, what you eat, what medications you take, what herbs you are allowed to consume)...then those fabled states' rights magically vaporize. Odd.

[Grubster]

I dont really see how this effects jobs as I would assume that all cars from any country would have to live up to these standards. If anything it would create new jobs. Equal tariffs yes, I'm all for that.

[whatawonderfulday]

Looks to me like California moving forward and Trump wanting to go backwards, irrespective of the pollution and consequential electorate health risks which Trump appears to disregard.

[elgordo38]

7 hours ago, rooster59 said:

"What were you thinking when you threw yourself on the mercy of the Trump administration to try to solve your problems?" she said.

 

They got a listening ear I am afraid. Methinks California just does not feel the "love" for the Donald that is felt elsewhere. Like article 44 here Trump will find a "club" to bring you into line. 

[elgordo38]

7 hours ago, rooster59 said:

Board Chair Mary Nichols invited the auto industry to suggest implementation changes that would not undermine the program's goals.

Sorry this idea is redundant now we have the ear of the Donald. 

[elgordo38]

7 hours ago, rooster59 said:

“We are disappointed that California has chosen to refuse our good-faith offer to work together with all relevant stakeholders on this important matter,” the person said.

Sorry disagree only one clear winner here the car makers. Good faith offer what a joke. There are no "relevant stakeholders" they just want to drive a stake into your heart. 

[Ramen087]

This isn't that unusual. For years the CARB had a different set of rules regarding emissions of autos etc.  You could see it in adverts where a car would be termed as 'for sales in 49 states'. There wood be a slightly higher price in CA due to a catalytic converter fee.  If you bought your car outside CA a retrofit wasn't difficult so you could meet the annual smog check requirement. Is this all that different?

 

Ps.  CARB = California Air Resources Board...

[Grouse]

I hear Trump wants to have coal fired cars.....

[impulse]

3 hours ago, Ramen087 said:

This isn't that unusual. For years the CARB had a different set of rules regarding emissions of autos etc.  You could see it in adverts where a car would be termed as 'for sales in 49 states'. There wood be a slightly higher price in CA due to a catalytic converter fee.  If you bought your car outside CA a retrofit wasn't difficult so you could meet the annual smog check requirement. Is this all that different?

 

Ps.  CARB = California Air Resources Board...

 

When I moved to California, I brought 2 cars with me.  One was a Suburban I had bought at government auction and it was labeled California compliant.  The other was Taurus I bought from my company (had been my company car) and it wasn't California compliant.

 

Getting the Taurus registered in California cost an arm and a leg, while the Suburban wasn't painful at all.  In spite of the fact that the Taurus got twice the mileage that the Suburban did.

[Ramen087]

2 hours ago, impulse said:

 

When I moved to California, I brought 2 cars with me.  One was a Suburban I had bought at government auction and it was labeled California compliant.  The other was Taurus I bought from my company (had been my company car) and it wasn't California compliant.

 

Getting the Taurus registered in California cost an arm and a leg, while the Suburban wasn't painful at all.  In spite of the fact that the Taurus got twice the mileage that the Suburban did.

Smog checks and annual registration fees are two distinct things. With relatively few tolls roads CA chooses to charge a higher annual registration fee (newer more expensive cars have higher fees) than many other states to aid upkeep of roads, with fuel taxes being the other major instate source of revenue. Smog checks are all about emissions, and have a standard relatively low price. You have to pass smog check to keep your registration current though.

[impulse]

15 minutes ago, Ramen087 said:

Smog checks and annual registration fees are two distinct things. With relatively few tolls roads CA chooses to charge a higher annual registration fee (newer more expensive cars have higher fees) than many other states to aid upkeep of roads, with fuel taxes being the other major instate source of revenue. Smog checks are all about emissions, and have a standard relatively low price. You have to pass smog check to keep your registration current though.

 It's been 20 years, so I don't recall the exact fee category.  I just remember the guy opening the hood on my Suburban and then of my Taurus, and then paying a buttload of money to get the Taurus registered and not so much for the Suburban- because the Suburban had a CA compliant sticker.  After that initial hit, they both cost about the same each year.  

 

They both passed emission testing with flying colors.  But that Suburban rarely passed a gas station without stopping in.  I loved it for skiing, camping and pulling a boat though.  Being an ex-government vehicle, it was one of very few 4 speed manual 4WD 1993 Suburbans on the road.  Also made it super easy to sell it on.

 

Edited March 25, 2017 by impulse