Why not make CAFE match California's EPA waiver?
Deny California's waiver, but...Yesterday, I heard a number of critics go off on President Obama's decision to have the EPA revisit California's waiver to regulate vehicle emissions because it would create too many different standards.
What a crock. As of today it would create 2 standards.
Basically, if California moves forward with its plan, there are a number of other states ready to comply with California's waiver. It's not as if 17 different states are coming up with 17 different standards.
Nonetheless, why even argue? Why not just rewrite CAFE standards to match California's plans?
Thus, instead of 31.6 miles by 2016, make it 35.7. And, instead of 35 mpg by 2020, make it 42.5. Problem solved.
The technology to achieve these standards exists today. Hybrid cars are proving that. More important, a serious focus on hybrids means a serious focus on battery technology - the battery technology of the future - NOW. Since every automaker claims that the battery is the future of the automobile, isn't embracing battery technology as soon as possible the key to future success?
Squeezing as much profit out of guzzlers for as long as possible while slowly toying with battery technology only guarantees that US auto industry has no future.
Labels: CAFE, epa, Hybrid Vehicles
posted by Dahcredyns at
10:12 AM
13 Comments:
This was my first thought also! Just adopt the CA standard as the federal standard.It is time that we stop acting like the car companies can't move quick enough to enact these tougher standards. We voted for change so lets make the change!
Not only that, the US auto industry and its suppliers are now terribly behind in the battery market. We need to create a huge market in America for batteries if we hope to create a successful battery manufacturing sector in the US. And I just don't think we can make that happen fast enough.
Nah, let California have its standard and let the Fed keep theirs. In the short term, that will force all the hybrid cars (AND Volts!) to be sold in CA, which means better availability for us!!
Getting selfish now are we, alcatholic?
Oh, did I forget my smiley?!
:)
But I must admit, I am starting to think about how best to score a Volt.
Of course, if I can't get a Volt, I expect used Prius prices to crash when the Volt goes on sale. So, I hope to be good, either way.
California's EPA waiver could make used Prii pretty valuable. And, since the Volt is coming out in such small numbers the first few years, I doubt the Volt will put much downward pricing pressure on other hybrids.
At some point, I also think that the after sale plug-in conversion market could be a sweet spot for used Prii as well, although that's probably still several years away.
I thought the EPA waiver is a car PRODUCTION mandate, not a personal pollution mandate. Meaning new car sales need to meet new standards, and no significant pressure on individuals to purchase hybrids to meet the standard. Rather pressure on the industry to sell them.
Well, California consumers will only be able to buy cars that meet California's standards. Other cars will not be legal to buy, sell or be licensed in California. So, if you're selling an old gas-guzzler, you'll have to sell it outside of California, for instance.
Hmm, that's not how I understand it. I better read up on it.
that's how Phil Lebeau of CNBC described the situation the other day while reporting on this topic.
he claimed that if you're going to buy a new car and you have an old SUV you want to get rid off, you'd have to sell it in Nevada, for instance.
it's been quite a while since i read the legislation so i can't guarantee that's true.
plus, you might already have government buy back problems for such vehicles - something already being considered that would help Californians.
What a stupid socialist idea.... forcing the automakers to build cars based on what the whiz-kid environmentalists and politicains want. Since environmentalists and politicians are SO good at making sustainable companies that can stand up on their own. I have an idea, instead of jumping on the "Detroit is the bad guy" bandwagon and screwing over the Big3 (and Toyota/Nissa/Mercedes/BMW/Audi/Ferarri/Maserati/Hyundai), why don't we just tax gas to a reasonable level. A $1 a gallon tax is MORE than fair. We have all these "green" and infrastructure projects that need to be paid for. Not only is ia great source of revenue, it makes Americans DEMAND certain vehicles from automakers instead of dumbass eco-whackjobs getting stupid legislation to force automakers to build crap that no one wants at a huge loss. Screw california, who the hell put those idiots in charge of running shotgun over the whole country? Here's an idea, they should give up CARB to the EPA and save a few billion a year and stop asking for a bailout.
we're for a gas tax and agree that it would be easier. still, without a gas tax, then CAFE is needed.
as for california, well, it's the world's 8th largest economy and probably the most important auto market in the world. it's also terribly polluted thanks to gas guzzlers.
Post a Comment
<< Home