http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/ Autoblog Comments for EPA officially defends denial of CA request to regulate emissions http://www.autoblog.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.autoblog.com en-us Copyright 2008 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/Mar 4th 2008 2:03PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/
There seems to be a huge amount of confusion here.

Again.

California (and no other states) has historically been granted the right to petition for a waiver because A) it had already started regulating emissions before the federal government ever decided to step into the ring, and B) it was able to demonstrate that due to its size and extreme amount of pollution, the need for regulations was imperative. Once the EPA started regulating emissions, California's laws were grandfathered in and, in addition, it was given the right to continue to regulate its own emissions assuming a waiver is granted by the EPA. The dispute here is not whether California has the right to regulate its own emissions, but whether this particular request for a waiver was denied for political reasons or for a valid reason.

Now... pay attention here. Other states have the right to EITHER ADOPT CALIFORNIA'S STANDARDS OR THE NATIONAL STANDARDS. They DO NOT have the right to develop their own standards. Therefore, the argument that I see over and over and over that 50 different regulations are too burdensome for the auto manufacturers does not apply. There would be, at most, two standards (in addition to the standards that they already successfully meet in every other international market).]]>Mar 4th 2008 4:25PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/Mar 4th 2008 6:01PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/If you haven't lived in a big city you probably wouldn't understand...local pollution by cars can be a huge problem and it mostly affects the local population, lingering for quite a while. Just look at some of the pictures of beijing today and you can see how horrible the smog is from the cars/mopeds and it's mostly local (I've been there and on bad days the sky has a hazy light brown fog and the air feels very stuffy). By the time it reaches other states, the pollution would scatter and spread out. There's the argument right now that CA is much better now and doesn't need the waiver. In that past this was definitely not true, esp if you look at LA.]]>Mar 4th 2008 7:41PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/Mar 5th 2008 1:53AMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/Mar 4th 2008 2:07PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/Mar 4th 2008 2:12PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/if CA really wanted emissions levels lower, the residents would quit buying hummers, Benzes, Ferraris, Porsches, and all would buy Priuses, Yarises,...

Since they dont, its obvious that there are only a few who want it.

OR, nothing has been set that says CA cannot charge the public a usage tax based on their emmissions test; it records pollutants issued by the vehicle and recording mileage is part of it as well. This will drive home their point also. If the people dont buy the big bad nasty cars, then the mftrs wont sell them there, or will learn to offer more frugal engine choices.

and btw: mpg does not have a direct correlation to emissions. they are related but a 10% increase in mpg does not necessarily reduce emissions by 10%.

so my question is : Does CA know what the heck it is doing? dont think so...]]>Mar 4th 2008 2:28PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/
So? The commerce clause exists for a reason. If California and their fans don't like it, then try and secede.]]>Mar 4th 2008 3:07PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/
Two standards. Two. Not fifty. Got it? Ok.

Sheesh.]]>Mar 4th 2008 4:40PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/But I agree, its a load of hooey.


It sounds like Calif. AG Jerry Brown has Seinfeld's Jackie Chiles on staff./
]]>Mar 4th 2008 2:09PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/Mar 4th 2008 2:10PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/Mar 4th 2008 2:19PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/Mar 4th 2008 2:37PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/
We have more cars and more licensed drivers in a higher density than most other states in the Union. Therefore we'd like to stay ahead of the growth in automobile traffic and make sure we can all breathe.

For all of you who pooh-pooh air quality, get photos of what the Silicon Valley skyline looked like in the 1970's vs now.

The gains are real.
]]>Mar 4th 2008 3:54PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/
They are so far gone, there is no getting them back. They are the reason we call it the "Left Coast"]]>Mar 4th 2008 4:17PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/
If California secedes, the single largest revenue generator in the entire US, as well as the largest innovation hotbed, goes away. If New York joins them, the US goes from "economic superpower" to "less significant than Mexico" really fast.

The US needs California. The reverse isn't particularly true.]]>Mar 4th 2008 4:26PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/
Sheesh...get an education.]]>Mar 4th 2008 4:41PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/
Your BBQ possum is burning. Best you go tend to that.]]>Mar 4th 2008 4:50PMhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/http://www.autoblog.com/2008/03/04/epa-officially-defends-denial-of-ca-request-to-regulate-emission/Mar 4th 2008 5:22PM