Featured EPA Chief Pruitt pushes back CARB

this will make a lot of americans happy.

i haven't tallied the numbers, but did read that new car sales started slacking off awhile back.

 

People aren’t buying cars new or used,
They are buying trucks and minivan like vehicles

 

Yea Cailifornia, boo Pruit.

 

Watch not what they say, watch what they do.

 

At one time back in the 1980s, there was a difference between California rated and other cars. CARB vs non-CARB works for me. If ca manufacturers don't want to sell in CARB states, their problem. . . .

Hummmm, CARB states could impose a pollution tax on non-compliant cars . . . nice big State tax. That could fix the roads and balance out the anti-EV taxes from the dumb states.

Bob Wilson

 

Sales of “new privately owned vehicles” have been going down compared to population for 2 decades due to
1. Reliability

2. Style - all recentish “cars” look the same

3. Mode income stagnation- the average income has been increasing due to an exceedingly small portion of the population, in many areas most people don’t earn much more than they did 2 decades ago, Wisconsin and other states are in this boat

 

Can't we boo both of them ;=) Pruit, tool of the oil industry, and Carb for making rules that make new cars unnecessarily expensive.

Well its worse than that, under some extra waivers now DOE, EPA, and CARB all try to set fuel economy standards. The 3 agencies have somehow gotten criptic rules where real world economy is not all that important. We have the IIHS working to give an advantage to larger less efficient cars, and car manufacturers that have carved that out.

Why have a system that relies on the 2-cycle test plus extra incentives for some special technologies like hydrogen? Why did bigger vehicles get segmented to be able to burn a lot more fuel, so shift in mix (which happened in the '90s and is happening again) means the fleet average real world fuel economy goes up more than the measures? Why does carb insist that they get to put their politics in the game, and wants rules based on bad assumptions from the 1990s.

IMHO the 2025 cafe rules should be tweaked. Restate them on the 5 cycle test, and make sure vehicles actually improve on today's test. Get rid of some of the bad ideas in the bonus system, and lower the improvements so real world improvements will work.

Really no reason to be basing most of today's fuel economy for the fleet on how people drove in pre-WWII LA. Current 5 cycle EPA should be improved on as it still has some large systemic errors, but at least use that. I would actually like to see more improvement in real world fuel economy than current rules, but that won't happen with all the politics.

 

The auto manufacturers don't want to go back to that, and are pushing to keep CARB and the EPA close, if not the same.

 

I've lived in California for nearly 62 years. Thanks to CARB rules, the overwhelming smog, burning eyes, choking air we had during the '60s, was substantially reduced, even though we have since gotten vastly more cars on the road. I don't have all the statistics handy; I'm speaking as a person who, up until recently drove 35,000 to 45,000 miles a year in Southern California.
Unfortunately today you have climate change denyers, pro-oil advocates, and Big car companies all trying to shove their agenda down our throats. On top of this, thanks to highly successful marketing campaigns to peddle high profit Jumbo Wagons, a large portion of the American public today is buying these behemoths at record rates. With all this pressure, it's AMAZING that our protections from CARB have survived at all. Driving today, I have once again started to feel the burning eyes, and choking air, some admittedly from our recent giant conflagrations. Everything is trying to mess with our air. This Pruitt monkey (the real description is not family friendly!) is now doing everything in his power to sabotage what progress to environmental protection has been made in the past. Our state and several others choose to protect their citizens, unlike many in the current federal government, from the growing environmental threat. We have a choice, either we clean up ALL motor vehicles, which does cost money, or we stop driving our cars. By the way, my buddies in used car sales say that THEIR business has slowed down too. Keep in mind, for the last 40 years, wages have not kept up with inflation. In 1973, I earned $3.10/hr, working on an assembly line for Max Factor; my new VW cost $1800, my rent was $85/month, a charburger was $0.45, a postage stamp was $0.06, a gallon of Lerner Gas was $0.34, a house in Hawthorne California sold for $34,000, etc., etc. I lived on those wages for over 3 years.
Today, those items are at least 10 times the cost they were then; however, that poor assemblyman working today is NOT making $31.00/hr!
People today just don't have the buying power they used to have.
Since the greed-inspired crash of 2008, some have recovered; though many are now employed, they are earning far less than before thanks to part-time work, self-employment loopholes favoring corporations, etc. They were saving for a while, but now they're maxing out their credit cards again, hocking their homes again, taking out pay-day loans, all in a growing-less-regulated environment. The new super tech, super large, and yes cleaner cars are costing more and more!
I paid more for my Prime than that house in Hawthorne (our family's 2d house)!!
If people want cheaper-priced cars, put less crap on them; don't abandon the fuel economy and safety standards; imperfect as they may be, they have certainly improved our quality of life. You want to cut costs; stop putting those dozens of dangerous airbags in cars; a good 3-point seatbelt is what I want. My Honda Civic was totalled in a minor, non injury accident because the two $2500 airbags had triggered, making the car financially irreparable.
Don't we, our kids, and grandkids deserve a livable environment?
Nothing is free; we are just starting to realize the true cost of the automobile, and it's impact on the environment. Unfortunately GREED is still a major force in our economy and politics. Hopefully these involved kids today can help improve that situation; I'm too old to fight that good fight!

Posted via the PriusChat mobile app.
AChoiredTaste.com

 

You do realize that carb was only granted the waiver to do fuel economy in 2009. The waiver and CARB politics had nothing to do with things in the 1960s. If California followed EPA rules today they couldn't do things they were doing in the 1960s. Open your eyes. Its 2018. CARB is pushing a lot of things that have nothing to do with pollution, and as a texan I don't think I should be subsidizing them. My biggest problem with them is faking diesel data and their strong push to have american taxpayers subsidize hydrogen.

I did live in california. During that time carb passed rules without any testing that caused a great deal of damage to truck engines. They also forced fuel standards that caused leaks into ground water.

I don't want Scott Pruitt or Mary Nichols setting my regulations. I would prefer a science based not a politics based approach.

 

California Air Resources Board, CARB, is responsible for making sure we have clean air, among other things, in California. In my experience living here for 62 years, I have seen them be largely successful. I am not going to debate you on your opinion of this agency. It's worked for me; I hope they continue.

Posted via the PriusChat mobile app.
AChoiredTaste.com

 

To sell a new car most often you have to be able to sell your old car. That means people down the economic scale have to be able to afford to buy your old car. If those used car buyers have to buy further down the age scale than your car is, you have bigger than previous normals depreciation because the dealer can't buy your car in a trade for more than they can sell it for once interest and profit are added.

Add in the shift to leases which guarantees a glut of used cars being dumped into the market that didn't reach there till maybe 5 years later 10 years ago and you have short term profits but long term troubles.

 

Yes probably. But it is just YET ANOTHER smoke screen to try and justify more gutting of environmental regulations......much like the impending gutting of the regulations on the financial industry.......including allowing "payday loans" to victimize the economically disadvantaged even more than they do now.

Mark my words......if the Trump tariffs stick, the next cry we will hear is "But we can't open our steel mill again because it pollutes too much." And those precious short term jobs will be the justification for relaxing the pollution laws on steel and aluminum. Never mind the long term damage and increased heath problems that are caused.

Big business is EVIL. Coupled with a big business friendly government........we are screwed.

Oh.....and notice that I said all of that without ONCE putting a demonizing label on any of it.

 

The mid-course review is coming up next month.

 

We need to find a solution to just ONE re-occurring problem: Stupidity.
Every time we almost get out of the "rut"......gullible stupidity drags us right back down.

Pogo was right.