Trump prohibits California's higher emissions standards

[Leonhard]

Just be sure to save up for the inevitable electric car tax.

What would the reason be for this tax that's unique to electric cars, but not to gasoline cars?

[Mountain Man]

What would the reason be for this tax that's unique to electric cars, but not to gasoline cars?

You're paying the gasoline tax and putting a larger strain on the power grid.

[Leonhard]

You're paying the gasoline tax and putting a larger strain on the power grid.

In Denmark this is currently handled with a registration tax that all cars get. The pricing on larger strains on the power grid are paid by the electrical bill since here, like in the US, electrical bills consists of both utility costs as well as the price of electricity.

[Littlejoe]

What would the reason be for this tax that's unique to electric cars, but not to gasoline cars?

Many if not most states use tax on gasoline to fund road projects and repairs. (Expansions, extensions, new roads etc.) An electric car uses these roads but does not contribute any towards it maintenance.

[Leonhard]

Many if not most states use tax on gasoline to fund road projects and repairs. (Expansions, extensions, new roads etc.) An electric car uses these roads but does not contribute any towards it maintenance.

Well in that case there's no problem, it would still be cheaper to fuel an electric car than a gas car even with a reasonable increase like that.

[seanD]

What has Trump done to hurt the environment:

Well, that is a long list, but here is one that should be accessible to nearly everyone.

Remember the LA problems with Smog?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]39865[/ATTACH]

Well that is one reason why California has stricter emissions requirements than the Federal Government mandates. And 24 other states have adopted those same standards. The impact is auto makers don't make cars with different emissions controls for different states, so the impact is all cars effectively meet these standards, giving cleaner air in all US cities, not just those states that follow the CA standards. But, of course, that does make cars a little more expensive than they would be otherwise.

Now Trump pushes back, says they can't do that anymore.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/23/opini...ger/index.html

Is this some petty personal beef with the Governor of CA? Probably.

Who wants to lower emission standards on vehicles? Do you want cars emitting MORE noxious gasses? No-one I know of.


So - who around here would defend this? And if so why.


Jim

Why does California, being the ultra-liberal state that it is and the most public transit-friendly state there is, even need these regulations?

[mikewhitney]

All the car batteries, of all the electrical cars, in the world, in a thousand years of production, could fit into a corner of the dumping grounds for coal sludge, or inside an insignificant spot of the collosal natural areas in the US that have been irreversibly obliterated by coal mining.

Why Coal Power is being given a pass, will never cease to amaze me.

California needs only the minimal excuse to charge high fees for things. The fees only need to be tied to public perception/propaganda -- not to reality.

[lilpixieofterror]

I won't have to, I'm getting an electrical car.

That just means you’ll get taxed an extra 100 dollars a year when you register your car.

[Leonhard]

That just means you’ll get taxed an extra 100 dollars a year when you register your car.

We don't do it like that, Denmark has a strange system of taxing cars based on how much they cost. Its a horrible taxation system that everyone wants to move away from, but its gotten rather calcified. The only effect of this system has been to force people to drive old, cheap cars.

At any rate it'll still be an electrical car. No smog, no noise.

[oxmixmudd]

Why does California, being the ultra-liberal state that it is and the most public transit-friendly state there is, even need these regulations?

Smog can still get pretty bad in LA. That is almost 19 million people affected by the problem. The entire coast is prone to inversion due to the cool pacific waters and the mountains proximity to the coast. So the car exhaust can get trapped and just build and build.

From wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution_in_California

Source: above

The combination of three main factors are the cause of notable unhealthy levels of air pollution in California: the activities of over 39 million people, a mountainous terrain that traps pollution, and a warm climate that helps form ozone and other pollutants.[2] Eight of the ten cities in the US with the highest year-round concentration of particulate matter between 2013 and 2015 were in California, and seven out of the ten cities in the US with the worst ozone pollution were also in California.[3] Studies show that pollutants prevalent in California are linked to several health issues, including asthma, lung cancer, birth complications, and premature death.[4] In 2016, Bakersfield, California recorded the highest level of airborne pollutants of any city in the United States.

© Copyright Original Source

'activities of 39 million people' means:

Source: above

Although Los Angeles remains the city with the worst ozone pollution, the state of air pollution has been improving.[11] With a population of roughly over 10 million, the Los Angeles area is a large basin with the Pacific Ocean to the west, and several mountain ranges with 11,000-foot peaks to the east and south, Los Angeles is particularly susceptible to high ozone levels.[10] Diesel engines, ports, motor vehicles, and industries are main sources of air pollution in Los Angeles. Frequent sunny days and low rainfall contribute to ozone formation, as well as high levels of fine particles and dust.[12] The strong relationship between Air Quality Index (AQI) and ozone levels may be found on air pollution maps.[13]

© Copyright Original Source

It is not a trivial problem, and it is a very bad idea to disallow there rules controlling emissions. It's not a matter of trying to control any other state, it's a matter of preventing significant pollution problems in their state. It's the automobile industry that chooses to only build cars that meet their standards, which - in the long run - is good for all of us.

Jim

[mikewhitney]

All the car batteries, of all the electrical cars, in the world, in a thousand years of production, could fit into a corner of the dumping grounds for coal sludge, or inside an insignificant spot of the collosal natural areas in the US that have been irreversibly obliterated by coal mining.

Why Coal Power is being given a pass, will never cease to amaze me.

If people in the States were promoting thorium reactors as a focus of technology, I would have more confidence in the future plans. But I don't think it is logical to end fossil fuels. Any extreme cut in fossil fuels would mean that things like air transportation would become excessively priced.

I think an electric car would be nice to have, but I don't think it is good policy to cut off fossil fuel until we have a well-tested alternative. At this point in time, the governments make arbitrary laws on the improved gas mileage or on stopping fossil fuels. We really need a law against governments making arbitrary decisions.

[seanD]

Smog can still get pretty bad in LA. That is almost 19 million people affected by the problem. The entire coast is prone to inversion due to the cool pacific waters and the mountains proximity to the coast. So the car exhaust can get trapped and just build and build.

From wikipedia: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollution_in_California

Source: above

The combination of three main factors are the cause of notable unhealthy levels of air pollution in California: the activities of over 39 million people, a mountainous terrain that traps pollution, and a warm climate that helps form ozone and other pollutants.[2] Eight of the ten cities in the US with the highest year-round concentration of particulate matter between 2013 and 2015 were in California, and seven out of the ten cities in the US with the worst ozone pollution were also in California.[3] Studies show that pollutants prevalent in California are linked to several health issues, including asthma, lung cancer, birth complications, and premature death.[4] In 2016, Bakersfield, California recorded the highest level of airborne pollutants of any city in the United States.

© Copyright Original Source

'activities of 39 million people' means:

Source: above

Although Los Angeles remains the city with the worst ozone pollution, the state of air pollution has been improving.[11] With a population of roughly over 10 million, the Los Angeles area is a large basin with the Pacific Ocean to the west, and several mountain ranges with 11,000-foot peaks to the east and south, Los Angeles is particularly susceptible to high ozone levels.[10] Diesel engines, ports, motor vehicles, and industries are main sources of air pollution in Los Angeles. Frequent sunny days and low rainfall contribute to ozone formation, as well as high levels of fine particles and dust.[12] The strong relationship between Air Quality Index (AQI) and ozone levels may be found on air pollution maps.[13]

© Copyright Original Source

It is not a trivial problem, and it is a very bad idea to disallow there rules controlling emissions. It's not a matter of trying to control any other state, it's a matter of preventing significant pollution problems in their state. It's the automobile industry that chooses to only build cars that meet their standards, which - in the long run - is good for all of us.

Jim

Long story short: Cali needs enforced federal environmental regulation because liberals don't practice what they preach.

[guacamole]

Long story short: Cali needs enforced federal environmental regulation because liberals don't practice what they preach.

Ha ha! Good one! Kind of like conservatives and states rights!

[seanD]

Ha ha! Good one! Kind of like conservatives and states rights!

Zing!

[Teallaura]

If people in the States were promoting thorium reactors as a focus of technology, I would have more confidence in the future plans. But I don't think it is logical to end fossil fuels. Any extreme cut in fossil fuels would mean that things like air transportation would become excessively priced.

I think an electric car would be nice to have, but I don't think it is good policy to cut off fossil fuel until we have a well-tested alternative. At this point in time, the governments make arbitrary laws on the improved gas mileage or on stopping fossil fuels. We really need a law against governments making arbitrary decisions.

They are on the ring of fire - and building SOLAR arrays with Tesla battery banks...

Germany went all in for solar and wind (beat and fry bird conservation!) - and their energy costs skyrocketed...