Why are The United States' Emissions Standards so Lax?

Why are The United States' Emissions Standards so Lax?
The United States has been mentioned on this site as “the best”, “the most powerful” and “the most advanced”, but it is also one other thing, something that people might prefer you to forget. It is unequivocally the most polluting country in the world, which led me to ask, why? If we refer solely to automobiles, the answer is simple: pollution and economy standards and the US desire for bigger is better. Out of all developed countries (the EU, China, Japan etc), the US has the lowest fuel economy standards. Even California, the most actively “green” state, has lower standards than China. Pollution standards are easy for large petrol engines, due to fairly tough NO2 requirements (which petrol engines produce little of) but no limit on the amount of CO2 that is produced, the main cause of global warming, and ironically the thing that California is suing the major auto manufacturers over. The tax system is also lax; in Britain and much of the EU, initial tax rates are calculated on CO2 emissions, and company car tax (the tax an individual pays for having a company car) is based on the same scale. This means that diesel cars, which produce less CO2 and get better MPG than equivalent petrols take up over 50% of car sales across the EU, and in certain vehicles, often larger cars, an even higher percentage is diesel. In the Range Rover, for example, the new TDV8 is expected to take 85% of sales, and the 4.4 litre petrol will be dropped due to complete lack of demand.
For some reason, the US demands bigger engined cars, so while 320i’s and C180k’s are the norm in Europe, only a 325 and C230 will suffice. A member of this site laughed at the 525i, which I found strange, as a 520d is much more common in my country. Smaller cars, while growing in sales recently, do not approach the levels in the EU at all, and while the US’ best selling vehicles are the F-150, the Silverado and the Camry, which are all large vehicles, Britain’s are the Ford Focus, Vauxhall Astra and Vauxhall Corsa, all relatively small vehicles. The Corsa even comes with a 1.1 3 cylinder engine, which would probably be laughed out of the showrooms in the States. The largest vehicle that is in the Top Ten best sellers is the BMW 3 Series, most likely in 318d guise.
But why the lax emissions? Could America’s struggling car companies fail to meet these targets and still salvage their profits? This seems unlikely as Ford and GM all make good vehicles (I’m serious) outside of the US, which are small, clean and efficient. The expense seems the most probably cause. Cars in Europe are much more expensive than the US, and to import them would mean a dramatic rise in prices, and a fall in standard equipment. Americans seem to be perfectly happy with large, cheap, well-equipped vehicles, and prices rises would not be well tolerated. The switch to a smaller engines would not be taken well either, as a V6 or V8 in a pick-up is the norm, the change to a 4 cylinder would certainly be a shock to some people, for whom “there is no replacement for displacement”.
So Americans, you get to keep your cars that represent excellent value for money, with good performance and equipment, but remember, your bargain V8 F-150 or V6 Camry isn’t so good for the environment. And just because your government doesn’t say so, doesn’t mean that Climate Change isn’t happening, and that you can’t do something about it.


EL34EL34 - 12/23/2006 12:15:24 AM
+5 Boost
Every single car built 1975 and older in California must have a smog device that saps about 5 hp.


kart1kart1 - 12/23/2006 6:08:45 PM
0 Boost
And that is the real reason because it is still cheap enough to drive V-8's.


02WRX02WRX - 12/23/2006 8:05:24 PM
+1 Boost
The fact that the U.S. pollutes more than any other country isn't a result of lax emissions standards: it is the result of us having more cars. We are the third most populous nation in the world and are easily the wealthiest. Our population density is very low, so our mass transportation system is not as extensive as Europe's. This wealth, in conjunction with the lack of mass transportation, leads Americans to buy lots of cars relative to their counterparts in other countries. Combined with our very large population, this car-buying habit puts us at the top of the pollution index.

As for emissions standards, there are tons of foreign cars that cannot be imported into the U.S. because they fail to meet our emissions requirements. This includes many of the diesels sold in Europe (hence the rise of Bluetec), the Evo VII, and others.

I haven't looked up the exact regulations for the U.S. versus others, but I know for a fact that the U.S. prohibits the sale of some European and Japanese cars on the grounds that they pollute too much. Perhaps the oppulent lifestyle of Americans is the cause of our disproportionate contribution to global pollution and not our supposedly lax regluatory state?


chewychewy - 12/23/2006 8:42:25 PM
+2 Boost
Not exactly. The average American vehicle spews out 2-3 times more CO2 than the average European or Japanese vehicle. Most European and Japanese cars do meet US emmisions. I am not sure about Europe, but about 1/2 of the vehicles in America are fairly old and would not meet current emmison standards and some are extreme polluters.


kart1kart1 - 12/23/2006 1:28:45 AM
0 Boost
Because the 1.0L engines are just too small for America (although I currently have 4 cyl - they are 2.2 and 2.4). The 1.0 to 1.5 are just too small.


kart1kart1 - 12/23/2006 5:56:29 PM
+1 Boost
They don't have enough power to speed up to traffic. And it sucks when your car is too slow. And if you care so much why do you drive a 5.0 V-10, especially in Europe (Denmark???). I know why because you can afford to right? Well we can afford to drive big engined cars as well.


chewychewy - 12/23/2006 3:05:02 PM
+1 Boost
Yep, the trains here are about 50+ years behind rest of the world. The Electrical train has yet to be invented here.


S4cabriofoxoneS4cabriofoxone - 12/23/2006 11:00:26 AM
+4 Boost
This really is a great post.

And I've been mulling this over for the past week, because I've recently watched Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth". You really must see it- it's not entertaining, but it's striking and honest. There are some horrible things that may happen during our lifetimes.

If they made a diesel S4 Cabriolet (4.2TDI), I'd be first in line!

Or maybe even a 3.0TDI, if that's fast enough...


RupertRupert - 12/23/2006 1:03:14 PM
+3 Boost
there is a 3.0 tdi cabriolet in europe...and an RS4 cab....we get the best of everything :)


RupertRupert - 12/23/2006 1:04:10 PM
+3 Boost
oh and i did see the movie.


EL34EL34 - 12/23/2006 1:38:30 PM
0 Boost
S4cabriofoxone, tell the people that live in Denver, Colorado about Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth".

Do not buy that garbage from Al Gore.

BTW, Hurricane season is over and not one serious hurricane hit the Gulf.


chewychewy - 12/23/2006 3:01:12 PM
+3 Boost
Agree EL34, it was funny how there weren't any huricanes at all this season, shows that it just varies year by year. And as we know cows are much worse for global warming than cars. But I do agree that the EPA has to realize that C02 is an emmision and stop pretending that it isn't.


chewychewy - 12/23/2006 2:57:42 PM
+3 Boost
The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) doesn't recognize CO2 as an emmision. The other emmisions are controlled well. But that is why the hypocrites at the EPA have no gas guzzler tax on SUVs and pickups (which make up more than 1/2 of all vehilce sales or around 10 million a year) but does have a gas guzzler tax on cars that get SUV/pickuplike fuel economy. That is why those folks at the EPA are too silly.


RupertRupert - 12/23/2006 3:16:33 PM
+7 Boost
oh i've been waiting for huu's post all day.
and i think the article addresses those points.
america does not in any way at all regulate CO2 emissions, the main cause of global warming. you can go on about NO2 all you want and 50 state passes, because you no something? loads of american cars don't pass OUR emissions or fuel economy rates.
and "the I6 M3 has worse epa than a V8 truck. What purpose does it have?"
what purpose does the V8 in the truck have? none at all. we have pick-ups here (the nissan navara for example) that manages perfectly well with a 2.5 turbodiesel, as does the nissan pathfinder.


chewychewy - 12/23/2006 3:29:16 PM
+7 Boost
Sorry, the raillway (here) is much less efficient than a pure electric one would be. And the train can run 24 hours a day, so it makes quite a bit more sense in a large country.

And about 90% of trucks are NOT used for work (that would imply that we ALL work in construction and not in cubicles)The people that need it for work can pay a tax for their gas guzzling, because Europeans can tow and haul the same amounts (if not more) while using much less fuel.


BillBill - 12/24/2006 7:08:12 AM
+5 Boost
Well said, Rupert.

Huu's comments are bordering on idiotic. Either he's too stupid to know what he's talking about, or he's trying to brainwash all into driving Toyota Priuses because those little shitboxes can save the whales and the world. Yeah, in your dreams, Huu.


matt635matt635 - 12/23/2006 6:47:03 PM
+4 Boost
Err.

I'm no expert on this but I'm sure the irony is that the US govenment will not sign up to international agreements agreeing to cut industral emissions... which I suspect are far greater than auto emissions.

US Citizens do not NEED the kind of displacements that are considered as average over there... yes we have big disp. engines heren in the UK, but they represent a small proportion of all cars here - AND our overnment has agreed to try to cut industrial emissions (something the yanks are too afraid to do, just in case China gets an edge on them!)

and, as someone mentioned already.... if americans paid the same for petrol as we do here in the UK, you'd change your ways pretty quick!

The attitude that says you dont have to, because you are the greatest nation on earth, is one of the reasons why people take the piss out of americans!

Team America... Fuck Yeah.


RupertRupert - 12/24/2006 11:41:38 AM
+4 Boost
the purpose of the m3 is to do 0-60 in a very short time. it is a sports car. and are you implying that we all drive m3's here? the point is not that european cars in general are cleaner (which they are anyway), but that europeans are in general cleaner and more fuel efficient. i could equally say what's the point of the 3.3 in the grand voyager, when the 2.8 diesel is quicker and gets 12 more uk mpg?
what is the purpose of a whole 3.7 in the liberty? we get a 2.4 diesel here.
and 2.5 diesels pulling things? all 1994 onwards range rovers can pull 3.5 metric tons, including the 2.5 diesel. 3.5 tons is what, 7500 pounds? and a pathfinder 2.5 diesel can haul 3 tons. and the 2.7 diesel in your grand cherokee can haul exactly the same as the 4.7 litre.
NO2 is emitted in tiny amounts compared to CO2, but it is more damaging by volume, but still, the sheer quantiy of CO2 belched out by fuel guzzling cars means CO2 is the biggest cause of global warming.


BillBill - 12/24/2006 7:06:04 AM
+4 Boost
Mr Huu76,

That is the most retarded statement I have ever heard so far from you.

Europe isn't going down the crapper. If you examine the picture closely, WE (the US) are going down the crapper in some cases. Look at our education system for instance and compare it to that of Europe. The average European kid knows more about the world and what's going on than your typical American kid who spends his afterschool hours watching every conceivable TV show on TV when he could be reading a book or doing something for his future. The European welfare system, particularly the Finnish one, blows ours away. Watch your comments, because right now, the US isn't doing so well. Superpower or not, with a stupid generation of kids about to control our country in the future, I have my doubts. I work in the educational business. I thought universitty history classes and I had 30 year-old's in my courses who still couldn't spell properly.

Second, Germany and France are not looking to arm China. They may sell weapons, but that has nothing to do with "arming China so they can kick our ass". I won't get into the details of something called "business", because you obviously have no clue. What are you smoking?

Retarded, your statement.


S4cabriofoxoneS4cabriofoxone - 12/24/2006 3:26:07 PM
+1 Boost
Okay, I'm neutral here, but, Bill...

"I thought universitty history classes and I had 30 year-old's in my courses who still couldn't spell properly."

This just made me crack up.


RupertRupert - 12/24/2006 6:25:49 PM
+3 Boost
well in britain where diesel is MORE expensive than petrol, diesel cars still make up around 40% of sales, even with an initial higher purchase price.


nozferatunozferatu - 12/26/2006 2:18:17 PM
+1 Boost
Bottom line is most Americans don't care. Those bitches that go and pick up their stupid kids in front of their damned schools with Explorers, Expeditions, Excursions, Land Rovers, Land Cruisers, H2s, H3s, etc...are the most evident aholes around the rest also contribute.

People here just don't care. When the time comes, the selfish, egocentric mentality people have here simply won't let anyone do anything. Ask people if they'll give up their things, most people will say get lost. Ask them to change their lifestyle to improve things, most will say take a hike.

Half way around the world people are dying left and right so people here can pick up their kids in an 8 passenger POS SUV.

Protecting the oil? LOL...you must be joking...you think they're doing it out of the goodness of their heart and benefit you?

Just like any period in history, this crap is going to end and US "domination" will end with it unless it changes to accomodate the "new" global world. Neo-Nazi right-wing freak policies won't work too long.


nozferatunozferatu - 12/26/2006 11:23:03 PM
+2 Boost
Europe and the US are the same crap...one is an offshoot of the next. So please don't fool yourself that I'm one of those Euro apologists because I'm not. Europe (particularly the UK) is just as guilty and scummy as any American government has ever been.

The war-mongering mentality is extremely apparent when you say something such as "You cannot fight a war, hot or cold (economics), w/o oil." It seems like fighting and WAR are engrained in the modern US lifestyle...need to kill to get what you want. Mmmm...perhaps it's time for the human race to advance beyond that?

The amount of money the US is pissing away in fighting wars it pretty much creates every tens years could be used to what? Perhaps use it on its own people??? Wow...gosh..what a novel idea!! Fix our healthcare? Fix our social systems? Schools? Advance healthcare? Advance environmental research for cars? Factories? What? Not profitable like war?? Yeah I thought so.

Stop patting yourself on the back with stupid quotes from The Economist....if tomorrow the Chinese want to bring you to your knees they will. THe current US economy is help up by their bonds...all those fancy toys you buy yourself from Bestbuy, etc are made from there....so deflate your head because a big ego and arrogance are alot uglier and more dangerous than "jealousy." I don't think with half a brain and watching Americans piss away natural resources faster than anyone else is jealous....they're just in awe of the stupidity.


BMW740Z4BMW740Z4 - 12/27/2006 11:39:52 AM
0 Boost
It will be interesting to see if "Global Warming" will fizzle out to be just another political fad like "Diversity" (1999-2002), "Save the Rainforest", "Save the Whales", and "Acid Rain" in the 90's or "GLOBAL COOLING" in the 70's.

Given how the above issues were touted as some of the major "plague's of our time" I suspect Global Warming will go unresolved/overlooked/disproven over the next couple of years.

Not a war-monger by any stretch, but will have to admit that wars can be EXTREMELY profitable. Just take a look at what the Iraqi Abulances/Police and Fire Vehicles - you'll see Chevy, GMC and Ford painted everywhere. Consulting firms for infrastruture, supply companies, shipping and defense corps. can make a fortune of off any war which = jobs and $$$ for the country who is invading/taking over.

BTW, France, Germany and several other European Countries have suffered their weakest economic showing since the Marshal Plan combined with very high unemployment and low productivity. - Look's like they haven't been doing something right (like taxing the hell out of their people for substandard govt assistance programs and, among other things, emissions/automobiles).

China remains formidable - we'll see if their Communist Gov't collapses due to the fruits of Capitalism. If not, they may recede backwards into isolation just like they have done time and time again whenever the West started to gain "too much" power within their business dealings.




Copyright 2026 AutoSpies.com, LLC