Automakers Concerned Proposed Emission Standards Can't Be Met

If the government continues to ask Detroit to take a hike, thats just asking for a higher unemployment rate. These people have no appreciation for cars don't they?

And the fact that they can't meet emissions isn't my concern amongst them. Just take f-ing public transport if you're that concerned about the environment. And I'm not against public transportation btw, our county council will allow another line to our metro system linking from one county to another, reducing traffic nightmares on the beltway.

To the government, there are very many things to know about, but for now...

- First, CARS ARE IMPORTANT... They are virtually one of the main supporting joints that makes up most of your country's history. And so forth...


- Secondly, BRING BACK the MONORAIL! At first, LA ditched the idea because of the cost or something, but think about this... monorails are not only fast, but their designs can also make them very safe, unobtrusive, and in a way, very environmentally friendly (both in building them and operating them). Now, LA is just stuck with train tracks that have only recently been taken down because of the lack of use, and our highways are still clogged. ...and best of all, this system is adaptable virtually everywhere. We might as well make them solar powered in the deserts for example. Disneyland seems to be able to handle the monorail on a daily basis. Why not us with all the bailout money going to... nowhere.

Obama needs to put the redlight on this plan, and put the green light on improving infrastructure.

thats not going to happen, its trendy to force automakers to make little crap cars that no one wants. Improving infrastructure which has MASSIVE GHG gains won't happen. If the electricity grid efficiency (nationally speaking) were improved just 5%, it would be the equivalent of removing 50-55 million cars off the road... but naa its not cool. We'd rather attack the evil badguys in Detroit who forced us all to buy big SUVs and drive real fast. How dare Detroit respond to consumer demand..... If I hear once more how detroits problems are because they didn't have a prius equivalent, im going to schvitz.

BSBB, Here's your tax credit, it's called a GAS TAX. Not as bad as in europe or Japan, let's say something like $1-2. That way, when oil is $45 a barrel, a US gallon of gas would be more like $3-4. Then people wouldnt buy inefficient vehicles on a whim, only if they could afford / really need them. Oh god, what am I saying... Im pretty sure after you, me, Bimmermike46, 1UAW (I know you guys dont agree), there's probably only 5 other people on this site who actually understand the logic of a gas tax and the command-style socialism of this ridiculous emissions law. "HEY AUTOMAKERS, IM OBAMA. I PRETEND TO LISTEN TO ALL PARTIES AND MAKE LOGICAL DECISIONS BUT INSTEAD, IM PANDERING TO A BUNCH OF WHIMSIDAISICAL ENVIRONMENTALISTS BECAUSE I NEED THEIR VOTES AND GREEN STUFF IS POLITIALLY CORRECT RIGHT NOW". Cmon obama, give me a break, tell Pelosi to go play in traffic and make REAL decisions, not just ones that look good to know-it-all stoner eco-jackasses who think Detroit is to blame for global warming and energy independance.

Dont get me wrong, I hate taxes, but we have to do what we have to do. In the coming years, oil is going to go right back up in price unless demand is stifled. So, we have a choice, 1) tax gas, stifle oil demand, ues profits for all these new (expensive) govt programs or 2)dont tax gas, bankrupt automakers, upset buying public, and feed OPEC $140 a barrel. Lets face it, just b/c some sissyboys in california with no technical expertise think that everyone wants a prius, doesnt mean its right. People will still want their Yukons, X5's and Sports cars (so demand really doesnt go down)... all it means is that the automakers would have to literally dump expensive little shitter cars onto the market, causing resale problems, etc etc etc (at least I know you understand what Im talking about). Glad to see someone read my post and thought about it (although I already expected you would).

Sailor is right here guys.... Its not left vs right, dem vs rep, its stupid vs logic.... sadly stupid is going to win.

And that's why you drive so many dirty diesels in the EU. Cars offered there have neither NOx traps nor AdBlue catalysts. The Euro5 norm enforcing usage of particulate filters is valid just from now, LOL, not since many years ago as it should. Meanwhile, thanks to smart people from California, Volkswagen was forced to meet tightest emission regulations with their diesels in the USA. You Europeans apparently prefer lung cancer instead. Good luck. It has a very high, promising and hope-raising 5-year relative survival rate of 5%

downtoearth, please tell me you reviewed the emissions regs for USA & EUrope, and compared them to previous years and health concerns. You will see that the incrimental gain in diesel emission cleanliness isn't worth the costs and fuel economy losses just yet. The technology is very new (particulate filters, NOx traps, Urea injections, etc) and its very expensive. Not only that, its prone to breaking down (ask any shuttle driver in the USA who doesn't drive on the highway how much they love their DPF's) and the repair costs are astronomical. A blown DFP can run from a few thousand (small cars) to 10,000+ (USD). Diesel is the way to go, but once again, let logical engineers and scientists decide how to implement, not angry treehuggers.

By the way, if you think that people selling diesel passenger cars in CA are squeaky clean, guess again. Even the cleanest diesel engines (ones you can hold a white cloth to) have deficiencies in which the OEMs are forced to pay fines to the communists in california.

Sailor, As much as Im all in favor of clean emissions, I have to say that with the current technology already in place, vehicle emissions are very clean and it upsets me that the eco-physcos in USA & Europe (especially in california) claim their trying to clean up the pollution from cars when they're really trying to regulated fuel economy. They use health fears as an excuse to convince the grossly uneducated and uninformed public to go along with their shenanigans. As for europeans using less energy per capita than americans, yes you are absolutely correct, however there is more to it than europeans are more energy savvy than americans. In my recent travels to southern europe, I actually wanted a SmartCar or something to that extent. Not because of my pollution, not b/c of fuel economy (although 1.2euro/liter sucks REAL bad), but because the city where I was staying was so damn crowded that anything bigger than a 1-series was considered "big". Here in America, only a few cities are like that, most of us live "the american dream" with a big yard, big house, and long drives.

"Mr. Cole, the Center for Automotive research chairman, said he believed Congress would ensure Detroit would be able to live with any new standards." And everyone bitched and complained about the Loans to GM & Dodge, what does the public think this BS is going to be. I'll give you a hint, how about a $100 billion dollar giveaway to cover automakers' losses when consumers still don't want pussy little priuses.

What kind of car is that with the exhaust pictured?

So "The Lord Obama" may allow states to set their own emission standards...how about allowing states to RELAX emission standards for vehicles that get say...50 or 60mpg+ down to 1985 levels (helping diesels and gasoline engines under 1600cc)...NAW...That won't happen...It's not part of the "NWO Agenda"