California Goes Rogue And Refuses To Standardize Fuel Economy Standards With The Nation

The Trump administration’s chief environmental regulator signaled a coming showdown with California, warning the state won’t dictate the future of ambitious automobile fuel economy regulations enacted by the Obama administration. 

"California is not the arbiter of these issues," said EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt. California regulates greenhouse gas emissions at the state level, "but that shouldn’t and can’t dictate to the rest of the country what these levels are going to be."

The EPA faces an April 1 deadline to decide whether Obama-era corporate average fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks from 2022 to 2025 are attainable or should be revised. President Donald Trump’s administration already ripped up the EPA’s conclusion that no changes are needed, issued by the agency during former President Barack Obama’s final weeks in the White House.

TheSteve - 3/13/2018 2:52:35 PM

-1 Boost

Does this mean California wants to use more *stringent* standards, like lower emissions and/or higher fuel economy than standards elsewhere? And this is bad... why? Will anyone intelligently argue the case for why California should be compelled to be as dirty as the rest?

Remember that EPA Administrator, Scott Pruitt, is a well-known anti-environmentalist. He has spoken openly about his contempt and disdain for the EPA. Air quality, human health, lower pollution are not his interests. Profit for Big Business is, at any cost to humanity.

TomM - 3/13/2018 5:37:17 PM

0 Boost

We already have had a period of time when California cars operated on different Emissions and MPG standards - so what's new about this. Prevailing winds that cause the problem in California do not exist in other areas - and it is logical to address the LOCAL need. WHile I agree that it would be nice if the manufacturers only had ONE worldwide standard to deal with - they don't currently - and they NEVER will. It is likely that the standard that the Daffy administration comes up with (OOPS I meant Donald) - will be less stringent than what is in Europe so the manufacturers will have to produce several version of their engines to compete.

atc98092 - 3/13/2018 5:42:57 PM

+2 Boost

I believe it's time to revoke the ability of California to have separate automobile emissions rules. The issues that existed when the rule was created are largely overcome by modern equipment. It is cost prohibitive for manufacturers to make different vehicles for different states. Give them a strong voice in determining the national levels, but they need to be national levels, not a hodge podge of rules in different places. And I live in a state that follows the CA rules, so yes, it impacts me as well.

CANADIANCOMMENTS - 3/13/2018 6:13:26 PM

-2 Boost

Or the other US States and the Federal Govt could follow California's lead and have the EPA tell the automakers that what is good for California is good for the entire USA. One standard is best for the whole nation and the industry at large. Aim him versus being mediocre.

MDarringer - 3/13/2018 7:37:47 PM

+3 Boost

It's time for the Feds to sue the living hell out of California and put California in check. No state should have the right to do as they please. A 50-state standard is the only way to do it right.

SanJoseDriver - 3/13/2018 7:48:28 PM

+1 Boost

The whole point of states is to allow localized rules that better suit that region. Federal rules should always be the bare minimum with states allowed to go beyond if needed. Otherwise, why have states at all.

In this case it won't make a difference if California does their own thing, these regulations are all for show at this point--all manufacturers are going towards EVs and should be able to easily hit the Obama targets. I would rather the restrictions be around pollution and not MPG. Let the market decide regarding MPG.

CANADIANCOMMENTS - 3/13/2018 9:33:01 PM

+2 Boost

Good point @SJD - You still know the way! If you look at EU brands they always report C02 produced per 100km. They report fuel consumption too but it is good that they show the pollution figure too, which is really what counts in the end.

MDarringer - 3/13/2018 11:27:13 PM

0 Boost

This is NOT about "better" rules...not even remotely.

TheSteve - 3/13/2018 11:50:23 PM

+2 Boost

@MDarringer's vote for pollution, dictatorship, and thuggery is evident.

If California wants to be better than the rest of the nation, then they have my blessing. California is a "thorn in the side" for the current regime and its Trumpist followers, because it's full of those environmentalist, clean air, alternative fuel, not-interested-in-coal types... which the Alt.Right positively despises with a vengeance!

Just like lowlife school kids deride the smart kid in the class, Trumpists hate California for "you think you're better than me."

Go California! Be all you can be, in spite of Malignant Trumpism.

Vette71 - 3/14/2018 11:17:54 AM

+3 Boost

CC If you want to go by "C02 produced per 100km" then diesel is the way to go. For ICE it wins, which is why Europe went that way in the first place.

PUGPROUD - 3/13/2018 7:44:44 PM

+3 Boost

California wants nothing to do with the Federal government...until the next earthquake.

MDarringer - 3/13/2018 11:28:58 PM

0 Boost

California needs a massive wallop to its senses. The Alt-Left has dry-screwed the state and given it an STD (stupid, triggered Democrat) epidemic.

MDarringer - 3/13/2018 11:29:32 PM

0 Boost

Amen, brother! I agree.

SanJoseDriver - 3/14/2018 1:28:53 PM

+3 Boost

Like anything it depends on how you define quality of life an education. Obviously there is demand to live in California otherwise real estate prices wouldn't be what they are. Silicon Valley has the highest real estate prices and salaries for any metro in the country. The flipside is that things are so expensive that you need to make six figures just to get by and many have given up on buying a house (detached homes now go for $1.5-2 million). The diversity, culture, weather, food, and jobs are tough to beat but you will pay for it--speaking for SV specifically not all of California.

SanJoseDriver - 3/14/2018 1:29:53 PM

+2 Boost

~6,000 in Silicon Valley (out of ~2 million residents)

~5,000 in SF (out of 900k residents)

templar19d - 3/14/2018 1:44:09 PM

0 Boost

99% of new cars exhaust is CO2, the stuff that we exhale too. Plants take it in and produce oxygen. The stuff we inhale, CO2 is an inert gas. California is simply a state of "soft tyranny." In order for socialism to survive it must continue to grow to pay for it's always increasing needs for money and power. The market and public can and should decide what kinds of cars we want.

supermoto - 3/14/2018 4:55:43 PM

+1 Boost

Ah, if only auto manufacturers would stop making special versions for CA.