California Outraged After EPA Dumps Obama Era Fuel Standards - Citing Them As Inappropriate

Winning!!! This is delicious!!

if going against progress is the correct decision, may be you should start living in caves.

Remember, Scott Pruitt was the guy who openly stated the EPA should be dismantled before he got appointed. Protecting the environment or the health and wellbeing of all Americans is not a priority for him.

My hope is that US automakers are smart enough to know that America is not "The World", so if you want to sell American vehicles to the rest of the world -- to countries that have higher environmental and/or fuel economy standards that we have -- then you better keep that in mind when designing and building your vehicles.

Here's to a healthy and prosperous US auto industry (and a healthy US population), in spite of this dumb, short-sighted move by the EPA.

lots of right wingers in here that love their faux news deboosting ya.... merica

@CarCrazedinCali: Or one guy with multiple accounts. I was online one night, doing other stuff while keeping an eye on a "controversial" (AKA anti-Alt.Right) thread. Over the course of several minutes, a number of down-voters showed up, one at a time, evenly spaced out. Either that, or one guy logged into multiple accounts just to down-vote. Draw your own conclusions.

A few days later, when one of my posts got a lot of up votes, an Alt.Right-er chimed in, Trump-style, and claimed voter fraud. Sure as hell, in short order, all the down-votes showed up. Too predictable! :-D

I wear the down-votes as a badge of honor: Some Alt.Right-er / anti-science / anti-facts guy is so pissed at me, that he'll create multiple accounts and go through the regular ritual of multi-down-voting posts, just to express his outrage. Whatever :-) I don't take Flat Earthers or Moon Hoaxers seriously, either.

The kiss of death in this White House is Trump stating or tweeting or telling you to your face your job is secure. That happened with Pruitt already. I give it two weeks and then he is out.

let chaos reign

It is NOT the epa's mission to protect car buyers choices - it is their mission to protect the environment. While I do agree that the latest round of fuel standards needs to be adjusted because of the change of MIX of product that the customers are buying includes less cars and more trucks - that would have happened anyway. Until the EPA changes AIR QUALITY regulations - changing car regulations to allow more emissions is a losing strategy because there are still many areas of the country where they need more control - California is one.

However - since the emissions regulations in Europe and China are now more stringent than in the USA - the manufacturers will still have to meet THOSE requirements - putting the US manufacturers behind the curve elsewhere around the world. In the End - I doubt that Gm or FORD will actually produce HIGHER emission cars.

They would and they are for the NA market.

Thoughtful post, agreed 100%.

California needs to be taken over by the Feds so that the tyranny can end.

Hmmm, so Republicans can run the state like they do the solid south? Make California more like Mississippi or Alabama?? Personally I think Jerry Brown has done a great job out there. He took an economy in a mess with huge deficits and really turned things around. The state is now much more financially sound, employment is better than the national average, the state's GDP is even a larger part of the overall US GDP. All that while facing some huge natural disasters etc... not bad.

@MDarringer: So to recap, you prefer your brand of tyranny and dictatorship, brought about by take-over and conquest, to forcefully impose your will upon California, as compared to California's flavor of "tyranny," that being their desire to run a cleaner shop than what the prez and his regime want (negation of environmental laws to allow corporations to pollute and profit, unimpeded, at the expense of The People's health and wellbeing).

I just shake my head when I read your posts :-/

The problem in California is not that the locals control their positions - the problem is AIR QUALITY - and that is already controlled by the EPA. AND in order to reach the Air Quality Standards set by the EPA - Because of the Unique problem of position between the Ocean and a Row of Mountains - California needs to control Emissions in ways that other states - where the normal flow of air takes the emissions off the Atlantic coast - does not create the problems California has to Address.

I see no way that the Federal Government will be able to reduce the emissions by ALL contributors - that would solve the AIR Quality problem. Now that Federal Government could allow California to have UNLIVABLE levels of pollution in their air - but that is NOT a solution to the AIR QUALITY problem.

Matt- if you have a way that the Federal Government could greatly improve the AIR QUALITY in California - then WHY are they NOT doing that RIGHT NOW? Remember - it is Ultimately the AIR QUALITY - Livable Air Quality - that the EPA addresses - of which Car emissions are only ONE contributor. Relaxing regulations on Emissions of cars only makes the problem WORSE - which would REQUIRE more control on other emissions. ANd since this is the USA - lawsuits would fly. Imagine ALL the little old ladies with Asthma suing.

^^^^The histrionic responses of the hateful Alt-Left who bully and bash the minute anyone questions the tyranny of the Alt-Left, socialist-fascist-communist Gestapo in Sacramento. The Alt-Left tactic? Start shouting. Demonize any opposing viewpoint. #bully #bully #bully

Once again, TheSteve, TomM, and valhallakey spew their intolerant hatred.

@MD Instead of pointing to others and saying "stop being mean to me or I'll tell my Mom", come up with a solution to contribute to cleaning the air in California. Clearly, making vehicles burn more fuel per mile is not going to move things in the right direction... There needs to be a better way forward.

Tom, California does have an air pollution problem with smog caused by NOx and particles. Things the EPA was set up to address. Hence the issues with coal plants, diesels etc. which CA was allowed to separately address because of their geography. They do not have a unique problem with CO2, which the new mileage standards were allegedly proposed to address. Mileage standards first came into play during the oil crisis to address imported oil. They morphed into a political issue over time.

I've finally come to understand Trump, most of his followers, MDarringer, and the other Alt.Right-ers here on AutoSpies, when I read this…
_____

"Donald Trump, champion and avatar of the shallow state, has won power because his supporters are threatened by what they don't understand, and what they don't understand is almost everything. Indeed, from evolution to data about our economy to the science of vaccines to the threats we face in the world, they reject vast subjects rooted in fact in order to have reality conform to their worldviews. They don't dig for truth; they skim the media for anything that makes them feel better about themselves. To many of them, knowledge is not a useful tool but a cunning barrier elites have created to keep power from the average man and woman."

- David Rothkopf
Professor of International Relations and Political Science
_____

fool

@Canadiancomments We're talking MPG standards not tailpipe standards.

And no, I do not wish to hear "Tired CO2 Global Warming Argument Cliche #17" trotted out. Cars still have to pass emissions.

Furthermore, if you and your equally ill-informed buddy @TomM knew anything about the issues of clean air in California, you'd know that the majority of pollutants DO NOT come from cars, but from industry.

@TheSteve ctrl + c then ctrl + v of "Alt-Left Hate Speech Intolerant Diatribe #7" No thought or intelligence on your part just spew, spew, spew.

^^^
Gawd, I’ve nailed it! I finally understand MDarringer and crew! Sweet :-)

Science deniers. Climate change denial. Berthers. Moon hoaxers. 6,000-year-old Earth believers. Anti-evolutionists. It all makes sense how they’re all part of the same mindset, just as David Rothkopf points out.

Carry on, Matt! Carry on! :-) I’m your hateful Illuminati Liberal Communist, out to destroy all that’s good in America, LOL ;-) Be careful, though: I have books! :-D

People should be able to decide what they want to buy. Simple as that. I don't need a government making decisions for me.

Why don't you tell the government that you don't want to pay taxes. Let me know how that goes.

@monster That's an illogical response.

Monster, if we all told the government that we don't like how our taxes are being spent it would be very effective. But alas, we are surrounded by sheep who are addicted to mediocrity.