"What we need is not a new set of regulations plastered over the old ones, but a careful re-thinking of all of the regulations, in light of new knowledge, and the revocation of all inappropriate regulations before new (and contradictory) ones are added."
Your point is well stated!
What WE need is a COMPLETE REEVALUATION of emissions, fuels, enegines, and combustion strategies to arrive at the TOP TWO (2) "LEAST HARM" SOLUTIONS [available based on TODAY's technology] to OUR future automotive needs.
Then follow that up with the TOP TWO (2) "LEAST HARM" SOLUTIONS for the future based on most promising evolving technology.
Then work like "crazy" to get them into the market and to the consumer!
The real problem here is not getting EPA to act, but requiring the regulators to help, and not merely demand a good outcome. The California regulators are already causing the carbon dioxide emitted per mile to be higher than they would be without government intervention. The EPA has adopted some of the carbon dioxide emission increasing regulations pioneered by California, and made them federal requlations.
What we need is not a new set of regulations plastered over the old ones, but a careful re-thinking of all of the regulations, in light of new knowledge, and the revocation of all inappropriate regulations before new (and contradictory) ones are added.
The Supreme Court verdict that the EPA must regulate carbon dioxide should be interpreted to require the recall and removal of all of those automotive emission controls which increase carbon dioxide production, and to require the agencies (EPA etc.) which required these devices to pay for this removal.
To bookwerm314, in your post 05:26 PM : May 22, 2007, you mentioned "The massive engine improvements made in the last 20 years have gone into larger faster cars."
That is the same period that that the GOVERNMENT (US TAXPAYERS) provided $ BILLIONs for development of loser emissions and higher fuel economy vehicles! And this is what WE got. CAFE is "PUSHING A ROPE"!
Of course WE should not despair ... I think that these investments are what enabled the EU to have those CLEANER and HIGHER MPG vehicles!
So, IF the Detroit3 can't/won't immediately commit to production volumes of vehicles by 2010 with CO2 emissions below 140 g/km and 44 mpg(US) combined average ...
THEN demand that Congress should WAIVE ALL IMPORT RESTRICTIONS AND TARIFFS on vehicles that do get 44 mpg or better, CO2 less than 140 g/km, and meet Euro Step IV (or Step V) emissions and Safety standards; Effective IMMEDIATELY for a period of 36 months (OR 300,000 units of each model satisfying the criteria) EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
bookwerm314: "I strongly support this, but lets all recognize that it really is an increase in Miles Per Gallon, and NOT an "emissions" challenge."
EU regulations on CO2 fleet average/manufacturer emissions, currently at 160 g/km going to 140 g/km in 2008 with 130 g/km being discussed for 2012, have resulted in a significant number of vehicles with lower emissions AND coincidentially, higher combined average mpg.
There are already about 340 vehicles that meet or beat the 2008 CO2 emission level of 140 g/km. These machines generally get better than 44 mpg(US) combined city/highway. http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/
As you probably already know it is almost impossible to get this type of information on US vehicles. The general range for "domestic" Det3 product seem to range from a minimum of to 240 up to (and possibly above) 500 g/km.
And, that does not even address the 10x greater sulfur and 2x greater thermal emissions of these Det3 "domestic" products!
alphaa10, spoken like a true liberal, very revealing. If you had any technical knowledge whatsoever, take a look at an emission test result for a car that easily passes. Neglibile polution. Some cars can pass WITHOUT catalytic converters at normal operating temperatures! Why? Because they burn so clean and efficiently.
If you want to drive me on all my sales calls, or ride with parents who have to take their children to day care and pick them up, or school, or take others on errands after work, or drive 5 miles to pick up a co-worker 10 miles from work, so we can all use "public transportation", then register your clean-bus service and make sure it's cheaper than us driving ourselves.
In other words, the worst of the 48+ vehicles the Det3 and their associates are manufacturing and selling * IN * Europe * get 69.8% better gas mileage than the 25.9 mpg average of the 19 "best mpg domestic vehicles". In fact, five (5) of the EU FORDs have over 100% higher combined mpg. For fun, take a look at the Ford New Mondeo (May 2007) [50 mpg(US) highway]! or the Ford 8/9 passenger Tourneo van [35 mpg(US) highway]! See: http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search
How can WE get fuel effect low emissions vehicles like the 50 to 70 mpg(US) highway less than 140 g/km CO2 vehicles listed in http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search
IF the Detroit3 will not immediately commit to production volumes of 44 mpg(US) combined average vehicles by 2010 ...
THEN demand that Congress should WAIVE ALL IMPORT RESTRICTIONS AND TARIFFS on vehicles that do get 44 mpg or better, CO2 less than 140 g/km, and meet Euro Step IV (or Step V) emissions and Safety standards; Effective IMMEDIATELY for a period of 36 months (OR 300,000 units of each model satisfying the criteria) EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
IF YOU THINK the WAIVER idea is reasonable after OUR 30 year wait and $Billions of TAXPAYER funds expended for the development and implementation of low emissions and higher mpg vehicles ... please CALL YOUR ELECTED Representatives in DC and tell them you want "44 mpg by 2010 - WAIVE IMPORT RESTRICTIONS if that is the only way!"
As an exercise, I listed all 34 vehicles rated to achieve 30 mpg(US) or greater combined average city/highway for 2007 according to http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byMPG.htm
Then, their 2008 mpg combined average values were established using http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp
to determine their fuel economy ratings under the 2008 methods. The average mpg(US) combined city/highway for these 34 vehicles is 28.7 mpg using the 2008 method.
The 15 Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Nissan, and Toyota vehicles yield an average of 32.1 mpg(US) combined city/highway using the 2008 methods.
The remaining 19 "best mpg domestic" vehicles yield an average of 25.9 mpg(US) combined city/highway using the 2008 methods.
NOT ONE of these 19 "best mpg domestic vehicles" has a combined average over 30 mpg according to the 2008 criteria !
The CO2 emissions the 19 "best mpg domestic vehicles" range from 240 g/km and significantly higher. Many domestic machines are in the 350 to 500 g/km range.
On the other hand, the auto companies with significant sales in the USA (or their Euro partners) have over 48 vehicles in Europe that achieve over 44 mpg(US) combined average. A majority are diesels meeting Euro Step IV emission (and soon Step V) with CO2 emissions below ** 140 g/km **. By comparison, the "domestics" typically range between 240 and 500 g/km. Here is a list of these high mpg vehicles in Europe http://www.40mpg.org/pdfs/021407_fuel_efficient_vehicle_gap.xls
California residents and government continue to blame everyone in the world other than themselves for their problems with pollution. California residents and their government try to require non-residents to make changes to solve California's problems.
That is, force the carmakers to decrease tailpipe emissions for the whole country.
California can get the decrease they want and more, by changing there own transportation habits. Try some self-sacrifice.
The California citizens can limit the engine and vehicle size themselves, by law if necessary.
Limit engines to four cylinder for all personal vehicles, "50% increase in vehicle mileage". Companies can use whatever size is necessary, but only for business use.
California residents do not need four wheel drive, maximum horsepower vehicles.
The vehicle size change can give immediate emission reduction, not reductions five to ten years from now. No effect on the rest of the country. Plenty of business for import vehicle manufacturers, and hurt for the domestic manufacturers "quite popular with California residents".
Get some common sense and start public transportation, and state wide rail service.
deuuuce said, "What a load of ***. Modern cars run AMAZINGLY clean as it stands right now..." ---
You are much too easily amazed (and deceived)-- try leaving Faux News Network out of your daily diet.
"Hundreds of thousands of cars sitting idle for hours" is not the only green answer to TENS of hundreds of thousands of individuals like you driving one car per person. Mass transit is used around the world with great success where public policy supports its use.
But your last statement indicts your abyssmal level of knowledge-- "... it's a crime for one state to dictate an already VERY clean industry."
Rather, it is a crime for the EPA to fail to act (according to its legal mandate) against greenhouse gases. If you disagree, tell it to the US Supreme Court.
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
"What we need is not a new set of regulations plastered over the old ones, but a careful re-thinking of all of the regulations, in light of new knowledge, and the revocation of all inappropriate regulations before new (and contradictory) ones are added."
Your point is well stated!
What WE need is a COMPLETE REEVALUATION of emissions, fuels, enegines, and combustion strategies to arrive at the TOP TWO (2) "LEAST HARM" SOLUTIONS [available based on TODAY's technology] to OUR future automotive needs.
Then follow that up with the TOP TWO (2) "LEAST HARM" SOLUTIONS for the future based on most promising evolving technology.
Then work like "crazy" to get them into the market and to the consumer!
What we need is not a new set of regulations plastered over the old ones, but a careful re-thinking of all of the regulations, in light of new knowledge, and the revocation of all inappropriate regulations before new (and contradictory) ones are added.
The Supreme Court verdict that the EPA must regulate carbon dioxide should be interpreted to require the recall and removal of all of those automotive emission controls which increase carbon dioxide production, and to require the agencies (EPA etc.) which required these devices to pay for this removal.
That is the same period that that the GOVERNMENT (US TAXPAYERS) provided $ BILLIONs for development of loser emissions and higher fuel economy vehicles! And this is what WE got. CAFE is "PUSHING A ROPE"!
Of course WE should not despair ... I think that these investments are what enabled the EU to have those CLEANER and HIGHER MPG vehicles!
So, IF the Detroit3 can't/won't immediately commit to production volumes of vehicles by 2010 with CO2 emissions below 140 g/km and 44 mpg(US) combined average ...
THEN demand that Congress should WAIVE ALL IMPORT RESTRICTIONS AND TARIFFS on vehicles that do get 44 mpg or better, CO2 less than 140 g/km, and meet Euro Step IV (or Step V) emissions and Safety standards; Effective IMMEDIATELY for a period of 36 months (OR 300,000 units of each model satisfying the criteria) EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
EU regulations on CO2 fleet average/manufacturer emissions, currently at 160 g/km going to 140 g/km in 2008 with 130 g/km being discussed for 2012, have resulted in a significant number of vehicles with lower emissions AND coincidentially, higher combined average mpg.
There are already about 340 vehicles that meet or beat the 2008 CO2 emission level of 140 g/km. These machines generally get better than 44 mpg(US) combined city/highway.
http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search/
As you probably already know it is almost impossible to get this type of information on US vehicles. The general range for "domestic" Det3 product seem to range from a minimum of to 240 up to (and possibly above) 500 g/km.
And, that does not even address the 10x greater sulfur and 2x greater thermal emissions of these Det3 "domestic" products!
For what it is worth ...
If you want to drive me on all my sales calls, or ride with parents who have to take their children to day care and pick them up, or school, or take others on errands after work, or drive 5 miles to pick up a co-worker 10 miles from work, so we can all use "public transportation", then register your clean-bus service and make sure it's cheaper than us driving ourselves.
In other words, the worst of the 48+ vehicles the Det3 and their associates are manufacturing and selling * IN * Europe * get 69.8% better gas mileage than the 25.9 mpg average of the 19 "best mpg domestic vehicles". In fact, five (5) of the EU FORDs have over 100% higher combined mpg. For fun, take a look at the Ford New Mondeo (May 2007) [50 mpg(US) highway]! or the Ford 8/9 passenger Tourneo van [35 mpg(US) highway]!
See: http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search
How can WE get fuel effect low emissions vehicles like the 50 to 70 mpg(US) highway less than 140 g/km CO2 vehicles listed in http://www.vcacarfueldata.org.uk/search
IF the Detroit3 will not immediately commit to production volumes of 44 mpg(US) combined average vehicles by 2010 ...
THEN demand that Congress should WAIVE ALL IMPORT RESTRICTIONS AND TARIFFS on vehicles that do get 44 mpg or better, CO2 less than 140 g/km, and meet Euro Step IV (or Step V) emissions and Safety standards; Effective IMMEDIATELY for a period of 36 months (OR 300,000 units of each model satisfying the criteria) EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY.
IF YOU THINK the WAIVER idea is reasonable after OUR 30 year wait and $Billions of TAXPAYER funds expended for the development and implementation of low emissions and higher mpg vehicles ... please CALL YOUR ELECTED Representatives in DC and tell them you want "44 mpg by 2010 - WAIVE IMPORT RESTRICTIONS if that is the only way!"
PASS IT ON ...
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/byMPG.htm
Then, their 2008 mpg combined average values were established using
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectYear.jsp
to determine their fuel economy ratings under the 2008 methods. The average mpg(US) combined city/highway for these 34 vehicles is 28.7 mpg using the 2008 method.
The 15 Honda, Hyundai, Kia, Nissan, and Toyota vehicles yield an average of 32.1 mpg(US) combined city/highway using the 2008 methods.
The remaining 19 "best mpg domestic" vehicles yield an average of 25.9 mpg(US) combined city/highway using the 2008 methods.
NOT ONE of these 19 "best mpg domestic vehicles" has a combined average over 30 mpg according to the 2008 criteria !
The CO2 emissions the 19 "best mpg domestic vehicles" range from 240 g/km and significantly higher. Many domestic machines are in the 350 to 500 g/km range.
On the other hand, the auto companies with significant sales in the USA (or their Euro partners) have over 48 vehicles in Europe that achieve over 44 mpg(US) combined average. A majority are diesels meeting Euro Step IV emission (and soon Step V) with CO2 emissions below ** 140 g/km **. By comparison, the "domestics" typically range between 240 and 500 g/km. Here is a list of these high mpg vehicles in Europe http://www.40mpg.org/pdfs/021407_fuel_efficient_vehicle_gap.xls
themselves for their problems with pollution. California residents and their government
try to require non-residents to make changes to solve California's problems.
That is, force the carmakers to decrease tailpipe emissions for the whole country.
California can get the decrease they want and more, by changing there own transportation
habits. Try some self-sacrifice.
The California citizens can limit the engine and vehicle size themselves, by law if necessary.
Limit engines to four cylinder for all personal vehicles, "50% increase in vehicle mileage". Companies can use whatever size is necessary, but only for business use.
California residents do not need four wheel drive, maximum horsepower vehicles.
The vehicle size change can give immediate emission reduction, not reductions five to ten
years from now. No effect on the rest of the country. Plenty of business for import
vehicle manufacturers, and hurt for the domestic manufacturers "quite popular with California
residents".
Get some common sense and start public transportation, and state wide rail service.
---
You are much too easily amazed (and deceived)-- try leaving Faux News Network out of your daily diet.
"Hundreds of thousands of cars sitting idle for hours" is not the only green answer to TENS of hundreds of thousands of individuals like you driving one car per person. Mass transit is used around the world with great success where public policy supports its use.
But your last statement indicts your abyssmal level of knowledge-- "... it's a crime for one state to dictate an already VERY clean industry."
Rather, it is a crime for the EPA to fail to act (according to its legal mandate) against greenhouse gases. If you disagree, tell it to the US Supreme Court.
If American cars are less fuel efficient, clean running, and reliable, then I'll just continue to buy a Toyota or a Honda.