• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

EPA poised to scrap fuel economy targets that are key to curbing global warming — setting up clash w

The targets will almost certainly be put back in place in a few years.
 
Lord of Planar said:
ARE YOU JOKING?

Have you noticed how new cars have taken a sharp rise in costs, since Obama introduced the newest CAFE standards?
Click to expand...

I have to wonder who thought following California down their rabbit hole was a good idea.
 




[FONT=&quot]Environmental and consumer groups are howling about the Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to weaken fuel-economy standards President Barack Obama put in place in 2012. But Obama himself left his standards vulnerable to revision.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]The original Obama plan was to set aggressive targets that would go progressively higher through model year 2025, when cars would have to average 54.5 miles per gallon. But a mid-term review was supposed to happen in 2018. Automakers and regulators would assess the technological progress needed to meet that goal, along with other factors, such as the types of vehicles consumers were actually buying. In theory, the 2025 target could be rolled back if it seemed technologically out of reach.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]After Trump won the presidency in November 2016, Obama pulled a fast one. His EPA administrator, Gina McCarthy, declared that the 2012 targets were final, more than a year before the EPA and automakers were supposed to review the data and decide on future targets together. Obama essentially threw the automakers under the bus. McCarthy was peppered with questions about whether the EPA sped up the final rulemaking simply because Trump won and might not support the Obama rules. She denied what was obvious to everybody.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]So, not surprisingly, the auto industry appealed to the Trump administration a few months later to reconsider the 2025 targets. And Scott Pruitt, Trump’s EPA administrator, seems likely to oblige. He hasn’t yet said what, exactly, the EPA will do, but in a statement he said Obama, “cut the midterm evaluation process short with politically charged expediency” and “set the standards too high.” The forthcoming Trump standards will presumably be lower. . . . [/FONT]


 
Northern Light said:
This makes me angry because the prior arrangement was not just about climate change but it would've saved consumers money by making vehicles more fuel efficient. Now Trump is basically saying we should stick with the gas guzzling economy.

Sounds like another handout for his corporate buddies in the fossil fuel sector to me, as they're the only ones who would really benefit.
Click to expand...

You will still be able to buy fuel efficient cars. It's just that others for whom performance or cost are important considerations won't be forced to spend more.

Carbon emissions from personal vehicles make up only about 4% of carbon emissions in the US. Even if we eliminated personal transportation entirely it wouldn't make that much of a difference in terms for global warming. Certainly, spending a lot of money for marginal improvements in gas mileage for the sake of the climate makes no sense at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom