'Automakers, Rejecting Trump Pollution Rule, Strike a Deal With California'

1 Like

One of many ways companies, families, individuals, cities, states, etc. can be forward looking and responsible even when the present administration has other priorities.


Just because you don’t have to do it does not mean you can’t do it.

1 Like

It makes good business sense. They are companies already capable of producing clean vehicles. The ones that will balk are those already paying mega bucks in fines.

So, what happens when DT is challenged and loses? Not sell cars in CA until you catch up to everyone else?

It’s likely when a Democratic president is elected that’s the more restrictive fleet rules will be reinstated. All it takes to rescind an executive order is another one. I think the car companies are taking a longer term look at these rules. OTOH, they might actually care about the environment and want to keep coastal communities from going underwater.


This is really nothing new. Decades ago there were CA emission vehicles and NON-CA emission vehicles. Many of those vehicles were also sold in other states as well. Then the Fed’s required ALL vehicles to meet CA’s emission standard. It may be cheaper for manufacturers to build to one standard instead of two and we all can benefit.

CA has an extremely unique air pollution problem. They should be allowed to control their air quality. This administration is also trying to squash CA’s right to set their own standards. So much for the GOP philosophy of States Rights.

1 Like

Not a complete answer. Once stiffer emission standards were put in place by the EPA (driven by California, for sure) California was allowed an exception to impose even stiffer standards, and they continued doing that. Other states were allowed to follow suit but some chose limits between or just different than California and the federal standards. It became a bit of a regulatory mess that the government fixed by forcing a choice - Cali standards or federal standards, period. Some 12-15 states or so took Cali standards and the rest federal.

1 Like

If you are guiding a huge company that makes and sells cars all over the world, you look at the big picture. European standards for pollution are very strict these days, with no sign of any reductions in the future. China is on the verge of banning internal combustion engines in the next 20 years, as are several other, smaller countries. India has an enormous air pollution problem. It would make no sense for a company to go along with a what may be temporary reduction in standards by the US. The theatrical effort we are seeing to “go back to the good old days” is nothing but a political stunt, and any responsible executive decision maker would try to ignore it.

Thanks. I didn’t know other states took up CA’s standards. I know Oregon took up some of them, but the irony is if you live outside Portland, no one checks if your car is still running clean.

That might explain why some MC companies dropped their dual standard ratings… cheaper to build a single standard.

Or 2 (Federal and Other) instead of 10, 12, 15!

Doesn’t matter if anyone checks. It all still has to meet regs.

it would be more interesting debate if everyone involved agreed what the pertinent numbers are. In particular how much less would the same car cost to the consumer using Calif’s rules vs the White House’s rules?

It says they made a deal with CA. Hmm… wonder how much CAFE gave up in negotiation.

If consumers want it, they will make it. Just look at all the cars that far exceed federal safety standards.


They need to have one standard , it will be cheaper for all involved and California can fall in line if it is a reasonable standard for all .


Maybe not. It will be less expensive to buy a car, but the long term costs in health and global warming will dwarf the immediate cost increases. How much will it cost to build sea walls around Boston, New York City, Philadelphia, Baltimore, DC, Norfolk, Miami, Tampa, New Orleans, San Diego, LA, San Francisco, and Seattle? And that doesn’t include all the low lying areas in between or in Alaska and Hawaii. We alone can’t solve these problems, but others, like China and India, are starting to do their part, too.

Sea walls keep rainwater, the real cause of flooding, in. In places with aquifers in contact with the ocean, seawater infiltrates.

If you look at CO2 per person, China & India are already doing more than their share. If we made a crash project to improve solar, wind, batteries, and grids, we could sell it to all these guys, make money on the deal. Disparaging foreigners is more fun.

1 Like

Unintended consequences?


Oh please don’t hurry, relax a little and do not hastily jump into that kind of unknown territory.
Over here, we’ll be more than happy to cover the demand for many more years to come and take that burden of your shoulders. :sunglasses:

1 Like

Annapolis, MD and Norfolk, VA flood regularly in the lowest lying areas because of sea level rise. Annapolis is on the Chesapeake Bay, and I have witnessed high tide floods at the harbor on clear days. The Norfolk Naval Base is essentially on the ocean, and the US Navy is very concerned about regular flooding.

Ok, I know this is a serious issue, but couldn’t help laughing that the US Navy is worried about flooding … lol …Will we be hearing the Army is concerned there are too many hills next? the Air Force worrying about the amount of air in the atmosphere? :wink: