TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC
Start a Discussionhttps://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/tags/

Trump's EPA will try to destroy California's CARB to set its own rules...coming soon...

Discussion in 'Energy, Environment, and Policy' started by gene, Mar 3, 2017.

  1. gene

    gene Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,218
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, CA
    I have not found a thread addressing this likely court battle. California has retained Eric Holder to defends its position to set its own standards for emissions and EV requirments.

    This from today's LA times: EPA to reconsider vehicle fuel standards, may move against California targets

    "According to individuals briefed on the matter, the new administration also is considering issuing an executive order that would revoke California's ability to set its own, tighter targets for those model years. California is the only state allowed to do so under the Clean Air Act, but other states can adopt its regulations as their own."
     
    • Informative x 1
  2. SmartElectric

    SmartElectric Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2014
    Messages:
    1,419
    Location:
    Toronto,Canada
    Then California changes a law to only allow cars built in California to use the carpool lane. Boom. Instant Tesla max sales...

    Whatever. States like california and new york will rebell and figure a way around the Federal laws.
     
  3. Mark Z

    Mark Z Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2013
    Messages:
    1,620
    Location:
    North Orange County
    IMHO, the new administration wouldn't want California law to apply to the entire nation. The states could regulate, but not outside the state.

    OT: Now if we can just get Gov. Brown to push for an LA/SF Hyperloop instead of a train.
     
    • Like x 1
  4. jbcarioca

    jbcarioca Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2015
    Messages:
    2,680
    In order to discuss this subject in context it is necessary to understand exactly what the CARB exemption is and how it happened. Then it becomes easier to understand how the avowed 'states rights' advocates can be against the exemption for CARB. This issue is very hot now, not least because the present US Federal Goverment policies are likely to view anything from California with particular disfavor.

    https://www.nap.edu/read/11586/chapter/5
     
  5. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    4,056
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    Pretty sure if you left California on it's own, it would ban all but Toyotas from the HOV lanes and incentives. California is not particularly impressed with having manufacturing in this state.
     
  6. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    4,056
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    BTW - Toyota will tell CARB where to set the mileage standards, nobody else. Not the EPA, not the POTUS, not the director of CARB, not the Governor.

    Right now Toyota has about the thirstiest and dirtiest large pickup and SUVs, so they will probably ask for a heavy vehicle exemption or for the timetable to be relaxed.
     
  7. wdolson

    wdolson Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    3,843
    Location:
    Clark Co, WA
    I hate hypocrisy. All for states rights right up to the point the state does something they don't like, then suddenly a centralized federal government is the best thing ever.
     
    • Like x 7
  8. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    4,056
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    You do realize it's a little late to disband the EPA. You might as well wish for access to public land today. Not going to happen.
     
  9. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    4,056
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    Here's a question: Does California get special permission to deliberately pollute other states? If so, is it because of it's tremendous power in Washington DC? Or is it a birthright of the wealthy developers?
     
  10. kort677

    kort677 Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    4,588
    Location:
    florida.
  11. wdolson

    wdolson Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    3,843
    Location:
    Clark Co, WA
    That wasn't my point. My point is that one political party in this country wants to dismantle the federal government right up to the point where they can use the power of the federal government to stop someone from doing something they don't like or force someone to do something they don't want to do. As I said I hate hypocrisy. Even if I don't agree with it, I can respect a consistent ideology and the logical conclusions that come from it.

    I actually think reasonable government regulation is a good thing. Sometimes regulations get out of hand and those things should be addressed, but throwing out the concept of regulation all together because it sometimes gets applied wrong is like stopping all kids from learning because one kid figured out how to make a bomb with stuff he learned somewhere.

    I may be slow kid in class today, but how is California deliberately polluting other states?
     
    • Like x 3
    • Love x 1
  12. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    4,056
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    Yes, the Feds are taking our land, then they make it off limits for anything but industry or bombing ranges. They also control how you deal with your own land unless you are rich enough to rent politicians.

    The good news is money talks, so if you are very rich, and a DNC donor, you can skip these hassles. Our farm had a migratory bird pond on it, that we kept there for kicks. We were not allowed to use the land for anything but farming. We sold the farm at farm pricing. Then bucks exchanged hands in Sacramento, it was rezoned for Close Quarters Combat housing (good news? you can mow your lawn during a commercial break on TV) when the rest of housing was required to be 1/2 acre minimum. And of course, the waterfowl habit is gone now.

    We used to ride all the time on a dry lake. You've seen this dry lake in hundreds of commercials and TV shows, it's called El Mirage. The first episode of Grand Tour shows you what it looks like. There is no life on the dry lake as the rainwater dries too fast. So the BLM fences it off, and now charges us $15? a day to visit it with all kinds of restrictions now. There is a plan in motion to turn it into a closed off Solar Array or Windfarm, we will see. The land selection is based on Washington DC campaign donations (free after bribes). It is one of the last of these kinds of environments in California with public access. There are other large dry lakes, but they most (all?) off limits or in the planning stages of cutting off the public.
     
    • Funny x 1
  13. Oil4AsphaultOnly

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2015
    Messages:
    761
    Location:
    Arcadia, CA
    I'm not a fan of H2, but you're espousing some serious alt-facts.

    A) California requires 1/3 of it's H2 come from renewable sources - hydro, wind, solar, geo.
    B) The rest comes from the steam-reformation of nat gas using california's emissions mix.
    C) many of the "dirty" manufacturing jobs aren't even in the US anymore, let alone california! The rest is just high cost of living standards. This is the result of a strong EPA, which Pruitt/Trump has just successfully castrated.

    Do we, as citizens, have any grounds to fire Pruitt for dereliction of duty?
     
    • Love x 1
  14. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    4,056
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    California's goal of 1/3 'renewable' has two problems. If suppliers cannot hit it, they are exempt (WTF?), and it does not mean Zero GHG either. Renewables can make more CO2 and other GHG's than gasoline as long as they are not petro based.

    No, many mfrs are now in Arizona and Nevada. Go look. I send their parts still, just not by truck, by UPS instead.

    Hydrogen is effectively exempt from GHG levels, the stations are insanely expensive to build and operate, the fuel price is like running a steam powered car by burning money instead of wood, the CA rebate is massive for them, the cars are silly expensive, and have poor acceleration and warmup. AND? Fuel cells do not last as long as modern batteries and are more expensive.

    We pay tens of millions for scientists for CARB and at Universities, so none of this is news to them. They just choose to colorize the truth. Zero Emission, Free Fuel, Cheap to operate!
     
    • Love x 1
  15. McRat

    McRat Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2016
    Messages:
    4,056
    Location:
    Norco, CA
    There is nothing wrong with protecting the environment. There is something wrong with lying to the public though.
     
  16. wdolson

    wdolson Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2015
    Messages:
    3,843
    Location:
    Clark Co, WA
    You seem to believe that if Toyota puts more SUVs for sale in other states they will sell them at profitable prices. Those vehicles sell well in the US market, but they adjust production to what will sell. When they produce more than the public wants, dealers need to cut prices until they sell and they won't order a many next year.

    The big 3 used to make large, rear wheel drive, V-8 powered family cars. Fuel economy standards combined with higher fuel prices for many years pretty much mode those cars extinct. In the case of the Impala/Caprice, it's now applied to a smaller car with a V-6 and FWD and the Crown Victoria/Grand Marquis names are gone. If they were allowed to sell more V-8 powered cars, they would sell some, but to a large extent the public doesn't want them anymore.

    SUVs and trucks sell well in the US because gasoline prices are low and they have been since around late 2010. If gas prices went up sharply like they did in the 1970s, suddenly sales of economy cars would skyrocket. That's how the Japanese cars got a foothold in the American market. They provided more economic, but well built cars at a time many Americans were looking at their big V-8 powered cars and thinking they couldn't afford them anymore and the smaller cars from the Big 3 were awful.

    H2 might have a future as a long distance truck fuel, but I think it will lose out as a passenger car fuel to electrics. H2 stations are very expensive, much more expensive than gasoline stations, there are storage problems, and economically H2 from source to turning the wheels is 3X more wasteful than electricity. Electric cars aren't quite to the point where they are price competitive with ICE, but they are much closer than H2 is.

    It is possible to make your own fuel for an ICE, you can grow some kind of biomass and make ethanol, but the feds aren't too keen on the idea because the same process also makes distilled drinking alcohol and there really isn't any way to prevent that. Making your own hydrogen at home is technically possible with a solar array and a water source, but it's very energy inefficient. Making it from your natural gas supply is not very easy.

    Fueling an electric car from fuel made at home is very easy though. Not everyone has the climate for efficient solar (it isn't as efficient at northern latitudes, nor in places that are cloudy a lot), but in places where the sun does shine much of the year, it allows people with electric cars to do most of their driving for free. With gasoline so cheap, it isn't a convincing argument, but the world's supply of oil is subject to disruptions. A major war in the Middle East would not impact US supplies dramatically (most US oil imports come from this hemisphere), but it would drive up the global price of oil.

    Considering how unskilled and unstable the management in Washington DC is these days, the odds of a major war have gone up IMO.

    California doesn't do much manufacturing these days. Los Angeles used to be the hub of the aircraft industry with North American, Northrop, Douglas, and Lockheed in the LA area. Consolidated (later Convair) was down the road in San Diego. All those plants are gone. There still in some manufacturing of satellites in California, but the only aerospace builder making large things there is SpaceX. Lockheed's Palmdale plant may be doing some manufacturing, but that place is so hush hush, nobody knows for sure what's going on in there.

    A lot of the old aircraft factories have either been torn down or re-purposed. The old Consolidated plant at Lindbergh Field in San Diego is still there, but it's now owned by the Navy and used as a testing facility.

    California also had a lot of car manufacturing plants at one time, but now only has one building new cars. There are some small shops making conversions and custom cars, but that's very low scale.

    California was a major ship building center in the 1940s. Both the Bay Area and Los Angeles areas had major shipyards. The Kaiser yard in the Bay Area was one of the highest volume shipyards in history. The only ship industry in California is the ports for trade and some ship repair businesses.

    The San Joaquin Valley does have a large food processing industry. Fresno, Kern, and Tulare Counties compete every year to see which one takes the crown as the biggest ag producing county in the world. California is a massive ag producer. But food processing and packing is not a terribly dirty industry as far as air quality goes, and it can't really move all that far from where the food is grown.

    There are some oil refineries in California. Tesoro and Chevron are the biggest refiners, but Exxon, Shell, Phillips, and Valero also have large refineries somewhere in the state. If demand for gasoline dropped significantly, at least some of those refineries would shut down. Because of NIMBY, building new refineries in other places is difficult. The US's refining capacity is very tight because very few refineries have been built since the 1970s and the population has grown.

    A lot of the refineries are in coastal cities to refine oil coming in from overseas. Oil companies are likely going to suck it up and keep refineries running where they are rather than fight the public to build refineries in other places. They would need the expense of building pipelines to the new refineries. Add to that oil refineries need a resource that isn't common in the interior of the western US: water. Arizona's government would probably welcome refineries, but there isn't enough water to run the plants.

    Just about all the manufactured goods sold in California today come from out of state. Either made in another state, or more likely, comes in from overseas.

    California's clean air standards have already driven out most of the industries that would be driven out. The remaining industries don't have that big an impact on air quality, or it just isn't feasible to move them.

    I don't quite get this argument. If Los Angeles' air quality improves from a reduction of fossil fuel use, the pollution falling on any land inland from the city would go down. I would think this would be a good thing for the environment.

    Many of the cities of the San Joaquin Valley, especially the more land locked ones like Bakersfield and Fresno have some of the worst air quality in the US. Hydrocarbons escaping from oil production in Kern County doesn't help, but the Bay Area's smog is the worst culprit. The prevailing winds on the CA coast blow the Bay Area's smog inland where it gets trapped in the southern Valley.

    If the Bay Area produces less air pollution, the air quality in the Valley will improve too. Here are the worst polluted cities in the US for 2015:
    The 10 Most Polluted Cities in America

    California has more than its share. I can see why air quality is a major issue there, it's a major problem.
     
    • Informative x 5
    • Like x 1
    • Love x 1
  17. gene

    gene Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2013
    Messages:
    1,218
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, CA
    ^^^^^ Well said wdolson. Appreciate the accurate information.
     
  18. Ampster

    Ampster Member

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2012
    Messages:
    833
    #18 Ampster, Mar 4, 2017
    Last edited: Mar 4, 2017
    Not anymore since ToyotaUSA has left California and moved to Texas.
     
    • Like x 1
  19. kort677

    kort677 Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    4,588
    Location:
    florida.
    help me out here, could you expand on how relocating their corporate operations affects their retail business.
     
  20. cpa

    cpa Active Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    1,463
    Location:
    Central Valley
    A few points to echo wdolson's fine essay:

    I live in (cough, cough) Fresno. Some of the air pollution also comes from China, believe it or not. The prevailing wind blows east across the Pacific and through Altamont Pass or the delta into the Valley. Farming and trucking also contribute to our poor air quality. Farmers still use old, decrepit diesel tractors and pump motors. Seasonal truckers of ag products also have 1980s diesel motors in many of their tractors. Almond, walnut and pistachio harvest consist of shaking trees, sweeping the nuts into rows and then scooping them up into gondolas behind trucks for hauling to the huller/processor. A lot of dust is in the air from August through October.

    The Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley is a U-shaped valley (formed by glaciation) that extends from Shasta Lake on the north to the Grapevine on the south. We are surrounded by mountains: The Sierra Nevada Range to the east, the transverse ranges to the south and the coastal ranges to the west. The north is a mixture of the Cascade Range and Trinity Alps. The only exit for our heat is through the delta. And since the prevailing winds are from the west, the pollution cannot escape. It just gets pushed further north and south. As a result, when the temperatures rise in late April-early May, we get an inversion layer that hovers about 1,200-1,500 feet above the valley floor, beneath the elevations of the surrounding mountains. It rises slightly at night when the sun sets, but typically anything that is in the air remains trapped within this inversion layer. Cities closer to the delta do receive some respite from the pollution and sweltering heat, but the further one is from the delta, the worse the temperatures and air pollution are.

    On those rare winter days after a good rainstorm, and there is a zephyr to keep the particulate matter moving about, the snow-capped Sierra Nevada mountains are truly a beautiful sight. We might be able to see the mountains from our home 20-30 days per year. The rest of the year they are obscured by all the crap in the air.
     
    • Informative x 2

Share This Page