Jump to content
Create New...
  • William Maley
    William Maley

    White House Officials and California Quietly Work On A Deal For Emission Standards

      Trying to avoid legal trouble

    Earlier this week, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would be rolling back the fuel-efficiency regulations that were approved during the Obama administration. The agency also announced possibly revoking California's waiver that allows it to set tougher standards on vehicle emissions. The state vowed to fight this. But a new report from the New York Times says California and officials from the Trump administration are in talks about possibly reaching a deal to avoid a legal fight.

    Speaking to a half-dozen of sources briefed about the talks, the Times reports that the two parties, along with representatives of major automakers, "are searching for a compromise that could save a uniform set of standards for the entire country." 

    One of the proposals on the table is to keep the Obama fuel economy standards, but allow automakers to take advantage of more generous loopholes to meet them. In turn, the Trump administration would honor California's wavier through 2030. There could be other proposals in the cards as the EPA, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and the White House begin to coordinate their various strategies.

    There are a number of obstacles that could derail the talks. Various automakers "are in different positions” on how to proceed with the talks. According to a source, some are focused on rolling back the standards through 2025, while others want to have the discussion to reach a compromise to avoid having to build vehicles to different standards. The talks themselves seem to be spinning their wheels. Last week, William Wehrum, the EPA's senior clean air adviser met with Mary D. Nichols, chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board. Depending on who you ask, the meeting didn't amount to anything or was considered to be productive.

    Source: New York Times

    Edited by William Maley

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    5 hours ago, ocnblu said:

    A 50-state standard is best for everyone.  We all want clean air, but fuel mileage is a whole nother ballgame.  People want capable, larger vehicles.

    I agree here that a 50-state standard is best, but at the same time, the 50-state standard needs to take into account the needs of the states with the worst air quality.  So while California should not be dictating policy for the entire country, the entire country does need to follow a standard that protects California air (And Texas, even if they don't care to do it on their own).

    We also need national fuel blend standards, or at least much larger regional standards.  Having 50 states with 50 blend requirements for 3+ different grades of fuel is horribly inefficient.  There is no reason the gasoline I buy in NJ should be different in composition than the gasoline I buy in PA.

    I feel like most of the manufacturers have gone too far with engine downsizing.  Unlike @ocnblu I am not against electrification, in fact I see some strong benefits to it. However, putting these tiny displacement turbo engines is not having the results promised.  Either they need to bring the displacement back up or they need to add electrification to the tiny engines to give them a boost.  The tiny engines are just playing to the EPA test and do not produce the same results in the real world.  Driven normally, the little 1.4s and 1.5s get over worked and burn just as much, or more, fuel than a bigger displacement non-turbo.

    • Agree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    9 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

    There are 50 state emissions standards now for some aspects of vehicle emissions, right?  I've seen that phrase somewhere on documents related to vehicles..

    There are 50-state emissions, but there are also California emissions that have been adopted by 7 or 8 other states.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    3 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    There are 50-state emissions, but there are also California emissions that have been adopted by 7 or 8 other states.

    Washington state is one of the states that fully adopted California emissions and last update this state posted was that there are 17 states now that fully follow the CARB emissions standard. 13 fully enforce it on the auto makers. This puts much more weight behind clean air.

    Known as "Section 177" states, those 13 are: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, dfelt said:

    Washington state is one of the states that fully adopted California emissions and last update this state posted was that there are 17 states now that fully follow the CARB emissions standard. 13 fully enforce it on the auto makers. This puts much more weight behind clean air.

    Known as "Section 177" states, those 13 are: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington

    Yes.  This needs to be eliminated immediately.

    • Disagree 3
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, dfelt said:

    Washington state is one of the states that fully adopted California emissions and last update this state posted was that there are 17 states now that fully follow the CARB emissions standard. 13 fully enforce it on the auto makers. This puts much more weight behind clean air.

    Known as "Section 177" states, those 13 are: Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington

    And Quebec!!!

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-adopts-california-car-emissions-standards-1.837227

    Edited by oldshurst442
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    6 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

    He's ready for some Greek Love

    Im surprised you are even allowed to mention about Greek love...

    Where you come from its a sin...

     

    Where you come from its frowned upon, its denounced and its verboten...

     

    I wouldnt be surprised though, that where you come from, those people that vehemently denounce it, are sooooo flamboyantly immersed in Greek love, they cant even drive straight...

     

     

    Edited by oldshurst442
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 minutes ago, ocnblu said:

    Even idiots and morons?  Come now.

    Well, to be honest. I have never heard him say that he does NOT love you.

    So...yeah! 

    :P

    Edited by oldshurst442
    • Thanks 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1116176_epa-does-not-set-fuel-economy-limits-get-this-right-journalists

    So I like so many thought the EPA did it all but according to this story, EPA sets Emissions, NHTSA is responsible for MPG or corporate average fuel economy rules.

    To Quote the story:

    "The confusion comes because the EPA began to regulate vehicular emissions of the climate-change gas carbon dioxide in 2012, requiring the two agencies had to align those two sets of standards for the first time.

    Previously, the EPA regulated "criteria emissions" (carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and hydrocarbons), which it could do without directly affecting the fuel consumption of the vehicles.

    Following a legal battle that went all the way to the Supreme Court, the EPA was required to regulate CO2 emissions starting in 2012—and those emissions are directly proportional to the amount of fuel burned by the vehicle.

    That meant that the EPA and the NHTSA had to develop standards that "matched," so automakers weren't trying to meet fuel-economy rules that let them emit more CO2 than the EPA would allow.

    In partnership with automakers and the powerful California Air Resources Board, the two agencies did exactly that in 2010 for 2012-2017 vehicles.

    They repeated the process in 2012 for vehicles in model years 2018 through 2025, with a mandatory "midterm review" to look at the 2022-2025 standards before finalizing them."

    Interesting is that the Fed rules for changes must be based on scientific analyses and the 38 page rationale for tossing the rules now in force are primarily industry complaints especially from the oil companies and are devoid of any rigorous scientific analysis and modeling required by law.

    https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1116107_pruitts-epa-decision-38-page-intention-vs-1217-pages-of-analysis 

    Interesting read of the 38pg intention versus the 1,217 page analysis that showed the auto companies had in July 2016 met the standards required and at a much lower cost than they predicted almost 4 yrs ahead of schedule for the 2020 year. This also came to show that they could meet the later standards also.

    Looks like based on reviews from external independent groups that his rollback will fail when challenged in court due to the lack of any scientific proof.

    https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1116165_pruitts-epa-emission-rollback-reasoning-may-well-fail-in-court

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    @ocnblu Thought you would like this.

    The rules passed by Obama actual help trucks and SUV's not hurt them. So since it looks to be more and more that the changes at EPA with Courts challenges will not happen, you can be happy in knowing you get your trucks / SUV/CUVs.

    https://www.greencarreports.com/news/1116104_why-trucks-arent-a-cafe-problem-for-carmakers-despite-their-lobbying-claims

    Good read at the above link the but quote the story:

    "The original CAFE standards, passed in 1975, separated cars from trucks. Automakers had to hit the same average fuel economy target, divided by every vehicle they sold.

    The standards starting in 2012, however, divide cars and trucks into different sizes, known as "footprints" (the area bounded by the four wheels)—and it set lower targets for larger vehicles.

    As automakers sell more trucks (or more larger cars), the fuel economy they must deliver drops.

    Cars and trucks are still separated, but trucks have to meet lower standards than cars, and don't have to do it as soon. When the regulations were developed in 2012, automakers received extra time to develop fuel-saving technologies for trucks. 

    The New York Times suggested automakers now worry Pruitt will go overboard and freeze, roll back, or even dispense altogether with the "unnecessary" emission rules—giving them a black eye when the public largely supports stronger environmental standards."

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    On 5/18/2018 at 8:52 PM, Zane Wylder said:

    I got a simple solution: We give California back to Mexico and proceed with what we were gonna do

    So much for fresh produce in our grocery stores then.

    I thought conservatives were all for states rights? California is doing what is best for California. 

    • Like 1
    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    2 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    So much for fresh produce in our grocery stores then.

    I thought conservatives were all for states rights? California is doing what is best for California. 

    That is up for vigorous debate on so many levels.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    7 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

    So much for fresh produce in our grocery stores then.

    I thought conservatives were all for states rights? California is doing what is best for California. 

    Problem is, the inmates are running the asylum in Cali. Gonna cut most of the politics out, but simply put, there's a reason for the mass exodus basically. If you removed the illegals, implemented voter ID and didn't have radical judges overruling the consent of the govern, then I'd believe the state truly knew best (And the inmates would be put back in their cells)

     

    4 hours ago, ocnblu said:

    That is up for vigorous debate on so many levels.

    It truly is, bro, it truly is

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    11 hours ago, Zane Wylder said:

    Depends on where ya get your news from, but enough politics for now

    No. It really doesn't.  Facts don't change depending on the news source. Doesn't matter if it is politics or cars.  Facts matter around here.

    • Agree 2
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Sending a Christmas eve chuckle your way: Here's Dyan Cannon, who has again poured herself into her clothing, to attend a Lakers game, which she does often. It looks like she can easily fit down many chimneys.  Maybe even into a Christmas gift stocking. I find the different chapters of Dyan Cannon humorous.
    • @Drew Dowdell @Robert Hall @trinacriabob @A Horse With No Name @ccap41 @surreal1272 @oldshurst442  And including all of the C&G members that are here that I do not interact with often enough or those I have forgotten their handles. Wishing each and every one of you a Merry Xmas Eve and Merry Xmas.  To those that do not celebrate Xmas, Happy Hanukkah, Happy Holidays, Happy time off. Wishing each and every person here a restful end to the year, one of love, respect, relaxation to you and your families. Wishing all the best!
    • MOU means that these companies have signed a "Memorandum of Understanding" to explore the participation, involvement and synergy sharing in relation to the business integration through a joint holding company. Back in August 1st, 2024 Nissan and Honda created a Joint Holding Company for the commencement of a strategic partnership focused on intelligence and electrification. This was to start the consideration towards integration of the two companies. Mitsubishi Motors has now signed onto this MOU to explore the possibility of achieving synergies at an increased level through business participation or integration. In basic terms, the three companies have agreed to join forces in sharing costs to move forward with EV platform R&D while they also look at the ICE "Internal Combustion Engine" gas side of having shared platforms to reduce costs and hopefully save the three auto companies by keeping them alive.  While Nissan and Honda have agreed to move forward in this integration of the two auto companies, Mitsubishi Motors will make a final decision by the end of January 2025 about possibly joining in with the integration of Mitsubishi Motors into this joint 3 auto company venture. Nissan and Honda have already agreed to a full SDV or Software-defined vehicles program moving forward that will allow them to have a solid crucial collaboration of intelligence and electrification for future products. Both companies have stated that the acceleration of technology and the rapid change of the auto industry will allow these two companies to maintain global competitiveness and deliver more attractive products and services for customers worldwide. Nissan global mobility product line merged with Honda four-wheel-vehicles, motor cycles and power products can allow both companies to become more attractive to shareholders and innovation of products to sell to customers worldwide according to the CEOs of both companies. Nissan and Honda have stated the following: Nissan and Honda aim to become a world-class mobility company with sales revenue exceeding 30 trillion yen ($190 Billion U.S. Dollars) and operating profit of more than 3 trillion yen ($19 billion U.S. Dollars). The expected synergies from the business integration at this time are: 1. Scale advantages by standardizing vehicle platforms By standardizing the vehicle platforms of both companies across various product segments, the companies expect to create stronger products, reduce costs, enhance development efficiencies, and improve investment efficiencies through standardized production processes. The integration is projected to increase sales and operational volumes, allowing the companies to reduce development costs per vehicle, including for future digital services, while maximizing profits. By accelerating the mutual complementation of their global vehicle offerings - including ICE, HEV, PHEV, and EV models - Nissan and Honda will be better positioned to meet diverse customer needs around the world and deliver optimal products, leading to improved customer satisfaction. 2. Enhancement of development capabilities and cost synergies through the integration of R&D functions In accordance with the MOU to deepen strategic partnership and the joint research agreement on fundamental technologies dated August 1, the two companies have started joint research in fundamental technologies in the area of vehicle platforms for next-generation software-defined vehicles (SDVs), which is the cornerstone of the field of intelligence. After the business integration, both companies will encompass more integrated collaboration across all R&D functions, including fundamental research and vehicle application technology research. This approach is expected to enable both companies to efficiently and swiftly enhance their technological expertise, achieving both improvements in development capabilities and reductions in development costs through the integration of overlapping functions.   3. Optimizing manufacturing systems and facilities The companies anticipate that optimizing their manufacturing plants and energy service facilities, combined with improved collaboration through the shared use of production lines, will result in a substantial improvement in capacity utilization leading to a decrease in fixed costs.   4. Strengthening competitive advantages across the supply chain through the integration of purchasing functions To fully leverage the synergies from optimizing development and production capacity, both companies intend to boost their competitiveness by improving and streamlining purchasing operations and source common parts from the same the supply chain and in collaboration with business partners.   5. Realizing cost synergies through operational efficiency improvements The companies expect that the integration of systems and back-office operations, along with the upgrade and standardization of operational processes, will drive significant cost reductions.   6. Acquisition of scale advantages through integration in sales finance functions By integrating relevant areas of sales finance functions of both companies and expanding the scale of operations, the companies aim to provide a range of mobility solutions, including new financial services throughout the vehicle lifecycle, to customers of both organizations.   7. Establishment of a talent foundation for intelligence and electrification The human resources of the companies are an invaluable asset, and establishing a strong human resource foundation is crucial for the transformation that will come with the business integration. After the integration, increased employee exchanges and technical collaboration between the companies are expected to promote further skill development. Moreover, by leveraging each company's access to talent markets, attracting exceptional talent will become more attainable. Method of business integration and stock listing Nissan and Honda, with the result of the consideration, plan to establish, through a joint share transfer, a joint holding company that will be the parent company of both companies. This will be subject to approval at each company's general meeting of shareholders and obtaining necessary approvals from relevant authorities for this business integration, based on the premise that Nissan's turnaround*1 actions are steadily executed. Both Nissan and Honda will be fully owned subsidiaries of the joint holding company*2. Additionally, the companies plan to continue coexisting and developing the brands held by Honda and Nissan equally. Shares of the newly established joint holding company under consideration are planned to be newly listed (technical listing) on the Prime Market of the Tokyo Stock Exchange (“TSE”). The listing is scheduled for August 2026. With the listing of the joint holding company, both Nissan and Honda will become wholly owned subsidiaries of the joint holding company and will be scheduled to be delisted from the TSE. However, shareholders of both companies will continue to be able to trade shares of the joint holding company issued during this share transfer on the TSE. The listing date of the joint holding company and the delisting date of both Nissan and Honda will be determined in accordance with the regulations of the TSE. Regarding the organizational structure of the joint holding company, and both companies which will become wholly-owned subsidiaries of the joint holding company after the business integration, the optimal structure for realizing synergies, including the integration of R&D functions, purchasing functions, and manufacturing functions, will be discussed and considered within the integration preparatory committee, with the aim of establishing an organizational structure that enables efficient and highly competitive business operations after the business integration. The CEO's of all three companies had the following to say: Marking the announcement, Nissan Director, President, CEO and Representative Executive Officer Makoto Uchida said: “Honda and Nissan have begun considering a business integration, and will study the creation of significant synergies between the two companies in a wide range of fields. It is significant that Nissan's partner, Mitsubishi Motors, is also involved in these discussions. We anticipate that if this integration comes to fruition, we will be able to deliver even greater value to a wider customer base.“ Honda Director and Representative Executive Officer Toshihiro Mibe said: "At this time of change in the automobile industry, which is said to occur once every 100 years, we hope that Mitsubishi Motors' participation in the business integration discussions of Nissan and Honda will lead to further social change, and that we will be able to become a leading company in creating new value in mobility through business integration. Nissan and Honda will start the discussion from today onwards with an aim to clarify the possibility of business integration by around the end of January in line with the consideration of Mitsubishi Motors." Comment from Mitsubishi Motors Director, Representative Executive Officer, and President and CEO Takao Kato said: “In an era of change in the automotive industry, the study between Nissan and Honda about a business integration will accelerate synergy maximization effects, bringing high value also to the collaborative businesses with Mitsubishi Motors. In order to realize synergies and to make the best use of each company's strengths, we will also study the best form of cooperation.” Upon looking at the press releases, it makes total sense that these companies would look to merge as each company is having a challanging time. Nissan globally has seen a 33.7% reduction in sales taking the estimated 2024 market share to 5.2%.  Honda globally has seen a 9% reduction over all with a 32% reduction in the asian rim leaving them with a 2024 estimated 5.4% market share. Mitsubishi Motors globally has seen a reduction year over year of a 10.7% drop leaving them with a 2024 estimated market share of 4.6%. All three auto companies lag the industry in technology connected auto's, feature / functions and especially EVs. All three companies have seen their profits turn into negative earnings for their respective companies leaving them with no real ability to perform R&D in building EVs to compete in China or the U.S. let alone Europe that has mandates in place for the end of ICE by 2035. End result is it looks like for these companies to survive, merging into one company that shares platforms and technology especially in the software and battery sectors will be the only way to move forward. View full article
    • I think I'm dreaming ... this vehicle would be the oldest of my handful of favorite "blast from the past" cars. A Cutlass Salon coupe in perfect condition, the first year I liked the colonnade Cutlass (and it's last year, of 3, with round headlamps in the colonnade), those huge bucket seats, and, oddly, A/C is there, but with manual windows.  It featured the new but not as popular 260 (4.3L) V8.  It also featured the light enamel blue they didn't repeat.  If the exhaust system is tight, this car will be whisper quiet. 1975 Oldsmobile Cutlass Salon (Numbers Matching Drivetrain) for sale: photos, technical specifications, description See anything odd?  Come on.  Quick. . . . It has Buick rally wheels instead of Oldsmobile rally wheels. * sigh ... I wonder what time frame this ad goes back to *
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search