Obama Looks to give States the rights to set Emissions and Mileage Standards

[black02]

hmmm... instead of messing with this, lets just build up our rail infrastructure and get some semi-trucks off the streets? Or enforce stricter emissions on Ships (although i want to say that there is some post WW2 treaty that disallows this).

Building more railway would give people jobs, be cleaner and more efficient, and spur private investing (due to better, cheaper, transportation options). Not to mention it could double for public transportation! Which, of course, would reduce emissions as well.

This is not the way to go about reducing emissions, personal autos do not represent the largest contributor to smog (at least not anymore), so we should focus on sectors that will be larger contributors to cleaner air than making automobiles more expensive (especially in hard times!) with diminishing gains as to emissions reduction.

What i mean by the diminishing gains is, you reduce your emissions by 1lb/smog or whatever per year for $5 for a car, but that same 1/lb reduction could be achieved on a ship for $1. Eventually, if emissions reduction was actually enacted sensibly, it would get to the point where the marginal cost to reduce emissions by 1 lb/year would eventually be the same throughout all sectors because they were reduced as efficiently as possible.

All nice ideas about cleaning up the air efficiently. Note that giving power to California to set CO2 standards has nothing to do with cleaner air. It's about climate change, or rather, less climate change.

[hyperv6]

The rail thing may work in the large cities and east or west coast city coridors. But here in the areas inbetween you will find few riders.

They keep wanting to build a rail system here in Ohio and it will fail. The cities now have buses with few riders, Cleveland has a transit system with few riders and Amtrack pulled out of stopping here since no one got on or off.

The people in most interior states like their freedom and ability to go when they want to where they want with little problems. We have few traffic peoblems and seldom have time to wait for someone else to do the driving.

Any system here will become a burden for the taxpayers as they will build it but it will never pay for itself.

I can see it working in the right places but only in a few. San Diego to Seattle or Boston to Florida. but that is about it.

Some smaller rails in Chicago and Dallas?

It is not a case of right or wrong here it is just different life styles.

I did like the BART in San Fran but people here in Ohio would never support a system like that no matter how good.

Edited January 29, 2009 by hyperv6

[Drew Dowdell]

The rail thing may work in the large cities and east or west coast city coridors. But here in the areas inbetween you will find few riders.

They keep wanting to build a rail system here in Ohio and it will fail. The cities now have buses with few riders, Cleveland has a transit system with few riders and Amtrack pulled out of stopping here since no one got on or off.

No one wanted to ride a passenger train that was forced to share the track with a 20mph coal train.... imagine that!

If there was highspeed rail like they have in Germany that would get you from Cleveland to Pittsburgh in an hour, Cleveland to Columbus in an hour, Cleveland to Cincinatti in 2 hours, you think people would prefer to drive? No way man.

Columbus to Indianapolis to Chicago would be about 4 hours.

Here is the kicker. A true high speed line like the fastest French TGV could do the NYC to Chicago run in 3.5 hours or less. You cannot fly to chicago that quickly when you take into account the airport waits, taxiing, etc.

Think about the amount of carbon jet engines deliver directly into the air.

[A Horse With No Name]

+1 on the whole railroad thing.

We are just retarded and backwards as a nation on this...which is one more reason I don't vote for particular people who won't support Amtrack.

Chris

[Z-06]

Creating and revitalizing infrastructure is one of the most direct way of jolting the economy. The activity will actually create money rather than shifting money from one place to other and in transition losing everything.

For infrastructure:

• There can be no outsourcing of consulting jobs in structural, geotechnical and transportation engineering.
• Steel, concrete, and other resources will be manufactured here.
• Employers should be forced to hire workers, technicians from United States. Employers should be disbanded for getting their labor from south of the border illegally.
• Operations of infrastructure will create jobs too.

While not all areas need rail road, new cities like Tampa, Orlando, Charlotte, etc. can really use Public Transportation. Moreover, creating efficient transportation in the NE cities which are very close to each other will go many a step to create and sustain economy of this country.

[Croc]

Creating and revitalizing infrastructure is one of the most direct way of jolting the economy. The activity will actually create money rather than shifting money from one place to other and in transition losing everything.

For infrastructure:

• There can be no outsourcing of consulting jobs in structural, geotechnical and transportation engineering.
• Steel, concrete, and other resources will be manufactured here.
• Employers should be forced to hire workers, technicians from United States. Employers should be disbanded for getting their labor from south of the border illegally.
• Operations of infrastructure will create jobs too.

While not all areas need rail road, new cities like Tampa, Orlando, Charlotte, etc. can really use Public Transportation. Moreover, creating efficient transportation in the NE cities which are very close to each other will go many a step to create and sustain economy of this country.

I'd even take those points one further--in CA to work on a state infrastructure project, the contractors generally have to meet certain diversity requirements like using union workers and having certain percentages of women, minorities, and others. Also, unions have certain diversity requirements like taking on some of the unemployed or other high-risk populations and training them via apprenticeship programs. It's been a great way for many people to gain employment who would otherwise be considered "unskilled" and therefore perpetually unemployed.

[Satty]

I'd use rail service to get to St. Louis or Kansas City once a month or so, even if it were riding on slowpoke lines.

[2QuickZ's]

Rail service will never be popular while gas prices are low. That is part of the reason why I keep saying gas tax. I realize it's unpopular and I understand why but to me it seems like the most certain way to permanently change America's bad transportation habits.

As for California, this is going to be a sincere question since I really have no idea what has been done on the local levels to curb pollution. My question is, have the larger cities or even the state spent a lot of time and money performing transportation studies that would allow lights to be better timed, road ways to be better planned for efficiency, etc. to help cut down on all the congestion on there? I've never been in or around L.A. during morning or evening "rush" hours but from what I hear, there are really more of morning and evening "stop" or "park" hours.

[black02]

Rail service will never be popular while gas prices are low. That is part of the reason why I keep saying gas tax. I realize it's unpopular and I understand why but to me it seems like the most certain way to permanently change America's bad transportation habits.

As for California, this is going to be a sincere question since I really have no idea what has been done on the local levels to curb pollution. My question is, have the larger cities or even the state spent a lot of time and money performing transportation studies that would allow lights to be better timed, road ways to be better planned for efficiency, etc. to help cut down on all the congestion on there? I've never been in or around L.A. during morning or evening "rush" hours but from what I hear, there are really more of morning and evening "stop" or "park" hours.

Yes. California has done a huge amount to curb pollution (talking air quality here, not climate change). You can't just rip up the existing developments and put down new ones, but L.A. has done a lot with what they've got. There's also a decent bus and rail system in the denser parts of L.A. Along Wilshire Blvd, you can see articulated buses every couple of minutes during peak hours, and there are three bus lines -- one with stops every block, one with stops every half mile or so, and one with stops every few miles. They're often packed. The buses bought since 2001 are all either CNG or gasoline-hybrid (and L.A. Metro is actually CNG since 1995). There's also a computerized traffic light system. The city streets often move better than the freeways.

[black02]

They keep wanting to build a rail system here in Ohio and it will fail. The cities now have buses with few riders, Cleveland has a transit system with few riders and Amtrack pulled out of stopping here since no one got on or off.

I did like the BART in San Fran but people here in Ohio would never support a system like that no matter how good.

Cleveland actually has a decent transit system, but mostly only within the city limits and a few close-in suburbs.

[haypops]

+1 on the whole railroad thing.

We are just retarded and backwards as a nation on this...which is one more reason I don't vote for particular people who won't support Amtrack.

Chris

Senator Pell, a strong proponent of Amtrak, died a year? ago. He is also of Pell grant fame of course. Quite an accomplished gentleman.

[hyperv6]

No one wanted to ride a passenger train that was forced to share the track with a 20mph coal train.... imagine that!

If there was highspeed rail like they have in Germany that would get you from Cleveland to Pittsburgh in an hour, Cleveland to Columbus in an hour, Cleveland to Cincinatti in 2 hours, you think people would prefer to drive? No way man.

Columbus to Indianapolis to Chicago would be about 4 hours.

Here is the kicker. A true high speed line like the fastest French TGV could do the NYC to Chicago run in 3.5 hours or less. You cannot fly to chicago that quickly when you take into account the airport waits, taxiing, etc.

Think about the amount of carbon jet engines deliver directly into the air.

Cincinati in 2 hours. but by car we can get ther in just a little longer and still have a way to reach where we want to go away form the train station. What time you save getting there is lost oce your off the train unless there is a way to get where your going. If it is in the burbs your screwed. Taxis and Buses are not often an option.

Accept for some inter city folks here with out cars few people have an interest in public transportation. Heck we hardly have a downtown as it is. After 6 PM most people are 30 Miles oput of town or more.

Many small cities and areas away form the large metro areas are where people use door to door transportation and expect nothing less.

Heck they put in bike lanes here but no one uses them. Part due to the weather and two we just don't have people that ride for more than just pleasure. Besides most here value their lfe more as they would get run over.

It is a different mind set in parts away from the metro coast. There is no right or wrong here just choice and different life styles built around the Auto in many areas of the country.

The rail thing is Europe works but just as many other things is Europe work there does not mean they will work in many areas of this country. Just look at the reluctance of Diesel cars in this country vs Europe. It is not one world.

Edited January 29, 2009 by hyperv6

[Drew Dowdell]

There is no right or wrong here just choice and different life styles built around the Auto in many areas of the country.

But there is sustainable and unsustainable....

and Cleveland to Cincinnati in a little over 2 hours? They're 250 miles apart! Even at 90mph the whole way you're looking at nearly 3 hours.

Furthermore, I'm saying that we need to change our lifestyles. Our lifestyles are what got us in this mess to begin with.

[Shantanu]

Once you get from Cincinnati to Cleveland by train, WTF are you going to do then? You need a car to get around. In Europe, they take trains from city to city, and once they get there people walk or use public transportation. Here you deal with extremes of weather like 6 inches of snow that I'm seeing outside my window right now, and more importantly, incredibly vast distances. I don't think you guys realize how compactly built things are in the rest of the world.

[Intrepidation]

Our rail system sucks...pure and simple...it's outdated and poorly laid out.

[Drew Dowdell]

Once you get from Cincinnati to Cleveland by train, WTF are you going to do then? You need a car to get around. In Europe, they take trains from city to city, and once they get there people walk or use public transportation. Here you deal with extremes of weather like 6 inches of snow that I'm seeing outside my window right now, and more importantly, incredibly vast distances. I don't think you guys realize how compactly built things are in the rest of the world.

Yeah, because Sweden never gets snow.

I do realize how compactly thing are built elsewhere. We need to start moving in that direction as well. This isn't an overnight fix.

[hyperv6]

But there is sustainable and unsustainable....

and Cleveland to Cincinnati in a little over 2 hours? They're 250 miles apart! Even at 90mph the whole way you're looking at nearly 3 hours.

Furthermore, I'm saying that we need to change our lifestyles. Our lifestyles are what got us in this mess to begin with.

You may be right but the mass majority of Americans outside major metro areas think other wise.

You think you have a fight to take away their guns just wait till you take away thier cars.

That is the major problem with most electric cars today as to use most you have to change your driving habits. Few are willing. In fact the auto companies are working hard to make electric cars that will not change life styles. The Volt is a good example.

The Eviroment is important to many till you tell them they have to change somthing or give something up.

3 Hours to Cincinnati and your where you need to be. If you take a train it may get you there faster but how long is the bus trip to where you need to be. Or is there even a bus that will take you there? Taxis are not cheap or even common in many midwest citys. Nothing is close togehther here either.

Also most people live out of town and the cities here are dead. No one wants to live in a city here and are willing for a hour drive or more to get to work.

What might work in LA will not work in Akron.

As I have stated some of these thing will work well in some areas but others no way. Just the way it is.

People complain that the Goverment is taking away their rights to fight terror or guns but you take away their right to drive and go where they want your really going to have a real fight. Americans have always come and gone as they please and few will acccept nothing less.

I just hate to see every expenisve rail systems go into areas where they will not use and money that could be used in better way go wasted. Not that the goverment has wasted money before...

If they want to put a system in where it will be used go for it. Jut in Ohio I hate to see a billion dollar system go to somthing that serves very few.

Here in Akron they just spent $17M on a bus transfer stantion that few use. It will become more a homeless shelter than anything. They would have been better off building a real homeless shelter.

[Drew Dowdell]

Also most people live out of town and the cities here are dead. No one wants to live in a city here and are willing for a hour drive or more to get to work.

Gas prices will not remain low. As soon as the economy rebounds expect gas to shoot back up to previous peaks and higher. I expect that once that happens, gentrification will start to occur.

[Intrepidation]

Gas prices will not remain low. As soon as the economy rebounds expect gas to shoot back up to previous peaks and higher. I expect that once that happens, gentrification will start to occur.

[Robert Hall]

You may be right but the mass majority of Americans outside major metro areas think other wise.

3 Hours to Cincinnati and your where you need to be. If you take a train it may get you there faster but how long is the bus trip to where you need to be. Or is there even a bus that will take you there? Taxis are not cheap or even common in many midwest citys. Nothing is close togehther here either.

Also most people live out of town and the cities here are dead. No one wants to live in a city here and are willing for a hour drive or more to get to work.

Those are Ohio cities, though...they suck. I got out of the Akron area 15 years ago and it was dying and decaying..pretty bleak area...worse now, I suspect.

Edited January 29, 2009 by moltar

[hyperv6]

Those are Ohio cities, though...they suck. I got out of the Akron area 15 years ago and it was dying and decaying..pretty bleak area...worse now, I suspect.

No it got better about 15 years ago after most of our problems left town. Just kidding!

No it really not to bad now accept for the 12 inches of snow yesterday.

We don't have a lot of issues here the burbs grew well and we are doing fine. At least most people can afford to live here. Akron is becoming a solid white collar area and reshearch area for Polymers. Many of the 4N tire companies have built places here and Goodyear is building a new head quarters here too.

It not getting any better but it is not getting any worse right now vs other areas. Now Youngstown that is a differnet story. Industry will not go in because of the union mentality and they have lost many new plants because of it.

Now if we only could improve the weather this global warming is freezing us out here. We have had 3 winter with many snow records and low temp records. We already had a -20 this year. We just set the record for the most snow in January.

[hyperv6]

Gas prices will not remain low. As soon as the economy rebounds expect gas to shoot back up to previous peaks and higher. I expect that once that happens, gentrification will start to occur.

Sorrry but most areas here the jobs moved to where the burbs. The city down town is Pawn shops. Hospitals and a few resturants. after 6 PM it is a ghost town.

If gas prices rise the people will just pay more or stay were they are at. Since that many companies are in the burbs now.

We have had several attempts to put high buck apartments and housing downtown and they all went belly up. The City has had to step in every time to bail them out and tear them down or adapt them to something they could be used for [half way house etc].

Chrissy Hynde has the latest effort that the downtown critics love but everyone else ignores as it is expensive and your in a bad neighborhood.

The people that now work in the burbs some are living farther out where you can see the stars at night. The only negitive are the occational road apples form the Amish buggys.

The bottom line is preople love the freedom of their car and will not give it up unless forced. Then if forced it will not be without a fight.

Their is the utopian world of how things should be and then their is real life. Things may evolve but I don't see any major changes.

Edited January 29, 2009 by hyperv6

[Robert Hall]

No it got better about 15 years ago after most of our problems left town. Just kidding!

No it really not to bad now accept for the 12 inches of snow yesterday.

We don't have a lot of issues here the burbs grew well and we are doing fine. At least most people can afford to live here. Akron is becoming a solid white collar area and reshearch area for Polymers. Many of the 4N tire companies have built places here and Goodyear is building a new head quarters here too.

It not getting any better but it is not getting any worse right now vs other areas. Now Youngstown that is a different story. Industry will not go in because of the union mentality and they have lost many new plants because of it.

Now if we only could improve the weather this global warming is freezing us out here. We have had 3 winter with many snow records and low temp records. We already had a -20 this year. We just set the record for the most snow in January.

I've heard it's been a rough winter...my Mom and brother are about 60 miles south of Akron down in Tuscarawas County in Amish country... I was back there for Xmas, wasn't too bad then. My Mom went without power for 11 hrs yesterday, though still had heat (gas furnace, private gas well).

I was back in Kent and Cuyahoga Falls a couple of summers back, first time I'd been there in about 10 years--lots of changes, some for the better (lots of new buildings on my old campus). Downtown didn't look too good, though, a lot of the bars I hung out in as a student are gone.

Went up to the Flats in Cleveland while I was there also, looks pretty good, some redevelopment going on in Cleveland, looks like...quite different than when I remember it from I frequented the area in '88-94..

Edited January 29, 2009 by moltar

[hyperv6]

I've heard it's been a rough winter...my Mom and brother are about 60 miles south of Akron down in Tuscarawas County in Amish country... I was back there for Xmas, wasn't too bad then. My Mom went without power for 11 hrs yesterday, though still had heat (gas furnace, private gas well).

I was back in Kent and Cuyahoga Falls a couple of summers back, first time I'd been there in about 10 years--lots of changes, some for the better (lots of new buildings on my old campus). Downtown didn't look too good, though, a lot of the bars I hung out in as a student are gone.

Went up to the Flats in Cleveland while I was there also, looks pretty good, some redevelopment going on in Cleveland, looks like...quite different than when I remember it from I frequented the area in '88-94..

It has been a bad winter again.

The bars are just very trendy anymore. The hot club opens and last for a few years then a new one opens and become the new place. The old hot place fades quick.

Kent, Akron and Start Tech [now Stark State] have been growing and growing. Akron is taking over down town.

The Flats are tanking. Most of the places other than the strip clubs are closed or closing. It is nothing like it was a few years back.

The only good thing there now it to eat at the Hard Rock at Tower City and then fight your way past the youth gangs [they will ask you what you want and steal it for you at a discount] and pan handler to see a concert at the Tower City Amplitheater.

Cleveland is a hole but still nicer than Detroit.

Akron is all about living out of town. Canton has a lot of money around it aand many Million dollar houses in areas. A million dollar house here is a $10M in California.

Even in Bath west of Akron many Million dollar houses. Lebron James tore down an old Million Dollar house to build a bigger one? Not sure why as there is plenty of open property here. He has to stay close to the Olive Garden since he eats there and hangs at Best Buys a lot. He also is at a lot of High School games locally with a few NBA buddies. He showed up with Dwayne Wade at Barberton high school for a St V game one night.

Chrissie Hynde built a vegan resturant next to Luigi's in Akron. Let put it this way people are still out the door in the cold waiting for the Pizza and no one is waiting for the veg.

Still the best pizza around and the guys that draw the Funky Winkerbean cartoon in the paper still go there to get ideas for the comic strip.

My family is form Holms county area. It is even growing down there a lot. It's not like it used to be. Even on tv show 24 last week they mentioned Kidron Ohio as a terror target. They said 39,000 people would be killed? Even on aution day when the Amish come to town you would be hard pressed to have 6,500 people in the area. I have to watch this weeks show to see Kidron fares. LOL.

Edited January 29, 2009 by hyperv6

[SingleStylish]

Yeah, because Sweden never gets snow.

I do realize how compactly thing are built elsewhere. We need to start moving in that direction as well. This isn't an overnight fix.

There is a movement afoot by choice of the consumer to provide just that. I've worked on two such projects. Visit this site for more info and encourage your City to adopt similar development code:

http://www.cnu.org

[pow]

By ordering the review of the previous admin's waiver denial, Obama could potentially harmonize CARB and CAFE regulations. Here's a good overview:

Obama Memos on California Waiver and CAFE Create Opportunity for Harmonization of Federal and State Fuel Economy/GHG Standards in US

27 January 2009

On Monday, US President Barack Obama issued two memoranda, one, to Lisa Jackson, the new Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA); the other, to Roy LaHood, the new Secretary of the Department of Transportation (DOT).

The resulting activity will create an opportunity to harmonize fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards in the US not just between two different sets of tailpipe or fuel economy numbers (California Pavley versus federal CAFE), but also between the two currently differing approaches to implementing and managing the regulations.

In his memo to Jackson, Obama requested a review of the EPA’s earlier denial of the waiver to California to implement its greenhouse gas reduction standards for vehicles sold in the state. Granting of the waiver opens the way for implementation of the state standards in California and 13 other adopting states (in total representing about 40% of the US market).

In his memo to LaHood, the President requested very precisely a final order for federal fuel economy standards for only model year 2011, with further consideration and analysis to occur prior to issuing rules for subsequent model years. The original intention of the DOT’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) had been to issue rules for model years 2011-2105. (Earlier post.)

In the absence of harmonization, the downside scenario for the auto industry is two sets of regulations, based on different metrics, applied to 15 different—at current count—fleets: the California fleet under the Pavley regulations; the different fleets of each of the 13 other states currently queued up to implement the California standard; and the remaining national fleet under federal CAFE...

Continued: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2009/01/ob...os-on.html#more

[Teh Ricer Civic!]

There is a movement afoot by choice of the consumer to provide just that. I've worked on two such projects. Visit this site for more info and encourage your City to adopt similar development code:

http://www.cnu.org

Hmm i do believe i wrote a paper about the CNU back in the day... and i determined i liked driving & living in suburbs or rural areas...

its not a bad idea though, its just not my cup of tea.

and as for CAFE for the rest of the nation... i sure hope ya'll dont like modifying your cars, cause by law ANY MODIFICATION to your car in CA is illegal (not that its enforced very well). i dont know if thats just part of CA traffic law, or if its handled directly by CARB.

Oh and as for the rail i was talking about, i meant primarily for commercial use... the mass transit part was just a side effect of the building of the rail... cause uh... we need stuff to help the economy first (not that mass transportation doesn't per se, just that it will yield faster effects if it was primarily for commercial use).

Edited January 30, 2009 by Teh Ricer Civic!

[rivieraranch]

.

[hyperv6]

Hmm i do believe i wrote a paper about the CNU back in the day... and i determined i liked driving & living in suburbs or rural areas...

its not a bad idea though, its just not my cup of tea.

and as for CAFE for the rest of the nation... i sure hope ya'll dont like modifying your cars, cause by law ANY MODIFICATION to your car in CA is illegal (not that its enforced very well). i dont know if thats just part of CA traffic law, or if its handled directly by CARB.

Oh and as for the rail i was talking about, i meant primarily for commercial use... the mass transit part was just a side effect of the building of the rail... cause uh... we need stuff to help the economy first (not that mass transportation doesn't per se, just that it will yield faster effects if it was primarily for commercial use).

I work in the performance aftermarket.

The modifications are permitted in CA. You just have to have approved CARB parts. There are waivers for years and etc but those too have changed from time to time.

The aftermarket companies have to pay thousands of dollars to get parts approved so they have to be good sellers to recoupe the cost. The sad part is many parts added to many cars will infact improve emmissions but will not pass just because they did not pay the money to get the CARB number for that part.

Modifications are legal for the most but they have to be with CARB approved parts. Local laws may vary. I know they were hitting thr ricers for a while with local laws.

SEMA is on a constant fight to keep the MFG in many states.

In fact the laws in many states vary so much on emissions and noise on exhaust now it is hard to know who is doing what.

Just this year we no longer sell Converters in California due to the restrictive laws and it has increased prices there a lot.

Edited January 30, 2009 by hyperv6

[prinzSD]

hmmm... instead of messing with this, lets just build up our rail infrastructure and get some semi-trucks off the streets? Or enforce stricter emissions on Ships (although i want to say that there is some post WW2 treaty that disallows this).

Building more railway would give people jobs, be cleaner and more efficient, and spur private investing (due to better, cheaper, transportation options). Not to mention it could double for public transportation! Which, of course, would reduce emissions as well.

This is not the way to go about reducing emissions, personal autos do not represent the largest contributor to smog (at least not anymore), so we should focus on sectors that will be larger contributors to cleaner air than making automobiles more expensive (especially in hard times!) with diminishing gains as to emissions reduction.

What i mean by the diminishing gains is, you reduce your emissions by 1lb/smog or whatever per year for $5 for a car, but that same 1/lb reduction could be achieved on a ship for $1. Eventually, if emissions reduction was actually enacted sensibly, it would get to the point where the marginal cost to reduce emissions by 1 lb/year would eventually be the same throughout all sectors because they were reduced as efficiently as possible.

I agree. I take the Amtrak Capital Corridor from Martinez to San Jose and Amtrak uses Southern Pacific tracks so freight trains have first priority and there are times when we share the same track, we have to wait for the freight train to pass. On a good day it takes me a half hour to get the train station, another 2 hours and ten minutes for the train and fifteen minutes to walk to work for a round trip of 6 hours per day. If there are train accidents and there are plenty of fatalities on the Corridor which can take upwards of four hours to clear and let the trains through, it adds to the commute time. If I leave the same time in the morning and drive I can get to work in about an hour and fifteen minutes. I have to wait until 7:00/7:30 PM to leave work if I want to get home in an hour and fifteen minutes otherwise the drive can take at least 2 hours. I take the train beacause I am saving wear and tear on my car, saving gas and money, doing my part to lower emmisions and our dependence on oil, I can work on the train, sleep or watch a DVD. Many people chose to still drive because the feel they can not relinquish control of their commute and be at the mercy of train schedules. There are others that simply can not take the train because it does not get close enough to work without major headaches.

Edited: for clarity

Edited January 31, 2009 by prinzSD

[hyperv6]

Good read and brings up point none of use have even considered yet.

Autoline on Autoblog

by John McElroy

Big Problems with California's CO2 Standard

Earlier this week President Obama instructed the EPA to determine whether it should grant California a waiver to set its own CO2 standards for cars. It's a hugely controversial issue, and one that's fraught with major problems for the auto industry.

First off, cars and trucks account for only 18% of total CO2 emissions in the United States. Yet it's the automotive industry that's in the cross-hairs, and California's rules are designed to "hold the automaker's feet to the fire." But even if it eliminated all automotive CO2, that still leaves 80% of other man-made sources untouched.

Besides, California's standard will merely bring the federal standard forward by four years. What's the big rush? Even more importantly, California only accounts for 1% of global CO2 emissions. So is it really fixing anything? And above all else, whatever reduction the state achieves will be immediately replenished by CO2 and other green house gasses blowing in from India, China and other points in Asia.

"By 2020 cars will have to average about 49 mpg, trucks will have to average 33 mpg." You can't blame the state for trying, but you can blame it for trying something that's unworkable. California set a CO2 standard that requires a fleet average of 35 mpg by 2016. But that translates into an average of roughly 43 mpg for cars and 26 mpg for trucks. By 2020 cars will have to average about 49 mpg, trucks will have to average 33 mpg.

This is California dreaming! Right now only one car can meet that 43 mpg standard and that's the Toyota Prius. Even the Honda Civic hybrid falls short. Not one truck even comes close to the standard. And remember, that standard is what the entire fleet has to average.

So you're telling me the entire fleet will be completely retooled to meet that standard by 2016? In two design cycles? I'm telling you it ain't gonna happen. It's not a question of foot-dragging or a lack of technology, or even a question of money. It simply is not physically possible to change the fleet over in that time frame. Even meeting the federal CAFE standard by 2020 will be a stretch.

Detroit isn't the only one fighting this, by the way. Toyota, Honda and Nissan are opposed to the California standard. That's telling. Those companies already meet stricter CO2 standards in Europe and Japan. But fuel prices, driving habits and customer requirements are far different in the USA and not even the big Japanese car companies see how they can meet the California standard by the 2016 deadline.

You'd hear more squawking from the Europeans except that they're exempt. Any automaker selling fewer than 60,000 vehicles in the state doesn't have to meet the standard, even though this gives giant corporations like the VW Group, the BMW Group and Daimler a free ride.

"It simply is not physically possible to change the fleet over in that time frame." Technology is riding to the rescue, but it takes time to ramp it up. Electric cars and plug-ins will help immensely, but they're not going to be available in large numbers by 2016. Diesels are unlikely to sell well as long as diesel fuel is priced above gasoline. CNG has never caught on, despite big subsidies from the state. That means automakers will have to severely limit what they can sell in California and in the other states that plan to adopt its CO2 standard. (As of this writing: Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Utah, Vermont and Washington.)

Automakers will be forced to restrict their California fleet to vehicles that can meet those numbers. Yes, they will be able to allot a small number of full-size trucks and big cars to sell in the state, but once the law of supply-and-demand kicks in, the price for them will climb steeply. Drivers may find it more attractive to keep the vehicles they have rather than buy new ones, which defeats the effort to reduce CO2. Drivers close enough to the state line may decide it's easier to buy a new car next door and drive it home. How will that be policed?

Forget about those "Vehicle Locators" that dealers use, if the exact car you want can't be sold in your state. And pity the auction houses that are going to have to determine if auctioned cars can be legally transferred to the wrong state.

I predict that once consumers learn how limited their choices are, they're going to hit the roof. Environmentalists beware! You're setting up the system to generate a big public backlash against CO2 legislation.

Those who want to fight global warming would be better served coming up with a comprehensive national plan that actually works, rather than picking on the car companies to score political points.

John McElroy is host of the TV program "Autoline Detroit" and daily web video "Autoline Daily". Every week he brings his unique insights as an auto industry insider to Autoblog readers.

Edited January 31, 2009 by hyperv6

[daves87rs]

But you forget that Cali pretty much runs the US.....

They will NOT stop pushing for this....

They don't how, but it will be done. (I guess)

I smell lawsuits.....

[black02]

You'd hear more squawking from the Europeans except that they're exempt. Any automaker selling fewer than 60,000 vehicles in the state doesn't have to meet the standard, even though this gives giant corporations like the VW Group, the BMW Group and Daimler a free ride.

Let's just call it the "Kill Michigan" boondoggle. Obama's got to see that the statute as written is a horrible idea.

I don't think it's as bad as John McElroy says, as I believe the 43 number for cars is based on the raw EPA data, under which the Civic Hybrid would pass, and the Fusion Hybrid should also.

While you're at it, take a listen to the Jan 30 "Talk of the Nation" on plugin hybrids where the host is as clueless as ever. Well, only listen to it if you have a strong stomach.

[rivieraranch]

These people will not be content until everybody has to use balsa wood cars with electric sewing machine engines.

[hyperv6]

These people will not be content until everybody has to use balsa wood cars with electric sewing machine engines.

Oh god now you cant use those. We would deplete the balsa wood in some remote village in Sumatra and the electic sewing machine motor will put too much ozone in the air an effect the migration of the whoopty bird.

Excuse me while I go dig out the 12 inches of global warming in my driveway.

Edited January 31, 2009 by hyperv6

[daves87rs]

These people will not be content until everybody has to use balsa wood cars with electric sewing machine engines.

[Drew Dowdell]

These people will not be content until everybody has to use balsa wood cars with electric sewing machine engines.

Now you know that's not true. They have crash standards too. There is no way a balsa wood car would stand up to a 95mph off set frontal crash test.

Now Bamboo... that's doable. Very strong and very renewable.

[Satty]

Bamboo dash trim would be pretty cool.

[Drew Dowdell]

Bamboo dash trim would be pretty cool.

+1

You could have a lot of wood in your car and it wouldn't upset the greenies because it's highly renewable. Heck, I have bamboo infesting my back yard now.

[Satty]

I had a bamboo plant in my kitchen, but somehow managed to kill it.

[pow]

Isn't the floor of the Corvette made of balsa wood? It's supposed to be light and strong.

[hyperv6]

At the rate it is going we all will be in those Bamboo cars like they built on Gilligans Island.

You know the one they had to pedal.

Oh can't do that either because the drivers/engine emissions would not pass CARB reg is he ate Mexican.

Edited January 31, 2009 by hyperv6

[regfootball]

Now you know that's not true. They have crash standards too. There is no way a balsa wood car would stand up to a 95mph off set frontal crash test.

Now Bamboo... that's doable. Very strong and very renewable.

one car that incorporates balsa wood, the corvette, is not a bad ride.