General Discussion Undecided where to post - do it here. |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
![]() |
#1 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#6 |
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediaselector/c...&nbram=1&asb=1
The EU is moving ahead with CO2 limits for cars. |
![]() |
![]() |
#7 |
|
Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Well, aside from the fact that under the EPA, it DOESN'T happen all the time. That's why there is a specific carve out procedure for California. That's because of historical accident. I don't see the problem in harmonizing national environmental regulations, in general. |
![]() |
![]() |
#8 |
|
This refusal was a first. The EPA has never refused such a waiver request before. By Federal law California is the only state allowed to set separate automotive tail pipe emissions and other states have the option of either adopting the California standard or the looser Federal standard. Since 1963 the EPA has never blocked any such regulation by the state of California and legally speaking California has every right to regulate any emission which comes out of an automotive tailpipe. California's Republican governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has called the Bush administration's obstructionism "outrageous" and has directed the state's Attorney General to begin working on a legal case to challenge the EPA's ruling.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#10 |
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#11 |
|
They are the 16 states which have already passed laws ordering the California green house gas limits be adopted. Those 17 states make up something like 40% of the US automotive market which is so large that automakers would effectively have to design all cars to meet California's emission requirements. Thus Bush's obstructionism.
|
![]() |
Reply to Thread New Thread |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|