President Obama has directed the EPA to reconsider California’s application for a waiver from federal tailpipe emission standards for cars and trucks. California is seeking to impose tougher standards than what is required under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA).

Under the CAA, only California can seek a waiver from federal motor vehicle standards (so long as their regulations exceed federal standards). Once California’s waiver has been granted, then other states can adopt California’s more stringent standards.

About a year ago, the EPA had denied California’s request for a waiver, explaining:

California’s current waiver request is distinct from all prior requests. Previous waiver petitions covered pollutants that predominantly impacted local and regional air quality. Greenhouse gases are fundamentally global in nature, which is unlike the other air pollutants covered by prior California waiver requests. These gases contribute to the challenge of global climate change affecting every state in the union. Therefore, according to the criteria in section 209 of the Clean Air Act, EPA did not find that separate California standards are needed to “meet compelling and extraordinary conditions.”

Last year, some North Carolina legislators were trying to adopt California’s standards, even though it wouldn’t have been legal. The state’s Climate Action Plan Advisory Group (CAPAG), which was basically gamed to reach results that DENR and its “consultant” wanted, recommended that the California standard be adopted. If the waiver is granted, expect a big push to adopt California’s standards.

Expect the fleet mix to change in the state (i.e. what kind of cars are available) as well as cars to cost a lot more money (anywhere from $1,000-$3,000 more). These are just some of the costs. The benefit of such a policy would be non-existent.

The “father” of global warming hysteria, Dr, James Hansen, stated the following in trial testimony (link to a PPT file–also see this link)

Q: “Have you modeled the CO2 emission savings that would result if only Vermont and New York were to implement the AB 1493 regulation [California’s regulations]?”

Hansen’s Answer: “I haven’t modeled that. It would not be difficult to do it.”

Q: “Okay. Well, you have that model, one of the best in the country that you’ve got, correct?”

Hansen’s Answer: “Well, I wouldn’t run a model with such a very small change, because then you’re wasting computer time, because you do have the problem of finding a signal when compared to the natural variability of the climate.”

Q: “You never modeled — let’s move past Vermont and New York. Let’s say that it’s all 11 states that have adopted the regulation. Have you modeled that? Have you found the computer time or the time to model the total CO2 emission saving in all of the states that adopted the regulation –”

Hansen’s Answer: “No. Because we try to do useful things.”

If California gets the waiver and decides it doesn’t care about its economy or its citizens (which it doesn’t from its typical actions), then let it destroy itself. Some North Carolina legislators may have “California-envy,” but the legislature shouldn’t hurt the state’s citizens to appease a bunch of extremists.

No Comments »

No Comments »

No Comments »

No Comments »

No Comments »

1 Comment »

No Comments »

No Comments »

No Comments »