May I have the first slide, please…
O.K., first let's assume that almost all of those light and medium duty trucks, SUVs, and vans, plus almost all of those cars, are gasoline powered.
Further, let's accept a recent assertion that most of these vehicles could accept E30 without a problem.
Are you with me, so far?
Good. Next slide, please…
Now on December 19, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Stephen Johnson publicly announced that his agency had rejected the application from California for another waiver. California and seventeen other states wanted to impose rules that would limit CO2 emissions.
According to the New York Times1, the California attorney general, Edmund G. Brown Jr., called the decision “absurd.”
He said the decision ignored a long history of waivers granted California to deal with its special topographical, climate and transportation circumstances, which require tougher air quality standards than those set nationally.
Mr. Brown noted that federal courts in California and Vermont upheld the California standards this year against challenges by the auto industry.
"Global climate change presents California with serious challenges to the health of its ecosystems and the vitality of its economy. Recognizing this threat, the California Legislature and Governor Schwarzenegger approved AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006. AB 32 requires that the state cut greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions such as carbon dioxide (CO2) by 25 percent by 2020. This reduction target is calculated on a 1990 baseline of GHG emission levels and is measured against assumed business as usual economic activity." ETAAC Report Discussion Draft – 12/21/07 (PDF)2
Further Green Car Congress3 tells us:
Projected reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector, which accounts for more than 40% of all anthropogenic greenhouse emissions produced in California, relies heavily on the implementation of AB 1493—California’s statue on reducing greenhouse gas emissions from new vehicles beginning in MY 2009. With the EPA’s recent rejection of the waiver required to implement AB 1493, that particular element has become problematic.
So, if California had obtained this most recent waiver and 16 other states promptly had followed with their own requests, then an immediately obvious solution would be only selling cars in these states that made the switch to an ethanol blend easy and beneficial, from an environmental and fuel efficiency standpoints. As recently noted, such a switch to E30 would mean a loss of market share by Big Oil.
"So, Georgie, when you see him…"
"I d-d-d-don't know where he is, Arnold."
"Sure, sure, but suppose that you do see him. Tell him that the Governator would like to have a private chat with him, O.K."
"O.K. Arnold, O.K."
So. when Vice President Cheney recently met with representatives of automobile companies, we should assume that it is the holiday season and they were just stopping by to offer Seasons Greetings, eh? Even when Dan Glaister4, as a correspondent in Los Angeles for The Guardian, states that there is confirmation that indeed Dick Cheney's direct pressured the EPA director to reject the California waiver.
Staff at the agency, which announced last week that California's proposed limits were redundant, said the agency's chief went against their expert advice after car executives met Cheney, and a Chrysler executive delivered a letter to the EPA saying why the state should not be allowed to regulate greenhouse gases.
EPA staff members told the Los Angeles Times that the agency's head, the Bush appointee Stephen Johnson, ignored their conclusions and shut himself off from consultation in the month before the announcement. He then informed them of his decision and instructed them to provide the legal rationale for it.
In the opinion of Speaker of the House, Nancy Pelosi, "denying California's request defies the legislative history as well as the explicit language of the Energy Independence and Security Act."
Just more liberal mud-slinging, Citizen, and, in no way, reflects who is running the show and why.
Similar Posts: Supreme Court Orders EPA to Reconsider GHG Regulation ART a Possibility in California? Ecocidal Ideology And, May the Best Planet Win At the Half, It's Texas Ahead of California
1E.P.A. Says 17 States Can’t Set Emission Rules 2ETAAC Report Discussion Draft – 12/21/07 (PDF) 3ARB Releases ETAAC Discussion Document on Achieving GHG Reductions; Roadmap for Transportation and Other Major Sectors 4Cheney accused of blocking Californian bid to cut car fumes
Sort of Mad Magazine Meets Popular Science
written by a Wonderful Human Being.
No, really, I gave myself that title with
the Individual Corporation.