Vermont could clear way for new U.S. emissions rules

I saw this article and thought the comment on Toyota hybrids near the bottom was interesting- "While hybrid technology has raised manufacturing costs, Toyota Motor Corp., maker of the Prius hybrid, expects cost-cutting on hybrid production to make the cars as profitable as traditional gasoline models by 2010. By that point it expects to be selling 1 million hybrids a year."

**********************************************

Vermont could clear way for new U.S. emissions rules

Reuters | May 11, 2007 - 9:00 am

BOSTON (Reuters) -- A Vermont judge could soon clear the way for nearly a dozen states to surmount auto industry protests and limit emissions from cars and light trucks to protect the environment, legal experts said.

The rural northeastern state in 2005 followed California's lead in calling for a 30 percent cut in the amount of carbon dioxide, the main gas blamed for global warming, emitted from automobiles starting with 2009 models. U.S. automakers have sued both states, and Rhode Island, seeking to have the rules overturned.

Vermont's suit is the first to go to trial.

Arguments wrapped up on Tuesday, May 8, after nearly a month of testimony, and legal experts expect U.S. District Court Judge William Sessions to rule before September.

"This will be an important signal to the other cases, so I do anticipate that there will be an important precedent set in this case," said Daniel Esty, the director of Yale University's Center for Environmental Law and Policy.

The Vermont trial began shortly after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in an unrelated case that carbon dioxide can be regulated as a pollutant, rejecting a 2003 argument by the federal Environmental Protection Agency that it did not have authority over carbon dioxide.

That finding, legal experts said, weakened the auto industry's argument that the 10 states that have adopted the rules are overreaching in regulating carbon dioxide emissions. Fuel efficiency is federally regulated.

"I expect Vermont to win, and I think the deference shown to the states as sovereign entities by the Supreme Court recently sends a strong signal to this court that it needs to be very deferential to Vermont's desire to protect its air," Esty said.

However, Patrick Parenteau, director of Vermont Law School's Environmental and Natural Resources Law Clinic, said Sessions could dismiss the suit or simply delay ruling until the EPA takes up the issue.

"The probability here is that he is not going to issue any groundbreaking ruling," Parenteau said. "It's not a decision he has to make and it's not a decision he should make."

FEASIBILITY

General Motors and DaimlerChrysler AG, with local auto dealers and trade groups, said they could not meet the Vermont standards and would be forced to stop doing business in the state as a result.

"I seriously doubt that if you gave me all the money in the world and the same for all the other automakers that they could find enough resources ... to do this work," Bob Lee, a vice president at DaimlerChrysler, testified in April.

Vermont, whose farm and tourist industries depend on cold winters and mild summers, said the standards were realistic and crucial for maintaining a stable climate.

"They have some years, because they don't even start until 2009 at the earliest and then slowly ramp up, but it's a matter of committing to it," said Brad Kuster, an attorney at the Conservation Law Foundation, an advocacy group assisting Vermont and California on the legal issue.

The U.S. auto industry has been slower than its Asian rivals in adopting energy-saving technologies, such as hybrid engines. Hybrids couple a traditional gasoline engine with an electric motor to reduce fuel consumption and emissions.

While hybrid technology has raised manufacturing costs, Toyota Motor Corp., maker of the Prius hybrid, expects cost-cutting on hybrid production to make the cars as profitable as traditional gasoline models by 2010. By that point it expects to be selling 1 million hybrids a year.

California adopted its standard from concern that the national government was doing too little to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. U.S. clean air laws allow the West Coast state to implement stricter standards, which other states can adopt.

Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Oregon and Washington have also adopted the new California rule, and Arizona, Maryland and New Mexico are considering it.

Reply to
C. E. White
Loading thread data ...

So, now the federal government through the EPA can regulate our breathing? ?

Reply to
Brent P

If they really believe what they're suing for, they should immediately ban the import of all cars and light trucks.

Reply to
Larry Bud

No. However, the EPA does regulate the pollution that is put into the atmosphere. For example, the EPA lowered the amount of sulfur oxides that are allowed to go into the atmosphere, thereby decreasing acid rain.

The EPA doesn't regulate your breathing. They do make it so you have clean air to breath, though.

If you want to breath dirty air, take up smoking.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

Reply to
Shep

I apologize for the repost. The US Supreme court ruled that the EPA has both the right and duty to regulate CO2 emissions. You can read their opinion here:

formatting link
or you can search Google news or yahoo or whatever for the newspaper reports about this. The ruling was about 6 weeks ago. Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

Um... if the EPA is going to have the power to regulate CARBON DIOXIDE, then can they regulate breathing which emits CARBON DIOXIDE? Have to explain everything around here these days.

Reply to
Brent P

The EPA has the duty to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from inanimate objects. However, it is not empowered to regulate breathing.

Besides, breathing doesn't create carbon dioxide. Breathing only rids the blood of carbon dioxide made elsewhere in the body.

Jeff

Reply to
Jeff

And let's see how long it takes before they try to regulate breathing. Lesser beings will only be allowed to breathe on alternate days. No Farting allowed.

So most of the left will be turning blue soon. Not soon enough.

Charles of Schaumburg

Reply to
n5hsr

The environuts want us to breath every other day, to save the world. LOL

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Whether one can take up smoking, or not, would depend on the city or state in which one resides, wouldn't it?

By the way, when did CO2 become a pollutant. Like ozone the largest producer of CO2 is nature, by far. Do the environuts now want the EPA to regulate nature? If so, finally we have reached the point the nuts are actually running the asylum LOL

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

I remember when the Environmental Protection Act was enacted under the auspiciousness of a Republican President. A friend remarked, finally the federal government has done something to protect the people. A more astute friend profoundly remarked, but who will protect the people from the EPA in twenty years or so? LOL

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

The environuts are applauding the PETA-nuts campaign to get people to eat less beef, to reduce the number of cow farts, reduce pollution and save the world

GMs secret plan to turn the corporation around,and reduce pollution in the US at the same time, is to begin building all of their vehicles in China. If they were smart the would move the corporate headquarters to Japan and get all of those tax brakes and get away from paying US federal corporate taxes The only problem is Toyota is already years ahead of them in plans to build most of their vehicles in China by 2015 LOL

mike

Reply to
Mike Hunter

Maybe they should lead by example here?

Charles of Schaumburg

Reply to
n5hsr

Yes. And tax it. Just like the Romans used to tax urine.

Reply to
PAuL

Ahh... the old environmentalist rules, only CO2 produced by certain activities in certain places is bad.... the global warming swindle in action.

If you don't breath it doesn't come out of the body.

Reply to
Brent P

Please, quit breathing so we don't have to listen to your foolishness.

Ted

Reply to
Ted Mittelstaedt

All of you environunts can do us a favor and quit emitting carbon dixoide now.

Charles of Schauburg

Reply to
n5hsr

Ladies and Gentlemen (and I use those words loosely), in a sure sign that the Apocalypse is upon us, someone calling themself Ted Mittelstaedt said this in rec.autos.driving:

Please quit crossposting to r.a.d so I don't have to listen to yours.

Reply to
necromancer

oh boy! buzzword bingo.

Reply to
someone

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.