Automakers Attack Proposal to Address Global Warming

[Guest guest]

excerpted from article below....What the he-- ???? <<<But under the Bush

administration, the Environmental Protection Agency no longer considers

greenhouse gases to be pollutants >> Automakers Attack Proposal to Address

Global Warming

By DANNY HAKIM

 

Published: September 23, 2004

 

 

DETROIT, Sept. 22 - Automakers on Wednesday attacked a California plan to

regulate automotive emissions of global warming gases.

The state's proposal " clearly goes far beyond what is reasonable and

achievable, " said Fred Webber, president of the Alliance of Automobile

Manufacturers, a lobbying group that includes all of the major automakers except

Honda and Nissan.

 

Mr. Webber spoke at a news conference a day before the California Air Resources

Board is scheduled to begin two days of hearings on a plan to reduce automotive

global warming emissions about 30 percent by the 2016 model year. A vote on the

plan is expected Friday.

 

 

The plan, if it is approved and survives legal challenges, would have enormous

implications for the efficiency of cars and trucks sold in California. It could

also affect Northeastern states like New York that follow California's air

pollution rules. It would be several years before a plan would begin to take

effect, however, and a legal challenge is likely from the industry.

 

The Bush administration and other Republicans have generally rejected efforts to

regulate global warming. But in California, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a

Republican, has said he supports the emissions plan, which was signed by Gray

Davis, the former Democratic governor.

 

Automakers have criticized the plan before, but they attacked it more directly

Wednesday on several fronts. One of their main arguments is that the plan is

pre-empted by Washington's authority to regulate fuel economy, because improving

a car's fuel efficiency is by far the most significant way to cut emissions

linked to climate change.

 

" This proposal is really a fuel economy rule and as such is clearly pre-empted

by federal law, " said Mr. Webber. " A lawsuit is certainly an option, especially

when you're looking into the pre-emption issue, " he added.

 

But emissions can be reduced modestly in ways other than improving fuel

efficiency, for example by making changes to a car's air-conditioning system.

 

Part of the legal dispute centers on whether gases linked to global warming can

be considered pollutants. If so, California has the authority to set its own air

pollution regulations. But under the Bush administration, the Environmental

Protection Agency no longer considers greenhouse gases to be pollutants.

California and several other states are suing the agency on the decision.

 

" California has the clear authority to regulate carbon dioxide as an air

pollutant, " said Roland Hwang, a senior policy analyst at the Natural Resources

Defense Council. " We believe that attacking these global warming pollution

standards is a losing proposition, both legally and politically. "

 

Mr. Webber said that the industry estimated that California consumers would have

to pay $3,000 more upfront for the average automobile when the plan was phased

in. The state has estimated a $626 increased cost for cars and $955 for sport

utility vehicles and other trucks, which would be easier to make up over time by

saving money at the pump.

 

Mr. Webber also said that the plan as currently outlined " does not claim any

significant air quality benefit and does not even attempt to quantify a single

health benefit. "

 

Environmentalists, citing a growing body of scientific research, have said that

reducing emissions linked to climate change is an urgent concern. They cite

trends including higher ozone levels, which contribute to health problems

including asthma, as well as increased infectious disease and heat-related

deaths.

 

Alliance officials said they believed global warming was a legitimate issue but

did not have their own plan for addressing tailpipe emissions.

 

 

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/23/business/23clean.html

 

 

 

http://pets.care2.com/

 

http://www.theanimalrescuesite.com

 

" It is impossible to defeat an ignorant man in argument. " -- William G. McAdoo

" Providing health care to all Iraqis is sound policy. Providing

health care to all Americans is socialism. " -- anon