EV Cheating Scandal [LOCKED DUE TO POLITICS]

[luckie]

Except in my example-

Tesla was never going to do anything different.

And I was never going to use cocaine.

The end result is actually the opposite of the goal- NOTHING changes other than money changing hands to do what people were going to do in the first place.

First, I want to get in on this $100 for not using cocaine thing. I like it! I'm hoping it is $100/month.

I'm curious tho, haven't many of us already possibly(?) participated in an incentive for buying an EV that we might have bought even without it? Maybe just a few of us are like "Tesla" in the example, we were going to get an EV with or without that incentive. I'm pretty sure I was.

Sponsored

 

[buzznwood]

I said this a couple decades ago- environmentalists picked the wrong headline.

They shouldn’t have focused on manmade global warming (controversial and no immediate payoff).

They should have focused on SMOG.

It’s obvious. It’s 100% man-made. And 100% preventable. Plus you can see the results of your hard work! It should be the headline. Oh…… and side effect of preventing smog? Less greenhouse gases.

Agree but the problem as is you would get no doubt is poor implementation you can't use a one size fits all approach as local geography is a factor in air quality so there needs to be exemptions and at that point you are back to exemptions being used it to dance around the rules again.

The Air in LA is certainly better than it was 20 years ago, but if you eliminated all cars from LA the air still is not going to be the best. There is a reason the Chumash native americans called it the valley of the smokes.

The coastal regions are a little clearer as the onshore flow will push some of the pollution further inland but in general people in LA have a tendency to forget they are living in a basin sitting on top an oil field, with little wind and moisture surrounded by vegetation that has a tendency to combust. So with nothing to really clear it out the air pollution it will continually build up over year until the winter rains arrive to clean the air at which point the cycle starts again.

 

[DennisD]

The EPA needs to be defunded and eliminated. I am tired of them wasting my money.

EPA = Environmental Protection Agency

Why not (instead of eliminating) make it better?

For the life of me, I don't know how people come to the conclusions that doing away with something that protects the Environment is something that should be disbanded? The EPA through all of their faults have helped save thousands of lives through guarding against the polluting of lakes, land etc.

Now don't get me wrong, there are issues and troubles with everything but to do away with it because someone thinks that it is "bad" is not seeing the big picture.

It reminds of when Reagan said that you shouldn't trust the organization that he was the head of. That maybe was the stupidest thing that ever came out of a politicians mouth. Maybe that is why many gov't. programs are not doing well? The people that we put in charge wanted it to fail and now we are wondering why they should exist. Hmmmmmm

 

[Glen Boise]

The smog that was infamous in LA was present in most other big cities. I remember driving to visit Chicago and Indianapolis and seeing thick brown clouds over them from poorly burned fossil fuels. Those clouds are not seen today because of the Federal government, for good public health reasons, insisting that those burning fossil fuels clean up their acts. An effort that continues today as our growing population buys more bigger, heavier cars and trucks.
An effort required by the Constitution which in the first paragraph states "...in Order to..." "...promote the general Welfare..." "...establish this Constitution...". Promoting a healthier environment through regulation does "...promote the general Welfare...".

 

[nuMach]

they rounded up..... lets call it what it really is - 6.66 (666 666 etc)
its the work of satan

 

[mkhuffman]

I think they play a very important role in minimizing pollution, something that has been historically problematic with cars where I live (Los Angeles). It’s the conflation of greenhouse gas emissions with noxious chemicals that’s the bigger issue IMO.

99.999% of the public, including me, wants clean air and clean water. That doesn't mean we need an illegal Federal agency to achieve it. In fact, clean air and water can be enforced by state governments just as easily, and if a certain state government decides to regulate CO2 (that is not a pollutant), and unnecessarily drive up the cost of everything, you can move from that state to one that cares about its economy and its citizens.

Competition between states is a good thing. One monolithic and oppressive central government is a bad thing.

 

[Hammered]

It's the carrot and the stick approach. If gov't wants to encourage a behavior, in your example, don't use cocaine. They can pay people not to use cocaine, or fine people that do. Or they can do both. That's the point of the emission credit. They incentivizing automakers to go electric at the same time penalizing OEMs if they don't.

The govt needs to stay in its lane of breaking monopolies / anti trust, not attempt to steer the hand for arbitrary reasons. Most, and I do mean most govt employees are f'n morons. People who couldn't run a business shouldn't be going to town regulating them.

The original bell was broken up and its head, ATT has since bought most of those pieces back, and a whole lot more. Verizon was one of the other bell parts that bought the other bell parts ATT didn't, and when nobody was looking while TMO gobbled up Sprint This is they kind of incompetence we're dealing with.

Do you know why better internet doesn't exist in rural areas? The major wireless carriers were allowed to receive taxpayer handouts to buy up taxpayer spectrum locking out any competition. While it's a little expensive to deploy an LTE network, it's not that expensive. The problem is that the major carriers own all of the spectrum. A competent move would be to have a use-it-or-lose-it process like what spacex and amazon have to do with their sat constellations.

Point being, govt is a bunch of self-enriching morons who have far more power than they were ever intended to have, and use it to choke innovation and progress of the free market with laws that serve nobody but themselves and the people who paid their way into the position.

 

[mkhuffman]

EPA = Environmental Protection Agency

Why not (instead of eliminating) make it better?

For the life of me, I don't know how people come to the conclusions that doing away with something that protects the Environment is something that should be disbanded? The EPA through all of their faults have helped save thousands of lives through guarding against the polluting of lakes, land etc.

Now don't get me wrong, there are issues and troubles with everything but to do away with it because someone thinks that it is "bad" is not seeing the big picture.

It reminds of when Reagan said that you shouldn't trust the organization that he was the head of. That maybe was the stupidest thing that ever came out of a politicians mouth. Maybe that is why many gov't. programs are not doing well? The people that we put in charge wanted it to fail and now we are wondering why they should exist. Hmmmmmm

Because it is illegal and it abuses its power. It needs to go. The EPA is probably the number one Federal agency responsible for driving up inflation.

 

[kodiakng]

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2000-06-12/pdf/00-14446.pdf

It is clearly explain that this was intended as a reward to encourage EV production. It was neither hidden nor claimed to be a real-world number:



Move along, nothing to see here...

wild - that rule making has been in effect since 2000 and no one noticed before now.

 

[superdave80]

What about Tesla playing loose with the rules in determining the range of their vehicles?

The rules for determining range were not set by Tesla, and can you offer some proof they 'played loose with the rules'?

If you have a dumb rule, you will get a dumb result. Don't blame the result for the rule...

 

[superdave80]

They should have focused on SMOG.

But smog has been reduced so much since the 70s that I doubt it even registers on the radar of most people.

 

[superdave80]

wild - that rule making has been in effect since 2000 and no one noticed before now.

And what's even crazier is that this (obviously biased) blogger tried to blame it on Biden:

Headline: "Biden Caught in Huge Rigging of EV Carbon Credits at Taxpayer Expense"

Oh, and these credits are between automakers, not taxpayers...

 

[TowPro]

I remember in the 80's in order to get any Ford through PA state emissions inspection you had to follow a process:
drive the vehicle enough to get it up operating temp.
shut down vehicle.
start vehicle and immediately perform the emissions test.
If did not finish in 5 minutes the vehicle would fail emissions test.

 

[kodiakng]

Because it is illegal and it abuses its power. It needs to go. The EPA is probably the number one Federal agency responsible for driving up inflation.

illegal as in created and funded by congress. sure thing buddy. i see article I constitutional bodies delegating executive function isn't really your thing but it isn't illegal.

 

[devmach-e]

99.999% of the public, including me, wants clean air and clean water. That doesn't mean we need an illegal Federal agency to achieve it. In fact, clean air and water can be enforced by state governments just as easily, and if a certain state government decides to regulate CO2 (that is not a pollutant), and unnecessarily drive up the cost of everything, you can move from that state to one that cares about its economy and its citizens.

Competition between states is a good thing. One monolithic and oppressive central government is a bad thing.

The problem there is that pollution doesn't stop at state borders.

Sponsored