The plan faced opposition from OEMs, car dealers, and the United Auto Workers.

White House to weaken climate-fighting fuel efficiency targets for 2030::The plan faced opposition from OEMs, car dealers, and the United Auto Workers.

  • AutoTL;DRBEnglish
    3•4 months ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:

    It appears as if ambitious new fuel efficiency regulations that would require Americans to adopt many more electric vehicles are to be watered down.

    But opposition to the new CAFE standards has been fierce, and now Reuters reports that the White House is backing down and will issue new guidelines with less ambitious goals in the coming weeks.

    In fact, the current rules create a perverse incentive to make inefficient gasoline-powered vehicles, since the OEMs know these can easily be offset.

    But the Alliance for Automotive Innovation—a lobby group for the auto industry—called the rules “neither reasonable nor achievable” despite claiming not to oppose greenhouse gas emissions standards.

    And the United Auto Workers—which endorsed President Biden’s re-election—has claimed the fuel economy regulations would threaten jobs.

    In addition to the tougher new fuel economy standards, the auto industry also wants to see the government relax attempts to regulate particulate pollution from gasoline-powered vehicles more strictly.

    The original article contains 320 words, the summary contains 154 words. Saved 52%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

    • @NarrativeBear@lemmy.worldEnglish
      7•4 months ago

      Have you noticed how since the implication of stringer file efficiency on automakers cars have been getting larger and heavier?

      Here is an interesting video that shows how automakers have been working around fuel efficiency standards for some time now. It also highlights how automakers have chosen to ignore these rules/regulations and instead put pedestrian lives at risk indirectly.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh4H9qZ-_6Y

      IMO file efficiency standards should still remain in place, but a rework of the policies is needed.

      • @NarrativeBear@lemmy.worldEnglish
        7•4 months ago

        Also, unrelated, but this seems to be a problem no one is noticing. Most “arterial roads” in cities and surrounding areas are for the lack of a better word “disappearing”.

        Arterial roads are two lane roads in both directions, they have no driveways in/off them and no traffic lights/signals. They allow higher speed travel compared to city streets, or a suburban street, but are slower then a hwy thought the concept is similar.

        Most of these higher speed roads are being turned into “strodes” that are neither a street nor a road. This means multiple traffic lights and intersections, as well as driveways on/off the road (similar to a suburban street with driveways on the left/right).

        This IMO increases the amount of time you may spend in your car driving from one side of a city to another, thus increasing fuel consumption while idling at lights. It also means more “conflict areas” between the users of the “stroad”, such as pedestrians/specialists/transit.

        What we need is a complete reclassification of our roadways, as I guarantee if you thing of a street or a road or a avenue they may all look the same in our minds.