VinnyVeritas
Libertarian Sage
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2022
- Posts
- 2,842
...
As part of the rule-making process, the EPA solicited comments on its proposal. One response came from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation (AAI), a trade organization that represents the Big Three automakers as well as Honda, Nissan, Toyota, and others. AAI and its members "share EPA's and the Biden administration's goals to accelerate the transition to zero-emission vehicles," the group wrote, but the rule is "neither reasonable nor achievable in the timeframe covered" and "based on many assumptions that are largely outside the control of either EPA or individual automakers." As the standards are written, the group "does not believe they can be met without substantially increasing the cost of vehicles, reducing consumer choice, and disadvantaging major portions of the United States population and territory."
Further, the newly proposed requirements are significantly more strict than the ones agreed to in 2021. AAI points out that while the 2021 agreement only sought 50 percent compliance, it also allowed the goal to be achieved with a combination of battery-powered all-electric vehicles as well as plug-in hybrids and fuel-cell electrics. The newly proposed rule would only allow battery-powered electrics. Meanwhile, only 5.8 percent of new cars purchased in 2022 were electric, requiring a more than tenfold increase in less than a decade.
The EPA's proposal "effectively assume that everything will go perfectly in the transformation" to E.V.s, AAI writes. But automakers already struggle to acquire the raw materials necessary to manufacture E.V. batteries; some regions of the country, even E.V.-friendly California, also lack the necessary electrical infrastructure to support so many new vehicles in need of regular charging.
The EPA apparently expects all of these problems to be solved in less than 10 years. "For perspective," AAI writes, "10 years is the time required to obtain the necessary permits for a mine in the United States. Once permitted, another ten years could elapse before the mine produces at capacity. Ten years is also close to the time required to bring 20 [megawatts] of power to a single location in the United States."
https://reason.com/2023/07/03/autom...-standards-neither-reasonable-nor-achievable/
(Libertarian)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/03216/032162d292d4dfbce5eeb325b9210cb818d47468" alt="Hot face :hot_face: 🥵"
Zero emissions would be great, but government cannot wave its magic wand (bully stick) and just make it so as if they were Jean-Luc Pickard ordering Tea, Earl Grey, Hot...
Government never looks past The Broken Window (Bastiat) to consider the ripple/butterfly effect and the unintended consequences of mandated and codified altruism. The Emperor might wish that everyone deem his new suit as splendid, but there is always going to be the one un-indoctrinated mind that says, "Hey, Buddy! You ain't got no clothes on!"
As part of the rule-making process, the EPA solicited comments on its proposal. One response came from the Alliance for Automotive Innovation (AAI), a trade organization that represents the Big Three automakers as well as Honda, Nissan, Toyota, and others. AAI and its members "share EPA's and the Biden administration's goals to accelerate the transition to zero-emission vehicles," the group wrote, but the rule is "neither reasonable nor achievable in the timeframe covered" and "based on many assumptions that are largely outside the control of either EPA or individual automakers." As the standards are written, the group "does not believe they can be met without substantially increasing the cost of vehicles, reducing consumer choice, and disadvantaging major portions of the United States population and territory."
Further, the newly proposed requirements are significantly more strict than the ones agreed to in 2021. AAI points out that while the 2021 agreement only sought 50 percent compliance, it also allowed the goal to be achieved with a combination of battery-powered all-electric vehicles as well as plug-in hybrids and fuel-cell electrics. The newly proposed rule would only allow battery-powered electrics. Meanwhile, only 5.8 percent of new cars purchased in 2022 were electric, requiring a more than tenfold increase in less than a decade.
The EPA's proposal "effectively assume
The EPA apparently expects all of these problems to be solved in less than 10 years. "For perspective," AAI writes, "10 years is the time required to obtain the necessary permits for a mine in the United States. Once permitted, another ten years could elapse before the mine produces at capacity. Ten years is also close to the time required to bring 20 [megawatts] of power to a single location in the United States."
https://reason.com/2023/07/03/autom...-standards-neither-reasonable-nor-achievable/
(Libertarian)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/03216/032162d292d4dfbce5eeb325b9210cb818d47468" alt="Hot face :hot_face: 🥵"
Zero emissions would be great, but government cannot wave its magic wand (bully stick) and just make it so as if they were Jean-Luc Pickard ordering Tea, Earl Grey, Hot...
Government never looks past The Broken Window (Bastiat) to consider the ripple/butterfly effect and the unintended consequences of mandated and codified altruism. The Emperor might wish that everyone deem his new suit as splendid, but there is always going to be the one un-indoctrinated mind that says, "Hey, Buddy! You ain't got no clothes on!"