And CDOT screws the state again...

[ray1970]

In China, they just execute these guys for defrauding the government. In North Korea, they feed you to hungry dogs or shoot you with antiaircraft gun.

So I guess there are some positive things about communism.

[DavieD55]

California vehicle rules kick Coloradans out of the driver’s seat

Author: Ray Scott - July 19, 2018 - Updated: July 18, 2018


At the heart of the debate over Gov. John Hickenlooper’s recent executive order to adopt California vehicle emissions standards is a simple question: Who should decide what vehicles Coloradans will use in the future for work, recreation or basic transportation? Will there be fines or fees smacked on vehicle owners who will not or cannot comply?

I think most Coloradans believe they should be making those calls, based on the unique driving conditions and consumer preferences in Colorado. But Hickenlooper’s mandate hands those powers to the California Air Resources Board, a panel of unelected regulators that couldn’t care less about Colorado. Their actions could severely restrict the vehicle choices available to Colorado motorists, raise the purchase price of new vehicles (trucks especially) and cost taxpayers millions of dollars in additional subsidies and infrastructure spending, as the state pushes to meet arbitrary benchmarks that are neither realistic nor right for this state.

No one loves the environment more than Coloradans. And we’ve made significant progress improving ours in recent times without the need for such radical moves. Almost any new vehicle you buy today will be 99% cleaner than similar vehicles were a decade or two ago, thanks to huge technological strides made by the industry, and we’ve made real gains in improving our air and water by doing things “the Colorado way,” not by engaging in the sort of copy-cat regulating proposed here.

The dozen or so states that have adopted the California emissions model are all clustered on the West Coast or the Northeast. All are in control of big government liberals who enjoy regulating for regulation’s sake. None is in America’s heartland. Not one! Shouldn’t that provide the first clue of how out of the mainstream this proposal is?

Look, past superficial similarities, Colorado and California have little in common – especially when it comes to consumer preferences. Seventy-two percent of Coloradans purchased pickup trucks and SUV vehicles in 2017, which make up three out of every four new vehicles sold in the state. Yet it’s this category of vehicle that these mandates will impact most, as government uses all the weapons in its regulatory arsenal to override consumer preferences and push the public into the smaller, lighter, less-versatile vehicles we don’t want.

Relatively few Coloradans buy electric or plug-in hybrid vehicles – they account for less than 2 percent of vehicles sold in Colorado. These buyers are likely to live in densely populated urban centers, where charging stations are readily available, and they tend to be more affluent than average Coloradans, which makes one wonder why taxpayers of lesser means are obligated to keep subsidizing or “incentivizing” the car preferences of a pampered minority.

We’ll never meet these arbitrary, pie-in-the-sky mandates without pouring untold millions into this wasteful kind of welfare for the wealthy. We’ll have to continue the $5,000 per vehicle tax credit the state currently offers. And massive new public “investments” in EV infrastructure inevitably will be required to address these performance deficiencies and meet Hickenlooper’s mandate.

“Range anxiety” evidently is a problem for these folks when they stray beyond urban areas — I know I wouldn’t want to rely on an electric vehicle during regular treks to the statehouse from Grand Junction – but that’s one of the limitations they accept when choosing such vehicles. Why are the 98% of us who choose highly reliable vehicles obligated to rescue the 2% of Coloradans who opt for performance-impaired alternatives? That raises fundamental questions of fairness to me.

By raising the price tag on new vehicles, Colorado consumers will be forced to hang on to older, higher-polluting cars and trucks longer. Ironically, this would be a step backwards for Colorado’s air quality, which is disproportionately impacted by older, high-emitting vehicles. That’s just one way the “law of unintended consequences” will come back to haunt us if these ill-conceived mandates are finalized.

It’s telling that the term-limited Hickenlooper made this move in the waning months of his final term, when he’s no longer accountable to Colorado voters — and then specifically directed Colorado Air Quality Control Commission to take action before he leaves office. It appears Hickenlooper, who has made no secret of his national political ambitions, may be more interested in how his executive order is received by Democratic voters in cities like Los Angeles, San Francisco and Boston than by drivers across Colorado.

This is a stunning surrender of authority and accountability when one thinks about it, which will put California behind the steering wheel, dictating Colorado’s destiny, unless public opposition is heard loud and clear. Raise your objections now. Don’t wait until after the rules have been finalized to complain that you’ve been the victim of a regulatory hit-and-run.

Colorado PoliicsFull Article

[Irving]

Ugh. I'm sure the back peddling after this decision will be, "But we'll have the control to change specific attributes if we want to, like adopting the international building code."

[BPTactical]

Fuck Hickenlooper

[theGinsue]

Fuck Hickenlooper

Ditto

[DavieD55]

Here is what California is up to. Could this be the future in Colorado...

California Lawmaker Introduces Bill To Ban Gas Powered Cars By 2040

Tim Pearce | Energy Reporter 9:19 PM 01/03/2018

A California lawmaker introduced a bill Wednesday that would ban the sale of gas-powered cars in the state by 2040.
Democratic Assemblymember Phil Ting introduced the Clean Cars 2040 Act in an effort to prevent climate change by cutting back on greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles. If passed, his bill would mandate that all passenger vehicles sold after Jan. 1, 2040, be zero-emission machines.

“California has long led the nation in promoting environmental protection and public health through visionary policies and technological innovations,” Ting said in a statement Wednesday. “It’s time that we clear the path for emissions-free transportation and take significant steps to achieve our ambitious emissions reduction goals.”

Billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer, who is currently running a campaign to impeach President Donald Trump, lent his support to the bill.

“Now more than ever, this legislation is needed to protect Californians’ health, create good-paying clean energy jobs, and reinforce our state’s role as a global climate leader,” Steyer said in a statement.

The new law would not apply to commercial vehicles weighing more than five tons. It also would not apply to cars owned by people moving into the state from elsewhere.

Ting is following the example of countries such as Norway, the United Kingdom and France, who have all pledged to ban the sale of gas-powered cars in the coming decades.

This is the first legislation of its kind introduced in the United States.


The daily Caller Full Article

Countries are announcing plans to phase out petrol and diesel cars. Is yours on the list?


China is considering when to ban the production and sale of petrol and diesel cars. The move is aimed at helping the world's largest car producer and seller to tackle air pollution and boost development of electric and hybrid plug-in vehicles.

In a statement released through China’s official news agency, Xinhua, the government said that while no date had been set, it was performing “relevant research” in order to come up with a “timeline”.

The news comes hot on the heels of the Scottish government’s announcement that it plans to phase out petrol and diesel cars by 2032.

Here are some of the other countries that are gearing up to replace fossil-fuel powered cars.


The UK

In July, the UK government unveiled plans to halt the production of new petrol and diesel cars from 2040.

Michael Gove, the Environment Secretary, warned at the time that Britain "can't carry on" with petrol and diesel cars because of the damage that they cause to people's health and the planet. However, experts warn that the national grid will struggle to provide enough electricity to cope with peak demand for charging electric vehicles, for example after rush hour.

Air pollution has been linked to 40,000 early deaths a year in the UK. And according to the UN, the country isn’t doing enough about it. The agency recently accused the UK government of flouting its duty to protect citizens from toxic air pollution.


France

France has also said it will ban sales of petrol and diesel cars by 2040.

It’s part of a wide-ranging series of measures that the government hopes will position the country as a green leader.

Initiatives include the ban on further licences being granted for oil and gas exploitation in France and its overseas territories.


Norway

Last year, it was widely reported that Norway was planning to phase out diesel and petrol cars by 2025. However, the reports were challenged as misleading.

Although the news was enthusiastically received by the CEO of Tesla, Elon Musk, Norway's Minister of Climate and Environment explained that it was more of a policy than an outright ban.

Norway already has the highest per capita number of all-electric cars in the world.


The Netherlands

The Netherlands wants all new cars to be emissions free by 2030 - effectively banning petrol and diesel sales.

The country has the highest number of charging points per capita in the world, and the second largest concentration of electric vehicles in Europe.

It aims to have 200,000 electric vehicles on the road by 2020, and for 10% of new sold vehicles to be electric.

Have you read?

• Will this breakthrough see an electric car in every driveway?
• Which countries are speeding ahead with electric cars?
• Electric cars are coming. But are cities ready for them?
• Japan now has more electric charging points than petrol stations

Germany

Last year Germany’s Bundesrat passed a resolution to ban the internal combustion engine starting in 2030.

Though not legally binding, it's seen as a major step forward in the fight against emissions.


Germany already had a target of putting 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2020, although Chancellor Merkel recently admitted that they may fall short of this target.

However, last month, Merkel hinted that it's only a matter of time before Germany follows France, Britain, India and other countries in banning sales of new cars fitted only with petrol or diesel engines.


India

The Indian government has announced that it wants to sell only electric cars within the next 13 years.

India is facing an air pollution crisis that is responsible for 1.2 million deaths per year and costing the economy an estimated 3% of GDP.

It’s been calculated that the gradual switch to electric vehicles (EVs) across India would decrease emissions by 37% by 2030.


Other countries in the EV race

According to the International Energy Agency, Austria, Denmark, Ireland, Japan, Portugal, Korea and Spain have set official targets for electric car sales.

The US doesn't have a federal policy, but at least eight states have set out goals, says the IEA.


What next for carmakers?

The Chinese government predicted “turbulent times” for domestic carmakers forced to adapt to its new targets.

And it seems that the global auto industry is also worried. US, European, Japanese and Korean carmakers recently sent a joint letter urging China to delay and soften planned quotas for sales of electric and hybrid cars, saying its proposals will be impossible to meet and would severely disrupt their businesses.

That said, some carmakers are embracing the rush to EVs.

In July, Volvo announced that every model it launches from 2019 will have an electric motor.

BMW has followed suit, saying that all brands and model series can be electrified, with a full electric or plug-in hybrid drivetrain being offered in addition to the combustion engine.

Several other carmakers have also announced plans to ramp up their electric car production.

The impact on oil companies is expected to be huge, with some arguing that a focus by policymakers on electric vehicles risked diverting investment from efforts to make internal combustion engines more efficient, which they say has more potential to reduce emissions and oil demand sooner.

The IEA predicts that, with all the government policies in place, electric car stock may range between 9 and 20 million by 2020 and between 40 and 70 million by 2025

WEC Full Article

[ben4372]

I watched a Youtube video of a hearing on CARB regulation on big rigs. Then I watched 10 more or so. CARB has a lot of regulator juice. Truckers getting tickets for idling in 100 degree heat, even with a certified clean idle truck. Cost to keep the trucks on the road is a bunch higher than older trucks. Lots of guys getting out of the business because Kalli wont let you run a 2010 or older motor. I think the next wave is 2016 trucks or newer. Thing is all this emissions equipment cost a lot and hurts MPG. Cost of rules always get passed on to us. Higher cost of goods, less profit for the driver and smaller companies.

[Gman]

CO2 is not poison, it's plant food, and required for life on our planet.

I still get a kick out of comparing trends mandates in parts of the world that are nothing like our great nation.

[Irving]

CO2 is not poison, it's plant food, and required for life on our planet.

I still get a kick out of comparing trends mandates in parts of the world that are nothing like our great nation.

Like Radon, asbestos, and even ambient radiation readings?

[Eric P]

And the next moron for governor thinks 1700s tech is the solution to traffic.
https://www.9news.com/article/news/p...n/73-590762396

Rail is fixed, expensive and outdated. Add lanes and busses. Busses have fewer rules, cheaper, and routes can evolve with changing demographics and job centers.

Look at the current rail in Denver. Expensive to run, moves next to no one, goes nowhere useful.