California and 13 other states (Vermont, New Jersey, New York, Arizona, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Washington and Rhode Island) asked President Obama to resubmit a request that would allow states to enforce stricter regulations than the federal government’s for auto emissions and fuel efficiency.
William Kovacs, a VP at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce was not happy with the President’s decision. “In addition, such a move would put the EPA one step closer to making carbon dioxide ‘subject to regulation’ under the Act. This would … have the unintended consequence of creating costly and burdensome permitting requirements on millions of construction projects, including hospitals, schools, and office buildings,” he said.
But what is wrong with an agency finally having the ability to regulate CO2?
And, the excuse of “costly and burdensome” has been used for far too long. Former President Bush rejected the same proposal in 2007, probably for similar reasons, but it’s about time someone took some action.
Currently, each gallon of gasoline you burn creates 20 pounds of CO2 and in California, about 40 percent of its greenhouse gas emissions are caused by automobiles, so perhaps it is time for better regulations.
In California, “the new regulations would force automakers to reduce vehicle emissions by a third by 2016…and increase fuel efficiency from 27 miles per gallon to 35 miles per gallon in cars and light trucks.”