Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4
I said that the air quality has improved over the decades, but they still have the worst air quality in the nation. How is that incorrect?
Better is nice, but they still come in last place and last place sucks, what do they want a participation trophy?
The only thing that can make them not last place is lots of electrics.
Then every other state has been able to clean up their sky's better and faster with out imposing their own standards.
|
I interpreted you incorrectly there, but I'm not sure exactly what point you're trying to make. My understanding of the argument so far is something like:
States should not be able to maintain their own environmental regulations for things like vehicles, but must instead be subject to only a single federal standard. The reasoning is that CA has the worst pollution despite having their own environmental board. The implication is that CA will have better environmental quality if subjected only to federal standards?
It doesn't follow because CA has bigger environmental challenges simply due to population and geography. Having the worst air quality (which I'm only assuming is true) is evidence of that problem, and therefore justifies a special regulatory agency to address it, with protection from the tragedy of the commons being among the few useful purposes of bureaucracy.
I lean towards liberty, and although I personally dislike CARB and CA in general, they've got the right to run their state how they see fit, and I don't have to live there.
Federal rights trumping states rights is a precedent that shouldn't be set, because power should be allocated at the lowest levels possible rather than concentrated at the top.
If I've misunderstood your point, kindly elaborate.
Quote:
Originally Posted by oil pan 4
The industry know about 12 years ago someone tried it.
GM built a hybrid Silverado back around 2008. It flopped, there were still new ones on dealer lots 2 years after they discontinued them. This is the main reason no one is trying to be first with an electric or hybrid pickups.
They developed a bit of a cult following after gas prices were stuck over $3 a gallon for a few years by 2013-2014.
So the industry knows gas prices will have to go up and stay up for an extended period of time to get people interested..
With the auto makers bleeding money from every orifice like an ebola victim no one can afford to launch a money pit.
|
GM made a crappy start/stop hybrid truck and priced it too high, and that scared others off perhaps. Sounds similar to how there was a huge gap between the EV1, and Tesla's first EV.
I'm not talking about a mild hybrid that is priced too high though, I'm talking about a true hybrid, perhaps even a plug in version. With $7,500 in federal subsidy on the table, it could probably be made to cost the same as the non-hybrid version, or at least easily pencil out factoring in the fuel savings.
The only thing I can think of, which is probably a huge consideration, is that a hybrid weighs more, and that cuts into payload and towing ratings. In an arms race to tow/haul more, coming in 200 lbs short won't cut it.