Toys4RJill

No offence to anyone, but many among the American population as well as many US companies do not like to think long term. Having better air quality and stopping a warming environment is not something Americans follow in politics.

By rolling back, new cars would stay cheaper to purchase at the point of sale, but they would be more costly over the long haul (because you have to use gas to fuel them). Tighter restrictions will make the car more costly to buy, but cheaper to fuel and use over the long term as it will promote the transition to EV type models.

coolsaber

Classic example of pointlessness.

-Cheaper Cars and more jobs
Really explain to me as a business why I would want to make cars cheaper. Trade issues, labor problems etc are always on the horizon. Even in the bestest financial times, companies like GM are closing plants, Fords trimming down sedans....

-Automakers
Notably absent from this development. Not taking a side or being vocal even though this is a huge possible issue impacting their future plans. Aka silence speaks volumes...their plans were already set for the now revoke regulations.

The real question is who does this really benefit...not those students or any number of services that could be funded by the legal costs that both parties involved will spend on their weeks in court.

But hey, cheaper cars and jobs right?

Toys4RJill

cars that are cheaper, are easier to sell. The western world, especially the US and Canada love cheap stuff. To keep the US car industry moving, you want cheap stuff...the US car industry is actually contracting, you never see unit growth again.

coolsaber

I get the "cheap sells well in the NADM" however think of it this way, are folks gonna be picking up a new corolla for $5k new? The pricing structure that is here now, is gonna stay probably increase due to inflation and others factors. Folks are not gonna get cheaper cars over carb rules. Companies however may shift to reduce costs, but thats never gonna translate to a lower entry point that the end customer will ever see.

EDIT:
The only way we get jobs and cheaper cars is if someone else foots the bill by means of subsidies and initiatives.l

Toys4RJill

I am a little confused by your post. I was not saying that their would be $5K Corollas, rolling back fuel economy standards allows for the current establishment to keep on moving.

I do not agree with rolling them back. I think it is dumb. But, Cali has a huge a influence on the fuel standards for the US, and the president is trying to take back that control. What Cali says pretty much dictates. And the state is blue. An election is coming, the auto sales are contracting, manufacturing of cars is about to crash. Support big oil keeps things going for the short, short term.

TigerInst

Cali's unrealistic standard of air cleanliness is precisely why cars and gas prices are so much higher than most states. The cost to develop cleaner, more efficient vehicles would no longer hurt the customers, and the inflated gas tax due to the "Clean Air Act" would no longer deter ppl wanting to travel. This is a core reason why the auto industry hasnt had any real growth here.
While Cali's demand for developing new technologies to produce cleaner, more efficient vehicles is noble, it clearly is having a negative impact on the economy/auto industry without seeing real gains in air quality, and this idea is easily reinforced by the negligence of accurately measuring pollutants in the air from the companies they employ to do so. VW and GM have even been caught fudging their emissions after they have been officially tested. EPA only found out after someone had ratted on them. Why cheat the system? They can achieve federal emissions standards but not Cali's.

coolsaber

How did the above come directly as a result of the Carb?

coolsaber

Not singling you out so apologizes there, but the recurrent theme for proponents are that "cars would be cheaper and more affordable" and it wouldnt "negatively effect the job market for those employed in the car industry" but I`m confused as to how numerically those would play out?

Would I be able to pick up a new 2019 Chevy Cruze that currently stickers at 17,995 for MY19 for $9,995 if the Carb rules are no longer in play?

Would more folks be hired if the Carb rules would go away in lordstown assembly after March 6th 2019?

mmarshall

CARB rules or not, Lordstown is gone. It was shut down on the exact date you posted. That is one of a number of different reasons why the UAW launched their retaliatory nationwide strike against GM last Monday.

Toys4RJill

no. You would not be able to get a Cruze that cheap

TigerInst

Idk how else to simplify it anymore. CARB, along with other agencies, set strict emission standards if cars are to be sold here in Cali. How will auto manufactures do this? Through developing non-standard ways to reduce emissions and then testing to see if it works. Here in Cali, cars sold after 2004 had to meet LEV standards (Low Emission Vehicle). ULEV, and SULEV are even more stringent restrictions on emissions and then there are ZEV and PZEV but those are generally hybrid cars. This added cost is then distributed amongst the consumers and generally will add to the overall cost of vehicles being sold throughout the nation so that the difference in price between the same vehicle isn't drastically different.
Probably should have been more clear but all this is definitely effecting the auto-industry as the cost to meet higher and higher emission standards goes up, meaning higher costs customers have to pay. This coupled with our crazy gas tax isn't exactly good for Cali's overall economy, especially our farming/transportation industry.

Vladi

I'm sorry I just cannot be convinced how abandoning the strict pollution targets are good for any of us and the environment. More efficient ICE cars, car you recharge using clean technology are good for everybody and a giant leap forward for our society. Only excuse I hear against this is the cost of vehicles going up in short term. So what? You will have to downgrade from 3 series to Camry? Big f'in deal.

The real problem here is that manufacturers will have to adjust development strictly to efficiency instead of performance 70% efficiency 30% they all do when developing gasoline engines. Mazda is great example of developing for efficiency and are they any more expensive than others? No, so there is no absolutely no reason to worry that cars would get more expensive because they have to meet the strict goals, you would just have to accept the fact that your car will not be able to hit 0-60 in 5.5 seconds but instead it will do in 7.5. Changing the shift in development is what will hit the manufacturers the most but their profit margins are so spread that they don't have to pass the additional cost to consumer if they don't want to and most likely they will not. I believe this whole your car will now cost a fortune campaign is just the scare tactics by dirty oil lobby just like how the whole climate change denial is only there to maintain oil industry profits in check. Are CO2 and NOx gasses bad for us and our environment? Yes. The end of story.

Bob04

Well, that certainly hasn't been the case in the HVAC industry. The higher SEER units are substantially more expensive than the lower SEER units, so you have to shell out a lot of money upfront or finance a much higher amount and pay a much higher monthly payment. Then, you have to count on the efficiency making your money back for you, which is often calculated on best case scenarios and not real world cases. And every HVAC tech I've ever talked to said the high efficiency units of less reliable and much more expensive to repair.

The bottom line is that there is no free lunch. The cost savings/environmental gains in one area are just shifted to expense/environmental damage elsewhere. We are to the point where big gains are going to cost big money, and companies will not eat it. The consumer will pay for it. And the government can come in with rebates/incentives/tax credits, but that just means you pay through the government instead of the companies. In the end, the only thing that will make a big difference is for people to sacrifice either their money or what they want in a vehicle.

LeX2K

Then why are you using carbon based energy? Stop right now.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

i didn’t see anyone write that cars would suddenly drop massively in price because of this action, but even so, car makers having to make special adjustments or just certification for california, or possibly just decide that we’ll do it for california and sell the same versions everywhere else too because it’s simpler means that everyone outside california is paying more for a vehicle than they would... it’s not that complicated.

Lower prices could mean greater sales, or keep the same prices if the market will support it and make more profit, either way this puts more money in the automaker’s pocket and the potential to hire more people - well definitely more if they’re selling more volume, but even if same volume with more profit they can hire people for other areas, like EVs.