Mr. Obama’s unhinged EPA just got done proposing new rules for airplanes, which will raise costs not just for those who take fossil fueled flights, but every product that requires shipment by air (while Obama just ordered a new Air Force One). Now they want to raise the cost of living even more
(AP) The Obama administration on Friday proposed tough new standards to improve fuel efficiency and reduce carbon dioxide pollution from trucks and vans, the latest move by President Barack Obama to address global warming.
The new rules are designed to slash heat-trapping carbon emissions by 24 percent by 2027 while reducing oil consumption by up to 1.8 billion barrels over the lifetime of the vehicles sold under the rule.
Medium and heavy-duty vehicles account for about 20 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and oil use in the U.S. transportation sector, polluting the air and contributing to climate change. The trucks and vans comprise only 5 percent of vehicles on the road. (snip)
Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx said the new rules would help the environment and the economy, as trucks use less fuel and shipping costs go down. Foxx called the rules “good news all around.”
You just know that the line was thrown in to attempt to ease fears over cost increases. Unfortunately, it’s not true. The cost of the trucks will increase, which will be passed on to consumers, much as it has with car fuel mandates.
Lets also consider that better MPG often means driving more, which would do nothing for CO2 output.
The leadership for American Trucking Association is all behind this, and, really, they have been pushing for more efficient trucks. Who wouldn’t? The same could be said in the consumer car sector, where many consumers want better MPG. The mandates, though, artificially push compliance which isn’t always good for the consumer
The proposed standards would cover model years 2021-2027 and apply to semi-trucks, large pickup trucks and vans, and all types and sizes of buses and work trucks, officials said.
The National Automobile Dealers Association and American Truck Dealers blasted the rule, saying it would add an average of nearly $12,000 to the cost of a new truck.
“Recent history has shown that mandates with underestimated compliance costs result in substantially higher prices for commercial vehicles, and force fleet owners and operators to seek out less-expensive and less fuel-efficient alternatives in the marketplace,” the groups said in a statement.
While the overall cost of living for citizens may only rise a tiny bit, particularly via shipping costs, you add these cost increases to all the other cost increases from other “climate change” rules and regs, and you start having some serious cost of living increases.
Right-wingers have always been mindreaders!
Stupid. You can buy a Camry LE for less today than 20 years ago, in inflation adjusted dollars.
Stupider. Do you really think truckers will start taking more side trips now that they get better mileage?
Yes, we should listen to the minority of extremist right-wing anti-government anarchists for all our policies.
Or the costs may actually go down. The costs to society will certainly go down. It’s like rules and regs on childhood vaccinations. There is a mandated cost of getting vaccinated but a huge payoff in reduced communicable diseases.
The fact is, for reasons of ideology, you dislike any and all federal regulations even if it benefits the mass of citizens. Why should we all live our lives according to your religion/ideology?
Teach the old Air Force One(s) are 25 years old. This new one that “Obama” ordered he will not be delivered while he is in office.
Teach I have a Class A CDL and drive trucks. The average fuel economy of a semi is about 6mpg There are trucks now being developed but now on the road (see the EPA’s Supertruck) that get over 10mpg. Fuel costs are 25% of trucking costs. Far more than the purchase price of a truck that will burn about 150000 gal of fuel in its lifetime.
“It isn’t always good for the consumer…..” no not always but certainly MOST of the time, otherwise why would the consumers be the one pushing for
those mandates?
WOW Teach !!! 12,000 dollars sure is a lot of money.
But of course it is less than 10% of the cost of a new semi. So let’s see 10% extra cost over 10 years ( gee that math is so simple you can do it in your head) would increase the cost of a new truck by 1% per year and if by 2025 it can match the mileage of today’s EPA Supertruck it would reduce fuel use by 50%
http://www.hybridcars.com/cummins-peterbilt-supertruck-posts-10-7-mpg/
The fuel savings alone (besides greenhouse gas reduction) amount to over 27,000 dollars PER YEAR
Teach can’t you see that the report you cited from Heritage Foundation was designed to mislead you? Don’t you feel well a bit STOOPID for posting it ?
Teach wtf did they Teach you in prep school???
[…] William Teach on The Pirate’s Cove: Obama’s EPA Proposes New Rules For Truckers ‘Cause Climate Change […]
law of unintended consequences…..
better fuel economy means less gas tax revenue to maintain the crappy roads…
so the pols will have to raise the fuel tax to offset the loss….offsetting any savings by the better fuel economy.
[…] Who do they think the extra $12,000 per truck will be passed along to? […]
The entire effect of these rugs to a room should be considered when purchasing one.
Most of the time, when the topic is all about wastewater and sewage, the image people
often get is that of bad smells and all that grime.
Nitrogen-deficient grass invites the growth of moss.