XPost: alt.energy.automobile, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics
XPost: talk.politics.guns

On 26 Oct 2023, "rudy sucks dick"
<elonx@protonmail.com> posted some news:uhdu8d$1kk81$14@dont-email.me:

Electric cars are pieces of junk that cannot handle temperature
extremes, hot or cold.

The Biden administration is facing opposition to its proposed fuel
economy standards, with critics arguing that they would increase
consumer costs and burden U.S. businesses.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) received over
62,900 public comments during the comment period, including opposition
from 26 states and various industries.

The American Petroleum Institute (API) and other industry groups argue
that the proposed standards restrict consumer choice, raise costs, and
create a vulnerable transport sector dependent on electric vehicles.
(Trending: Joe Biden Does the Unthinkable For Hamas)

Automakers, such as Ford and Stellantis, express concerns about
substantial civil penalties and the impracticality of meeting the
proposed standards.

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation (AAI) predicts that
non-compliance penalties under the proposal will cost companies over $14 billion and lead to increased car prices.

“NHTSA’s proposal is yet another attempt by the Biden administration to restrict Americans’ freedom to decide what vehicle fits their needs and budget,” Will Hupman, the American Petroleum Institute’s (API) vice
president of downstream policy, said in a statement.

“Combined with EPA’s proposed tailpipe emissions standards, these rules
amount to a de facto ban on cars and trucks using liquid fuels, which
can and should be a part of the solution to reduce carbon emissions,” he continued.

“NHTSA has departed from Congressional intent and proposed standards
that do not meet statutory requirements,” American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, another industry group, wrote in a comment letter.

“In particular, we believe that NHTSA exceeds its legal authority by
setting the fuel economy standards at a level that is not feasibly
achievable by internal combustion engine vehicles, effectively
establishing a de facto electric vehicle mandate.”

The AAI also emphasizes the need for better alignment between NHTSA fuel economy standards and EPA tailpipe emissions rules. (Trending: Biden
Official Caught Working For Terrorists)

West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and a coalition of 26
states oppose the rules, citing concerns about national security, power
grid stress, and supply chain limitations.

“Ford has never paid civil penalties under the CAFE program, and yet by
NHTSA’s own analysis Ford would likely pay $1 billion in civil penalties
if NHTSA’s Proposal were finalized,” Ford Motor Company wrote in its
comment letter.

“This is alarming in and of itself, and threatens substantial economic
hardship for Ford.”

“Under NHTSA’s Proposal, automakers face risks of substantial civil
penalties not because they are less capable than others, but because
they hold a major portion of the market share for light-duty trucks,”
the major U.S. automaker continued.

“Money paid in civil penalties could instead be invested toward the
transition to EVs, toward higher wages for workers, or toward any number
of virtuous policy objectives.”

https://www.americainsider.org/2023/10/24/biden-admin-faces-pressure-to-d rop-electric-vehicle-mandate-regulations-this-is-alarming/

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)