Fuel Smarts

Trump's EPA Pick Questions Emissions Regs

January 18, 2017

SHARING TOOLS        | Print Subscribe
Photo of Scott Pruitt via Gage Skidmore/Flickr.
Photo of Scott Pruitt via Gage Skidmore/Flickr.

Scott Pruitt, President-elect Donald Trump's choice to lead the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, questioned agency regulations governing exhaust emissions during a contentious Jan. 18 hearing before senators who will vote on his appointment.

Pruitt, Oklahoma's attorney general, said he disagrees with a waiver giving California the power to impose stricter standards than other states, and couldn't commit to keeping the decades-old waiver in place, reported the Los Angeles Times.

California regulators have used the waiver to cut greenhouse gas emissions by nearly a third since 2009, and more than a dozen other states have adopted the California standard to clean their own air.

Pruitt also said he would review the Jan. 13 decision by outgoing EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy to finalize fuel efficiency regulations through 2025, reported Automotive News.

The Obama administration set aggressive corporate average fuel economy standards as part of landmark 2012 legislation that gives the EPA until April of 2018 to decide whether to modify the 2022 to 2025 model year emission rules that would eventually require 50 miles per gallon across an automaker's fleet of models.

Comments

  1. 1. Kristina [ January 23, 2017 @ 01:42PM ]

    Maybe we can add pipeline into the wall to export all of our CA pollution into OK. I think Mr. Pruitt needs to take a trip to China or India and see how wonderful it is living free of emissions regulations. In Los Angeles, we have managed to make huge strides in air quality in 30 years, as the mountains have magically reappeared in the horizon while the carcinogenic yellow haze has released its death grip. That would have never happened if not for the waivers, because clean air is not good for profit margins for petrochemical or healthcare industries.

  2. 2. Stan [ January 24, 2017 @ 10:41AM ]

    It's important to keep in mind that, in China, the 2010 EPA emissions, from Heavy Duty Diesels, are already to the point the exhaust is cleaner than the air they are taking in. Because we don't need the cost to every consumer, that further over the top regulations would cause, doesn't mean that what we have should be rolled back. It should be improved in not only the output but reliability and cost as well.

  3. 3. Cliff Downing [ January 24, 2017 @ 08:40PM ]

    How short of memories some folks have. Forget the nonsense California pulls off, the rest of the country just on the general air, water, land regulations has virtually become pristine wilderness compared to the 1960's. How many remember the Cuyahoga river catching on fire because of all the pollution back in the early 70's? And vehicles now are emitting a mere fraction of harmful pollutants that they were during the 60's/70's. California has taken this to an absurd extreme. It isn't so much about them wanting things cleaned up, they wish to destroy the economies of their own state and that of others. And anyone that has had rudimentary science classes knows that the GHG attributed to all of mankind's effort amount to less than 2% of total GHG pollutants per year. The earth itself contributes 98% of all pollutants. To follow California mindset, we would have to make this entire planet a dead barren rock before they would be happy. If Californian's want cleaner air, then stop making their state a haven for wild fires. That causes more pollution than all their autos.

  4. 4. MC [ January 25, 2017 @ 04:41AM ]

    I don't know what conservatives are trying to conserve, but it surely isn't the environment. They scream for less EPA oversight, but are the first to cry when their favorite hunting grounds (where they hunt squirrels with AK47s) become toxic waste dumps. They want less government oversight, of course unless it affects them personally.
    I love how conservatives shout for less federal oversight and more power to the states,that is until they take power...then they want to strip states of what power they do have. They do it with personal freedoms, too. They shout for more personal freedom, until they take power...then they want to be in your bedroom, your bathroom, your doctor's office and dictate what god to pray to.

  5. 5. Ranger [ January 31, 2017 @ 10:47AM ]

    Kristina, we have so many burdensome regs that it make it more attractive to manufacture(almost everything) in China. China does not care about the environment or human rights as much as we do. Therefore too much regs is hurting the environment.

 

Comment On This Story

Name:  
Email:  
Comment: (Maximum 2000 characters)  
Leave this field empty:
* Please note that every comment is moderated.

Newsletter

We offer e-newsletters that deliver targeted news and information for the entire fleet industry.

GotQuestions?

sponsored by

ELDs and Telematics

Scott Sutarik from Geotab will answer your questions and challenges

View All

GotQuestions?

Sleeper Cab Power

Steve Carlson from Xantrex will answer your questions and challenges

View All