Science: Trump admin. report justifying fuel economy rollback is flawed

EPA made incorrect assumptions in 2016 and 2018; most recent are more damaging.

Read the whole story

 

[Bastard2k]

Anyone capable of reading and understanding this article already knows the trump administration is an evil cabal of a-holes. You need to get this sort of thing effectively communicated to the slow people who can only handle 120 characters at a time.

 

[fishbait]

Eleven researchers publish sharp critique of EPA fuel economy logic

i swear i initially read that as elven researchers.

 

[co-lee]

newflash: trump EPA administrators acting in bad faith.

Time for the whole damned administration to go ...

 

[Ptahhotep]

Eleven researchers publish sharp critique of EPA fuel economy logic

i swear i initially read that as elven researchers.

You're not alone.

 

[bushrat011899]

Anyone capable of reading and understanding this article already knows the trump administration is an evil cabal of a-holes. You need to get this sort of thing effectively communicated to the slow people who can only handle 120 characters at a time.

I don't think anyone can. I think 120 characters (or 240 now) made Twitter so popular because statements made have no power to sway the masses. The only things Twitter is good for is affirming already held beliefs, or fueling distrust when a contrary opinion is held.

 

[LuDux]

Sounds like this report is a great example of having the required result in mind, and just working back from it to form the required assumptions.

Cynical and flawed, but enough cover for the predetermined decision

Sounds like you're a great example of making an assumption, then working backwards from it to your predetermined conclusion.

 

[Legatum_of_Kain]

There has to be a special kind of stupid to not remember how cities used to be before the EPA enacted strong pollution protections.

In management and development 101, you have to work towards a goal in order to have deliverables, so if you aim for the moon you can at least get to space, sort of thing and then later on the moon itself.


The anti-science administrations need to go and the anti-science party also needs to go, lest we become a MAD MAX planet.

 

[coslie]

Sounds like this report is a great example of having the required result in mind, and just working back from it to form the required assumptions.

Cynical and flawed, but enough cover for the predetermined decision

I'm guessing the EPA report is what you're talking about, and you are agreeing with the researchers who wrote the letter criticizing it. If so you are correct but some people are interpreting it backwards.

 

[arc-tu-rus]

Unfortunately this is unsurprising. This EPA report goes in line with the reasoning used by US (along with Saudi Arabia, Russia and Kuwait) when they rejected yesterday the IPCC's report on the impacts of a temperature rise of 1.5C at the COP24 summit...

 

[ColdWetDog]

There has to be a special kind of stupid to not remember how cities used to be before the EPA enacted strong pollution protections.

...

"Those who do not understand history are doomed to repeat it" -- George Santayana

 

[josephandrews222]

Our President, during the campaign, stated that he knew more about ISIS than our country's generals.

It is therefore not a stretch to imagine that he believes he knows more about climate change than our country's best scientists, including several National Academy members and a couple of Nobel winners.

And our President's base follows him as if they're in some sort of cult.

Elections have consequences, and I fear for the future of my beloved country...the United States of America.

 

[Oldmanalex]

"Occam's Scalpel" by Theodore Sturgeon may explain it all.

 

[ArseTechnically]

I am absolutely shocked that a former coal lobbyist could sponsor a report that dings the industry's bottom line. When he took the job, he swore to promote and protect a strong and healthy environment. I can't imagine that he'd change course after the swearing-in.

/s

 

[Sajuuk]

"C'mon, you can't even name something Trump has actually done"

This is an attitude I've seen recently, and it's as infuriating as it is stupid. Institutional degradation from a thousand cuts, like this, will cause lasting damage that's unlikely to get fixed later because it's not flashy and people don't care. Bush carried out the same thing to the same departments, and we simply forgot about it.

 

[Disco Funk Refugee]

Eleven researchers publish sharp critique of EPA fuel economy logic

i swear i initially read that as elven researchers.

"The illegal Snowflake Elves know nothing! They are totally biased against the economy and dumb as a rock! ICE should send every one of them back home! MAKE AMERICA AROMATIC AGAIN!"

-- trump, probably

 

[dbostrom]

As long as cars are freighted with glittering and functionally useless trim and all the other freight not directly in support of "Go from A to B," the claim that improving mileage is excessively burdensome is comically wrong and misleading.

Money spent on useless can be diverted and spent on useful.

"But the customers want style!" As Steve Jobs said, "customers don't know what they want" as amply exemplified by weird automotive features customers never asked for, such as absurdly over-sized wheel arches, giant grills, air intakes leading nowhere. Customers never asked for those things. All of them cost money to implement.

Meanwhile, it's much easier to explain to a customer the virtues of efficiency since there are actually good reasons for efficiency as opposed to the next expensive and pointless design fling.

 

[Bush Ranger]

Trump has moved to rescind a number of environmentally-minded regulations instituted under the Obama Administration.

Well that's a good thing isn't it? I mean what would a Muslim Kenyan refugee who's married to a transvestite know.

And yes that's sarcasm.

 

[cstalt]

Wow. This really is damning. The energy lobbyists in the current EPA clearly had an agenda (roll back regs), so they had to fudge the numbers to make it seem like their plan would be beneficial.

"Safer vehicles" always seemed like a guise, but now we know the details of their ploy. It still amazes me that the political party that prides itself on sound business judgment is so happy to deviate from basic logic when it suits their corporate donors.

 

[RandomCommentor]

Now if we could only get rid of ethanol in fuel, and prevent requiring glass roofs (and various other useless items) in cars to get things that are actually useful.

 

[coslie]

Sounds like this report is a great example of having the required result in mind, and just working back from it to form the required assumptions.

Cynical and flawed, but enough cover for the predetermined decision

Sounds like you're a great example of making an assumption, then working backwards from it to your predetermined conclusion.

Exactly. Cash for clunkers showed us that unintended consequences can lead to us throwing tons of money at a problem and going backwards. One of the facts is even without the regulatory requirements, there generally is a desire for cost effective improvements to improve the vehicles, and if the costs of vehicles are pushed upward, it pushes old vehicles, where the emissions systems often have entirely failed, to be kept on the road even longer. As it is, the average age of the American vehicle fleet on the road is rising at an alarming rate (made much worse by cash for clunkers), and anything to provide some relief to that will be good for the environment, and good for the people.

Cash for Clunkers was partially intended as an economic stimulus after the housing crash not just an environmental measure. It's results both on economic and environmental grounds are a cause for debate, it wasn't a smashing success nor was it a crushing failure.

What we are talking about here are politically motivated hacks at the EPA taking an existing model and arbitrarily changing assumptions and inputs in order to get the result that let their political masters do what they want.

The regular staff must be livid. You dedicate your life to creating accurate models and acquiring accurate data, then a pack of post-truth hyenas come in and defecate all over it.

 

[Spackler's Bent]

Sounds like this report is a great example of having the required result in mind, and just working back from it to form the required assumptions.

Cynical and flawed, but enough cover for the predetermined decision

Sounds like you're a great example of making an assumption, then working backwards from it to your predetermined conclusion.

Exactly. Cash for clunkers showed us that unintended consequences can lead to us throwing tons of money at a problem and going backwards. One of the facts is even without the regulatory requirements, there generally is a desire for cost effective improvements to improve the vehicles, and if the costs of vehicles are pushed upward, it pushes old vehicles, where the emissions systems often have entirely failed, to be kept on the road even longer. As it is, the average age of the American vehicle fleet on the road is rising at an alarming rate (made much worse by cash for clunkers), and anything to provide some relief to that will be good for the environment, and good for the people.

Cash for clunkers failed in several ways, but I don't see how it helped increase the age of our fleet. I'm legitimately curious what you believe cash for clunkers did to contribute to that issue, especially since the average age has been increasing since the late 70's. In fact, it pretty much follows the trend line of wage stagnation vs cost of living in the US, which is not at all surprising (but I'm sure trickle down economics is totally going to start working any day now).

One of the few things that the program did successfully was get something like 650k of the oldest cars off the road. It just wasn't a positive economic result as something like 60% of those car buyers would have purchased a car within a year anyway (meaning we just gave them free money for nothing) and the majority of fuel efficient vehicles actually tend to be less expensive so we were incentivizing people to spend less than they might have.

 

[Sajuuk]

Wow. This really is damning. The energy lobbyists in the current EPA clearly had an agenda (roll back regs), so they had to fudge the numbers to make it seem like their plan would be beneficial.

"Safer vehicles" always seemed like a guise, but now we know the details of their ploy. It still amazes me that the political party that prides itself on sound business judgment is so happy to deviate from basic logic when it suits their corporate donors.

Republicans having "sound business judgement" is a combination of complete hypocrisy, myth, and propaganda.

 

[pkirvan]

This kind of thing is a good demonstration of why emissions should be limited via stiff carbon taxes, not by emissions regulations. I'm sure millions of dollars are spent on this kind of unproductive bickering and lobbying. It won't change anyone's mind about anything. The only winners are the ones getting paid to write reports.

 

[127.0.0.1]

Eleven researchers publish sharp critique of EPA fuel economy logic

i swear i initially read that as elven researchers.

"The illegal Snowflake Elves know nothing! They are totally biased against the economy and dumb as a rock! ICE should send every one of them back home! MAKE AMERICA AROMATIC AGAIN!"

-- trump, probably

Please, stable geniuses don't use the word "aromatic". We say "smell good".

 

[tie]

Note that this is not just Republicans acting on their own. The auto industry asked for and heavily lobbied for this, and they should be held accountable as well.

Here's a letter to the EPA from BMW, FCA, Ford, GM, Jaguar, Mazda, Mercedes, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen and Volvo: https://autoalliance.org/wp-content/upl ... Signed.pdf

They are climate deniers, and suggest that tailpipe pollution doesn't kill anyone.

They are acting to corrupt our government. By freezing emission standards, they are killing people and helping destroy the environment.

It is ludicrous that private companies should be able to get away with such corruption. Consider a Honda.

 

[tmt]

wow, those researchers really are benevolent, I'd never call the stuff coming from EPA "logic"

 

[Ralf The Dog]

Our President, during the campaign, stated that he knew more about ISIS than our country's generals.

It is therefore not a stretch to imagine that he believes he knows more about climate change than our country's best scientists, including several National Academy members and a couple of Nobel winners.

And our President's base follows him as if they're in some sort of cult.

So far, assuming what you've said is true, this sounds an awful lot like you must be a citizen of North Korea. Welcome to the global Internet, friend.

Elections have consequences, and I fear for the future of my beloved country...the United States of America.

Oh. Uh. Never mind.

There is less and less of a difference by the day. Just ask our friends at the Ministry of Truth. (Big Brother is watching.)

 

[tmt]

Eleven researchers publish sharp critique of EPA fuel economy logic

i swear i initially read that as elven researchers.

Shame they aren't, we really could use some magic to undo all the pollution causing global warming.

 

[Ralf The Dog]

There has to be a special kind of stupid to not remember how cities used to be before the EPA enacted strong pollution protections.

In management and development 101, you have to work towards a goal in order to have deliverables, so if you aim for the moon you can at least get to space, sort of thing and then later on the moon itself.


The anti-science administrations need to go and the anti-science party also needs to go, lest we become a MAD MAX planet.

Trump has spent his life in one of the greatest cities of the world. To be honest, I don't think he can remember anything that happened five minutes ago.

 

[Ralf The Dog]

Eleven researchers publish sharp critique of EPA fuel economy logic

i swear i initially read that as elven researchers.

Shame they aren't, we really could use some magic to undo all the pollution causing global warming.

I would settle for fewer orks burning down the forests and spewing their industrial filth. We have one in the highest office of the United States.

 

[CraigJ ✅]

"Eleven researchers publish sharp critique of EPA fuel economy logic"

Logic?????

 

[Matthew J.]

This administration: bad at policy, bad at science.

 

[tmt]

Eleven researchers publish sharp critique of EPA fuel economy logic

i swear i initially read that as elven researchers.

Shame they aren't, we really could use some magic to undo all the pollution causing global warming.

I would settle for fewer orks burning down the forests and spewing their industrial filth. We have one in the highest office of the United States.

How could you!? The Horde is full of proud honorable warriors! Cadet bonespurs doesn't even know the meaning of those words.

also #NotAllOrcs

 

[Ralf The Dog]

Eleven researchers publish sharp critique of EPA fuel economy logic

i swear i initially read that as elven researchers.

Shame they aren't, we really could use some magic to undo all the pollution causing global warming.

I would settle for fewer orks burning down the forests and spewing their industrial filth. We have one in the highest office of the United States.

How could you!? The Horde is full of proud honorable warriors! Cadet bonespurs doesn't even know the meaning of those words.

also #NotAllOrcs

I was thinking more of the mind controlled orcs in Lord of the Rings. J. R. R. Tolkien was writing about Trump.

 

[Hezio]

There has to be a special kind of stupid to not remember how cities used to be before the EPA enacted strong pollution protections.

In management and development 101, you have to work towards a goal in order to have deliverables, so if you aim for the moon you can at least get to space, sort of thing and then later on the moon itself.


The anti-science administrations need to go and the anti-science party also needs to go, lest we become a MAD MAX planet.

Why would they go though?

They know they'll get the votes eventually, they know the population won't force them out. Who the hell would be saying "oh sorry you're right, we'll leave our cushy easy jobs of fucking everyone over now'.