Vermont Emissions Trial Update

[tarabell]

"If motorists are saving money at the pump, they will drive more."

Candace Page – Burlingtonfreepress.com – April 20, 2007

Vermont's greenhouse gas emissions limits would encourage the state's motorists to add more than 1 million miles a day to the distances they drive by the year 2030, an economist hired by the auto industry testified Thursday in U.S. District Court.

David Harrison, a private consultant, told U.S. District Judge William Sessions the state's greenhouse gas rules will require cars to get better gasoline mileage, thus cutting gasoline consumption. If motorists are saving money at the pump, they will drive more, he said.

He said his analysis also shows that more Vermonters will hold on to their old cars, rather than buy new ones because new cars built to comply with the new rules will be more expensive.

Harrison's analysis was intended to bolster automakers' argument that Vermont's rules could increase greenhouse gas emissions, if some motorists drive more and others hold on to their old, more polluting cars.

"In my opinion, these regulations would reduce new vehicle sales," he testified. "Overall the fleet of vehicles will become older ... (and) there will be an increase in vehicle miles traveled in Vermont." [Read More]

[c0da]

I was pretty sure hybrids don't emit any emissions when they're stuck in traffic idling, but I could be wrong.

[Earthling]

I served as a juror a few years back.

Trust me when I say you can hire an expert witness to say anything you want if you pay him enough. This article is an example of that, in my opinion.

Harry

[Alexstarfire]

Well, people are stupid. I bet you that analyst works for GM. That's just the stupidest thing I've heard. Older cars cost more to repair. And how can they prove that they will drive more if they save money?

They may hold on to older cars, but what they need to do is just reduce emissions period, on all cars. If older cars can't pass the emissions then the people who own them should get money for having them decommissioned. That's just about the only way this is gonna work.

[BailOut]

Originally Posted by c0da

I was pretty sure hybrids don't emit any emissions when they're stuck in traffic idling, but I could be wrong.

Anything that is burning fuel - which idling requires - puts off emissions. Hybrids are cleaner than the rest but they are not totally without emissions.

[brucepick]

How much baloney will people countinue to believe?

The analysis in the article is from "an economist hired by the auto industry testified Thursday in U.S. District Court."

Well duh.
What galls me is that the editor and/or journalist selected that analysis for publication.

They could instead have quoted another analysis stating that inneficient, pollution-spewing vehicles are simultaneously ruining our economy, our environment, and our national security. Just as correct as the article's assertions, if not more correct.

[xcel]

Hi Tarabell:

___Yet another great find.

Harrison testified … displaying a graph …

___The Graph starts in the upper left hand corner in the year 2000 at “Dahh, I am simply stupid” and slopes down to the lower right when it reaches “I am a complete Dumb@$$” by the year 2030.

___Sorry for not being politically correct while stating the obvious

___Good Luck

___Wayne

[tarabell]

Automakers are seeking to overturn Vermont's adoption of California emissions limits as illegal, technologically impossible to meet and costly to consumers.

I wonder if they noticed they just disproved their own argument #3

[tarabell]

Here is the latest auto salvo as of Friday:

Expert: Regulation would hurt industry

BURLINGTON — An auto industry consultant testified Friday that new rules to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from cars and trucks would devastate the industry if adopted, forcing the loss of up to 65,000 jobs over the next 10 years.
In addition, there would be more than 20,000 jobs lost in dealerships and distributors, and 41,000 indirect job losses in the economy at large if the rules take effect, according to Harbour, who called his estimates conservative.

So consumers aren’t going to spend more for these cars – no wait, they’ll spend more for them and drive them more —no wait….

And the shell game is now apparent to students --who have innately sensitive BS meters:

Hey carmakers: Is this a country of Americans or Ameri-can'ts?

The auto industry is again showing its true colors this month in Vermont, and they're definitely not green.
The states are setting incremental goals for the auto industry to attain that will alleviate the country's dependence on foreign oil and lessen the impact it has on the environment.
And the carmakers are pissed. Behind the flashy advertising -- they spend more on commercials than any other industry -- Detroit is a dinosaur refusing to adapt.

[Earthling]

My contempt for the Big Three grows daily, as I watch how they resist change.

Get with it, Big Three, or vanish. Someone will sell us fuel-efficient cars, even if you can't, or won't.

Harry