Guest guest Posted October 14, 2002 Report Share Posted October 14, 2002 http://www.nytimes.com/2002/10/14/opinion/14MON3.html October 14, 2002 Retreat on Clean Air The Bush administration has taken another step backward in the fight against air pollution. Last week, it joined the automobile industry in a lawsuit charging that a California program encouraging manufacturers to sell cleaner, more fuel-efficient " hybrid " vehicles - cars powered by a combination of gasoline and electricity - usurped federal authority. The suit is a direct challenge to California's longstanding authority to set emission standards tougher than the federal government's. More broadly, it is further evidence of President Bush's unwillingness to offend his political allies by pushing the industry to develop cleaner cars and thus lessen urban smog and the dangers of global warming. At immediate issue is California's right to set its own emission standards. The Clean Air Act gave California this power partly because its pollution problems were uniquely severe. Over the years, the state has used it to drive industry to develop cleaner cars and cleaner fuels, thus benefiting not only California but the whole country. As part of this effort, California decreed several years ago that 10 percent of the vehicles sold in the state between the 2003 and 2008 model years must be " zero emission " vehicles, meaning electric cars. But since there is no viable commercial market for electric cars, California said that Detroit could meet part of its quota with hybrids. The auto industry, which opposes quotas of any kind, resisted even this overture and went to court claiming that the California plan pre-empted the federal government's authority to set fuel-economy standards. It's a dubious argument. Hybrids do get more miles to the gallon than conventional cars, and for that reason create fewer of the gases that cause smog and climate change. California's interest, however, lies not in setting nationwide fuel standards, but simply in getting a cleaner car for California. It is to be hoped that the United States Court of Appeals in San Francisco, which will decide the case, appreciates this distinction. At a time when both industry and the federal government seem content with the status quo, California should be allowed to pursue its useful role as an advocate for technological change and cleaner air. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.