California Takes Drastic Step Towards Reducing Emissions

From oilprice.com

By Irina Slav – Nov 18, 2019, 11:30 AM CST California

California state agencies will stop buying gas-powered vehicles from a number of carmakers after the latter joined the White House in their opposition to the state’s new, stricter emissions rules.

UPI reports that the ban will be effective immediately and it will affect the local sales of makes including Toyota, GM, and Fiat Chrysler to state agencies. However, the ban is not complete: it will make an exception for public safety vehicles.

“The state is finally making the smart move away from internal combustion engine sedans,” California Governor Gavin Newsom told CalMatters in a statement. “Carmakers that have chosen to be on the wrong side of history will be on the losing end of California’s buying power.”

California is the single largest car market in the United States, but it is also the most environmentally conscious. Newsom has led a true crusade against the fossil fuel industry and emissions, which in September culminated in an executive order to advance the state’s environmental agenda, which includes generating 100-percent clean energy by 2045 and adding five million emission-free vehicles on California roads by 2030.

But the state also wanted to set its own emission limits as part of its efforts to become the greenest of them all, and this put it at even greater odds than it was already with the White House. Following the executive order by Newsom, Trump revoked California’s right to set its own emission limits, which led to the expected outcry, which was joined by another 22 states as well, which together filed a lawsuit against the U.S. president.

Full article here.

HT/Juan S

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

169 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
High Treason
November 26, 2019 11:46 am

California will rapidly become like North Korea- a backward state getting nowhere while the rest of the world progresses. Industries will leave, so the economy will collapse- it will be back to the caves. If we go eco-lunacy worldwide and revert to 100% renewable, the planet will support as many humans as it did 10,000 years ago.

Small problem, the planet supported around 7 million humans, not 7 billion back in the Neolithic. This will mean that 99.9% of humans will perish. Those with a skillset behind a computer will NOT be one of the lucky 1 in a thousand that will survive. In absolutely delicious irony, the ONLY humans that have any hope of survival are those very few that live a totally tribal stone age life without any inputs from industrialised society. This means no guns or metal knives. The trappings of modern life will disappear rapidly- cars, computers, hospitals, surgery, reliable food and water- all gone.

In all likelihood, EVERY single idiot that calls for such 100% renewable economy WILL die. It is quite likely that almost all human technology over the last 10,000 will just be abandoned. The ultimate irony will be that those who could have written the history of the total absurdity (that created total atrocity) will have died. Those last scraggy humans will have no idea of what abominations occurred until they eventually evolve archaeology and uncover some remnants of our society. They might even laugh at what utter morons we were to have just thrown it all away without some existential threat like severe drought , supervolcano or asteroid strike. They will scratch their heads if they can time date that coal fired power plants were destroyed to be replaced with unreliable and expensive windmills. If they can establish this time line, they will be truly perplexed- why on earth did they go backwards voluntarily? If they can decipher old surviving texts, they will be even more aghast that the justification for destroying themselves came without any actual debate.

Then, if they find that any debate that could have saved them was crushed, with the People of the day still selecting those that allowed the crushing of open debate to be their overlords, they will be truly horrified. What will be the conclusions they make of our long extinct society? What derogatory remarks will they make about us? We denigrate Neanderthals, so how will we we be denigrated?

n.n
Reply to  High Treason
November 26, 2019 1:49 pm

Ironically, California has a warmer climate, which enables them to indulge in liberal license.

Reply to  High Treason
November 26, 2019 2:22 pm

That all assumes that next large asteroid strike doesn’t happen during the impending neo-neolithic.

I’ve always wondered about Enrico Fermi’s comment that if there were space aliens, they’d have been here by now.

I’ve now figured it out. No matter what planet, any sentient species will have arisen by evolutionary process. They will be cultural obligates. In an environment of predators and con-specific competitors, their survival will have required tribalism.

Tribalism, as a survival trait, and genetics co-evolved to produce species that has an innately collectivist psyche (most human cultures still exhibit that trait). But any genetically determined psychology has its 3-sigma wings. In this case, ideological tyrants on one wing, and free-thinkers on the other.

When the culture reaches some state of material advancement, the free-thinkers emerge as the first true scholars, scientists, and engineers. Their culture necessarily splits away from the collectivist base.

This is a cultural speciation event. People with individualistic psyches emerge and form a new society of negotiated ethics (i.e., free-thinking) rather than one of collective morality (i.e., ideological).

And there we have it. All our material progress has come from individualistic culture. One that allows the independent thinking abhorred by collectivists.

The battle is between two cultural species occupying one landscape: one collectivist and one individualist. The latter tolerates the former, but the former cannot permit the latter. Where individuals thrive, collectivism fails.

I suspect the collectivist-individualist conflict occurs wherever a sentient species arises and develops as culturally obligate. If collectivists win out, the physical species goes culturally moribund (collectivist bliss), the bolide finally arrives, and they go extinct.

So far, as no space aliens have appeared, any such scenario has played out as a collectivist win.

Here on Earth, individualist culture first appeared as an obvious historical phenomenon during the Greek Enlightenment. Call it our cultural speciation event. Individual thinkers abounded. But they were eventually obliterated in the collectivist counter-attack which operated within the ideological and collectivist construct of Christianity.

In our time, individualist culture arose again during the 16th and 17th centuries, producing the Enlightenment in the 18th. Our second observable cultural speciation event.

The Romantic reaction is the collectivist counter-attack. Every ideology serves as its vehicle. Communism is the obvious example. Modern progressives have allied themselves with every single socialist mass-murderer. Whatever the delusional excuse, the result is invariably the obliteration of free-thinking.

One can only see the destruction of free-thought as the intended outcome, even if the intent is a visceral drive rather than conscious.

So, the on-going culture war is the answer to the space alien mystery. The same battle between cultural species is inevitable. If the collectivists win, human culture goes moribund, and the inevitable bolide will finish the job.

It doesn’t matter if human civilization arises again. The identical conflict will emerge.

So the culture war is an existential battle. If the next big bolide arrives with an extinction event, then the collectivists will have won (again). Humans will be just one more space alien species to have not made the free-thinking grade.

If the bolide is a happy catch of raw materials, then individualists will have won, humans have an optimistic future, and ad astra will be their outlook.

The Dark Lord
November 26, 2019 11:49 am

anytime someone invokes the “wrong side of history” troupe you can be sure they are actually selling snake oil …

November 26, 2019 12:03 pm

California would make much better use of its resources doing something about the “emissions” left behind by homeless people on the streets and sidewalks in LA & San Francisco.

Sunny
Reply to  Kamikazedave
November 26, 2019 12:08 pm

Kamikazedave

People in power do not care about the poor or even the middle class, imagine if the money spent on useless wind farms and solar panels was spent on homes or paying of student debt, even bringing back jobs from other countries, would help, But co2 is the enemy 😐

Bryan A
Reply to  Kamikazedave
November 26, 2019 12:23 pm

Ah Yes, Ca(ca) the land of the effluent

Reply to  Kamikazedave
November 26, 2019 2:25 pm

Those particular emissions are going down the storm sewers, untreated. One can expect fecal bacteria to appear along the beaches.

If so, it will be a large public health crisis. One hopes for a class action suit or prosecution for criminal negligence levied against the various government officials and bodies that will have made that disaster possible.

Diogenese
November 26, 2019 12:05 pm

Great idea. While they’re at it:
1) Prohibit government-paid travel on fossil fuel powered aircraft
2) Prohibit government-owned airports from supplying fossil fuels to airlines
3) Prohibit payment or reimbursement of gasoline or diesel costs for government vehicles
4) Prohibit use of fossil fuel-fired boilers for heating or hot water in government buildings
5) Prohibit State-paid travel to any other state that produces or refines fossil fuels

Bruce Cobb
November 26, 2019 12:13 pm

Ah, so Calizuela, in a fit of anger towards carmakers, who dared join the White House’s opposition to their new, stricter emissions rules has decided in their supreme wisdom to cut their nose off to spite their face. If Calizuela wants to just leave the US there’s the door, don’t let it hit you. Bye.

ResourceGuy
November 26, 2019 12:14 pm

California–the beach bum state

November 26, 2019 12:19 pm

Emperor Newsom has hubris unbecoming of such a high office. California has not solved any of their problems and if anything, they are devolving into chaos with no apparent awareness of their mistakes. Some have stopped joking about dismantling the state. If there is a benefit from their current form of politics it isn’t apparent to a lot of people. What will emerge is anyone’s guess but it makes me sad to hear just one crazy proclamation after another from people who should know better.

ResourceGuy
November 26, 2019 12:41 pm

California, the cFORD state.

Cal. Found on Road Dead

WR2
November 26, 2019 12:43 pm

It’s hard to imagine that support of their politics as a prerequisite to doing business with the state is constitutional…but that of course never stopped CA from doing anything.

Rocketscientist
November 26, 2019 12:53 pm

I don’t believe this is a lawful boycott perpetrated by a state entity.

NickSJ
November 26, 2019 12:56 pm

When the last sane people leave California, they won’t have to turn out the lights – they’ll already be out.

Linda Goodman
November 26, 2019 1:27 pm

“California Takes Drastic Step Towards Reducing Emissions” ‘Emissions’ suggests pollution and repeating any fraudulent alarmist language supports the fraud, however subtly; many articles posted at WUWT will change the headline of the original source for that very reason – not this time.

yarpos
November 26, 2019 1:34 pm

Keep in mind that all they have done is to think differently to a State government and support the Federal government, and nothing real has actually happened.

Newsome has lashed out and banned purchases immediately apparently for correct speak crimes. He comes across as a insecure, neurotic , despot dictator.

Tom in Florida
Reply to  yarpos
November 27, 2019 4:54 am

And when the state is in control of the electricity that powers everything, I suppose it is unthinkable that it would ever use that position to punish those areas that are not voting “correctly”.

November 26, 2019 2:04 pm

So when the Big One hits, the grid is down. There goes their fleet.
Killing your people with virtue signaling.
Real Smart.
Takes a real Dumbocrat to do that.

November 26, 2019 2:10 pm

“it will make an exception for public safety vehicles”

Meaning in intent, of course; ambulances, fire engines and police cruisers.

What that exemption means to every intelligent government official is that all their vehicles will be rebranded “public safety vehicles”.

Johann Wundersamer
Reply to  ATheoK
December 3, 2019 6:03 am

ambulances, fire engines and police cruisers –> police chargers

“Since power is one of the most important things in a police pursuit vehicle, the 2018 Dodge Charger Police Pursuit is equipped with a 3.6-liter Pentastar® DOHC 24-valve V6 engine. …

Also available is a 5.7-liter HEMI® V8 that generates up to a whopping 370 horsepower and 395 lb”

https://www.policepursuitvehicles.com › …
2018 Dodge Charger Police Pursuit | John Jones Police Pursuit | Salem, IN

https://www.google.com/search?q=police+chargers+for+sale&oq=police+chargers+for+&aqs=chrome.

https://www.google.com/search?q=police+chargers&oq=police+chargers&aqs=chrome.

XYZ
November 26, 2019 2:15 pm

Newsom has to end what he has started. There are too many parties involved. Too many crazy policies created. Too much money spent. Too much social engineering ongoing. California. That dystopian state for rich and illegals and occasional generator salesman.

MarkW
November 26, 2019 3:51 pm

I’m pretty sure that a state declaring that it will refuse to buy certain makes of cars violates the interstate commerce clause.

markl
Reply to  MarkW
November 26, 2019 5:52 pm

+1 It will be overturned but the virtue signal bomb was dropped and the media glorified it.

old construction worker
November 26, 2019 4:11 pm

Ok. I get about 250,000 miles out of my truck’s power plant without any major problems. I understand EV power plant has a range equal to about 100,000 miles it needs to be replace. My power plant can be recycled make into other needed metals materials. Can the same be said about the EV”s battery cord? At 100,000 miles is the EV worth spending $3000.00 for a new power plant?

November 26, 2019 5:02 pm

Dear California,

Has anybody out there in government read this:

https://clintel.nl/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/European-Climate-Declaration-Oslo-18-October-2019.pdf

If not, then please take a moment to do so.

Len Werner
Reply to  Robert Kernodle
November 26, 2019 5:44 pm

Their site claims under 800 signatures; the likes of Mann will double over in laughter at that. If you can find a way for me to add my signature as a scientist to that list please let me know, I couldn’t find it. There should be 15 million on that list and counting, not 779 and stagnant.

If the only way to sign it is to donate, Mann will be rolling on the floor, not just doubled over in laughter; he can claim you have to buy your way on and it’s nothing but a way to get money.

So far, it looks a bit silly and ineffectual, despite saying exactly what I would.

Reply to  Len Werner
November 27, 2019 9:38 am

Yeah, those lists don’t seem to mean very much do they, no matter which side they support.

How do rational people deal with irrational people? I don’t know the answer, other than the rational people have to make a concerted effort to keep irrational people out of government offices.

Rational people have to step up, get involved, make some noise. Right now the squeaky wheels in greatest number seem to be irrational.

michael hart
November 26, 2019 5:20 pm

” However, the ban is not complete: it will make an exception for public safety vehicles.”

Why the exceptions? Could it be that they know something they are not prepared to admit in public?

November 26, 2019 5:22 pm

How about they contract with Mercedes for these?

Len Werner
November 26, 2019 5:24 pm

“Carmakers that have chosen to be on the wrong side of history will be on the losing end of California’s buying power.” Oh really?–“California’s buying power”??

“We estimate that California state and local governments owe $1.3 trillion as of June 30, 2015.”

https://californiapolicycenter.org/californias-total-state-local-debt-totals-1-3-trillion/

You’d think that maybe a creditor or two might have some thoughts on how California spends the creditor’s money. To paraphrase Mark Steyn, they have to pay back $1.3 trillion (as of 4 years ago) just to raise their buying power to having none. What kind of an unrealistic arrogant buffoon does it take to make blustering claims of ‘buying power’ with that dismal a financial record?

Art
November 26, 2019 7:02 pm

Yes, instead California state agencies will buy gas-powered vehicles from OTHER manufacturers.

William Haas
November 26, 2019 7:57 pm

All of California’s problems will be solved as soon as the high speed rail line between Fresno and Bakersfield has been completed. If California really believes that the use of fossil fuels is bad then they should immediately ban the us of all goods and services that involve the use of fossil fuels. Everyone in California will then have to immediately leave the state before the ban takes place in order to survive.

November 26, 2019 8:26 pm

Are batteries easy to remove? They need to be in water tight compartments, I thought.
And, the idea of getting any old battery at charging stations is ridiculous.
I drive a plugin hybrid. That sort of car is actually practical.