German and French Automakers Balk at EU CO2 Regs
Europe is all set to bask in its my-farts-don’t-smell green virtuosity– if only Germany would go along for the ride. Easier said than done; the new standard dictates that no car sold in the Eurozone can emit more than 130gm/km by 2012. Mercedes, Porsche and BMW don’t build a single gas-powered vehicle that conforms to the new regs. In fact, BMW’s lowest petrol-powered CO2 emitter, the 116i, spits out 139gm/km. If the new regs are enacted, the propeller people will have to pay €180 fine for every 116i they sell in the European Union (EU). The situation is not much better at the Volkswagen Group, which shelters high CO2 producer Audi and more than a few gas hogs of its own (e.g. Touareg SUV). Which is why BBC News reports that German Chancellor Angela Merkel called the CO2 limits “not economically favorable.” For its part, BMW calls the legislation “naive.” Peugeot– which makes a small car or two– joined the German chorus of complaint, suggesting the legislation would give advantage to foreign carmakers residing in countries with less powerful Green movements. Let the lobbying and loopholes begin! [thanks to Cammy Corrigan for the calculations]
The Framework of the European Union has its flaws. But… The European Union exemplifies the willingness of European countries to work together and reach Solutions through compromise. Maybe you prefer the, “you are with us or against us” trait of diplomacy? The EU is regulated by a number of institutions: European Parliament The European Parliament is the directly elected parliamentary body of the European Union. Council of the European Union Is composed of twenty-seven national ministers (one per state). However the exact membership depends upon the topic being discussed, for example; when discussing the agricultural policy the twenty-seven national agriculture ministers form the Council. The ministers are accountable to their national electorates. European Commission The candidates are chosen primarily by the 27 national governments, meaning it is hard for the Commission to be thrown out directly by the voters. The legitimacy of the Commission is mainly drawn from the vote of approval that is required from the Parliament along with Parliament's power to sack the body.
Landcrusher: To bad this site doesn't have rep ratings, I give you some big ones after that nice post. I've always found it odd that the people who claim to despise the police state are the ones who want one so bad. Who was it that said every dictator supports democracy before he destroys it? Here's a good idea to save some trees...stop reading the NY Times and LA Times. FromBrazil: Its entirely political. A good portion of Americans could, in reality, care less about what powers there car, as long as it gets them from point a to point b whilst allowing them to talk on the cell phone, put on make up, eat breakfast, read the paper, and stuff little Johnny's face full of doughnuts before school. I have one friend who didn't even know there was a difference between diesel and regular gas.
D. Holzman, I would be a good supporter of pollution taxes of all sorts, so long as you first eliminate the income tax. After that, you could merge the EPA and the IRS and go at it. I suspect that we would get less taxes and have to raise the rates as people started polluting less. Ideally, I would not like our government fiddling around with things like this because undoubtedly there will be a lot of haggling for different industries to get advantages over others. However, since we have that now, it will not be a step backwards. The big problem you will have, I suspect, is getting enough votes from the left. Good luck with that.
Landcrusher, I'd love a consumption tax on the model that Robert Frank of Cornell U has proposed. And a straight carbon tax. No exemptions. Agree with you about the haggling.