Auto Industry Bailout - Page 9 - Zilvia.net Forums | Nissan 240SX (Silvia) and Z (Fairlady) Car Forum

drift freaq · 06-04-2009, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ronmcdon

Come on now, how can you think of me being Right Wing when I'm advocating Federal/Euro standards, and then applauding Obama for pressuring GM/Chrysler?

I'm not blaming CARB for everything.
I do have doubts as to whether CARB is any better than default Federal emissions requirements.
I'm also not saying the 'Big 3' don't have other issues.
I recall in other threads we were discussing about GM's mis-management/bureacracy & cost issues.

From a business perspective, it would have been a lot easier for at least Ford & GM to bring over their turbo-diesel compact & midsize offerings.
That would have allowed them to compete with the imports more successfully to a certain degree (and meet CAFE standards easier).
It would have allowed for them to more easily create a world car lineup.
It's not a guarantee, but allows them (and other manufacturers) to compete on a more advantageous footing.

From an environmental perspective, I agree that smog has been reduced been by quite a significant amount, even from 10-15 yrs ago.
What leads you to conclude that Federal emissions alone wouldn't have brought about the same level of change?
If turbo-diesel requirements were lower, we'd probably see more diesel cars several years earlier.
Perhaps there wouldn't ever have been the need for hybrids.
Fuel consumption & respective emissions, could have been much lower during those years.

I agree CARB is better than nothing.
I'm just not convinced yet that it's any better than the Federal or European emission regulations.

What I'm most concerned about GM, is that even their re-structuring they don't have a solid small/midsize fuel efficient car line-up or even a game plan that would allow them to sustain themselves in the long run.
As mentioned in one of the prior threads, the 36-40k Volt just isn't a realistic solution (unless gas jumps to be $20+/gallon).
If they had their fuel efficient, and (imo) better made Euro models, I'd be more optimistic.

Hehe a good debate we have here, I question the whole diesel situation though. why? One of the largest pollution problems we are having in the Southern California region now, is from Diesel particulate emissions. From all types of Diesel vehicles.

The central valley is now as smoggy as a urban area because of lack of emission regulations ( farm lobbies are responsible for this) and a lot of that comes again from Diesel particulate emissions.
Diesel is not exactly the clean burning fuel or engines that automotive diesel manufacturers would have you believe.
I applaud CARB in sense because several times Presidents have tried to roll back EPA regs on emissions to way behind what even they consider good. In the name of business.
CARB has repeatedly prompted the EPA to take a better stance on emissions. I fear without CARB the EPA would have no checks and balances. While you feel CARB goes to far quite often the EPA does not go far enough. They actually do balance things out and because of CARB the EPA has actually made strides they probably would not have made.

I do not put much faith in Washington or Nation Government agencies. The tend to be influenced completely by special interest groups, that do not hesitate to warp a law in their favor. Even if it means destroying the environment.
In this sense though we could say CARB is influenced that way somewhat as well the level and the amount is not nearly at a point of being completely fucked up.
Now our state Government and how they spend money? Well it is completely fucked up and thats a whole other story.

None the less I still feel Ford is on the ball has the right idea and is doing the right things. While both GM and Chrysler?

Well Chrysler should just die. While always being a technological company they have always had reliability issues. To think them teaming up with Mitsushitty(another winner , eh loser in the reliability department) The blind leading the blind.

GM I agree with you that they really don't seem to have the right ideas to make a concerted and real recovery that will allow them to survive. They are not focusing enough on small fuel efficient vehicles to compete.
The whole betting the farm on the Volt was pie in the sky. It does not look good as of right now for GM.

***S14DB*** · 06-04-2009, 07:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drift freaq

Hehe a good debate we have here, I question the whole diesel situation though. why? One of the largest pollution problems we are having in the Southern California region now, is from Diesel particulate emissions. From all types of Diesel vehicles.

The central valley is now as smoggy as a urban area because of lack of emission regulations ( farm lobbies are responsible for this) and a lot of that comes again from Diesel particulate emissions.
Diesel is not exactly the clean burning fuel or engines that automotive diesel manufacturers would have you believe.
I applaud CARB in sense because several times Presidents have tried to roll back EPA regs on emissions to way behind what even they consider good. In the name of business.

It's the NoX from desiel engines that cause smog not DPEs.
Smog - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

DPE's are a different issue.
Diesel particulate matter - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

CARB Under Alan Lloyd caved more then EPA. They are completely self serving to the industry's in California. Lloyd is now in charge of the fuel cell institute. Wonder why carb is so hard up on fuel cells. To think they are some white knight is a joke.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode