Doug Pensinger wrote:
> The U.S. could probably comply with the treaty by cutting
> auto emissions alone (just a guess on my part), which wouldn't be very hard to
> do with so many SUVs on the road. But of course the HoRs* voted to violate
> the ANWR for a lousy 2 year supply of oil (optimistic estimate), none of which
> will be available for at least 6 years in lue of improving gas mileage (which
> hasn't improved in 15 years). What a bunch of maroons.
Out of curiosity... It always seems from what press I see that California has far
stricter emissions and mileage provisions that the rest of the USA. (a) Is this true,
and (b) if the California provisions were extended across the ConUSA, would it make a
significant difference to total vehicle emissions?
It seems that the auto manufacturers must have the ability to meet Californian
restrictions (none of the mainstream companies have just pulled out or worn the
penalties?), so it can't be that hard. I mean, even the M-B ML320 meets Californian
LEV requirements, and it's one very heavy SUV.
Russell Chapman
Brisbane Australia
