Jed Rothwell wrote: > I wrote: > >> No doubt this is true. For that matter there are regional variations >> in cars such as the type of fuel allowed (more or less polluting) and >> customer requirements for things like road salt sealants . . . > > What I am trying to say is that manufacturers can support small regional > variations, but they cannot manufacture radically different vehicles for > California versus the rest of the country. To take an extreme example > that isn't going to happen: suppose California were to mandate that half > the cars sold in 5 years must be plug in hybrids. The manufacturers > would have to spend billions gearing up to meet this mandate. They would > then go ahead and sell the plug in hybrids in other states as well. They > would have to, in order to survive.
Last time that sort of thing happened, California mandated that part of the fleet be electric cars. But it didn't work out the way you're suggesting. What the manufacturers actually did was market the cars *only* in California, lease them but not sell them, and then go full-bore working to get the California law changed. When the California law was finally changed, they recalled all their electric cars (which had only been leased, not sold) and destroyed them. Never say "they would have to" with regard to some strategy which is supposed to force the car manufacturers to do what you want. They are cleverer and more devious than you think. > > - Jed >
