Obama is setting new standards for cars, following those already in place in California. The New York Times reports:”Mr. Obama is…effectively issuing a single rule for both fuel economy and emissions that matches California’s strictest-in-the-nation standard….Under the new standard, the new combined fuel efficiency standard for cars and light trucks will be about 35 miles per gallon by 2016, roughly in line with the California rule…. The current standards are 27.5 miles a gallon for cars and about 24 miles a gallon for trucks. The new mileage and emissions rules will gradually tighten, beginning with 2011 models, until they reach the 2016 standards.The auto industry is not expected to challenge the rule, which provides two things they have long asked for: certainty on a timetable and a single national standard.”Fantastic. Driving accounts for about 10 percent of greenhouse gas emissions and marginal improvements to the most inefficient cars help a lot.Of course, these new fuel efficiency standards will only apply to new cars. Cars that are 13 or more years old account for 75 percent of the total pollution from cars. We might want to combine this with a “cash for clunkers” program, or some other measure to deal with the dirtiest old cars.Clunker photo (cc) from Flickr user Mike McCaffrey.
Tags
advertisement
More for You
-
14 images of badass women who destroyed stereotypes and inspired future generations
These trailblazers redefined what a woman could be.
Throughout history, women have stood up and fought to break down barriers imposed on them from stereotypes and societal expectations. The trailblazers in these photos made history and redefined what a woman could be. In doing so, they paved the way for future generations to stand up and continue to fight for equality.
-
Why mass shootings spawn conspiracy theories
Mass shootings and conspiracy theories have a long history.
While conspiracy theories are not limited to any topic, there is one type of event that seems particularly likely to spark them: mass shootings, typically defined as attacks in which a shooter kills at least four other people.
When one person kills many others in a single incident, particularly when it seems random, people naturally seek out answers for why the tragedy happened. After all, if a mass shooting is random, anyone can be a target.
Pointing to some nefarious plan by a powerful group – such as the government – can be more comforting than the idea that the attack was the result of a disturbed or mentally ill individual who obtained a firearm legally.
advertisement

