this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2024
118 points (93.4% liked)

Technology

59674 readers
3163 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

White House to weaken climate-fighting fuel efficiency targets for 2030::The plan faced opposition from OEMs, car dealers, and the United Auto Workers.

top 32 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] skymtf@lemmy.blahaj.zone 21 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This always ends up happening lmao

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 13 points 9 months ago (1 children)

Biden is not Trump, but he's also not our friend. Even if the Democrats keep the GOP and Project 2025 at bay, there is still cause for mischief.

[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 6 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago) (1 children)

Biden is, though, very much the lesser of 2 evils.

The people throwing up their hands and refusing to vote simply make it easier for the greater evil to seize power.

[–] uriel238@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 9 months ago

Oh yes. By far.

Voting for public offices has become an absolute must: A vote for any GOP candidate is a vote in favor of one-party autocracy and the end of democratic (lower case) features in the US. A vote against the GOP candidate (by voting for the next popular guy, typically the Democrat -- uppercase) is a vote to slow down US progress towards this one-party autocracy.

No matter who you are, you're not going to like one-party autocracy. Here in the states, we established that when we chased off the Brits and established out own constitution. We can also point to countless other examples in which it's shit. (Iran is providing lots of current instances).

Yes, we want progressive policies. Heck, I want massive reform and in some cases radical abolition of current establishment systems. We're not going to get those just by voting. Nor are we going to get them simply with violent revolution. We have to actually try again and develop new systems, and then get them ratified by everyone, and all that time autocratic power is going to be tempting whoever has military power.

(The French Revolution, for example, started in 1789, but had to be reconsidered and revisited for nearly a century, with the occasional decade of uneventful constitutional monarchy before the regents started rolling back civil rights, and the guillotines were rolled out yet again. The third republic was established in 1870, and France became secular -- established freedom of religion -- in 1905. Revolution is long and bloody.)

Support your local mutual aid organizations. Help out when you can. If the federal government shuts down, check in on federal employees and help out as you can if they get in a jam. Don't cross picket lines, and check in with striking laborers. All this helps the resistance last longer than the autocratic movements until they ouroboros themselves through their own internal corruption.

That's where we are in the States.

[–] autotldr@lemmings.world 3 points 9 months ago (1 children)

This is the best summary I could come up with:


It appears as if ambitious new fuel efficiency regulations that would require Americans to adopt many more electric vehicles are to be watered down.

But opposition to the new CAFE standards has been fierce, and now Reuters reports that the White House is backing down and will issue new guidelines with less ambitious goals in the coming weeks.

In fact, the current rules create a perverse incentive to make inefficient gasoline-powered vehicles, since the OEMs know these can easily be offset.

But the Alliance for Automotive Innovation—a lobby group for the auto industry—called the rules "neither reasonable nor achievable" despite claiming not to oppose greenhouse gas emissions standards.

And the United Auto Workers—which endorsed President Biden's re-election—has claimed the fuel economy regulations would threaten jobs.

In addition to the tougher new fuel economy standards, the auto industry also wants to see the government relax attempts to regulate particulate pollution from gasoline-powered vehicles more strictly.


The original article contains 320 words, the summary contains 154 words. Saved 52%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

[–] NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago (2 children)

Have you noticed how since the implication of stringer file efficiency on automakers cars have been getting larger and heavier?

Here is an interesting video that shows how automakers have been working around fuel efficiency standards for some time now. It also highlights how automakers have chosen to ignore these rules/regulations and instead put pedestrian lives at risk indirectly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fh4H9qZ-_6Y

IMO file efficiency standards should still remain in place, but a rework of the policies is needed.

[–] NarrativeBear@lemmy.world 7 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Also, unrelated, but this seems to be a problem no one is noticing. Most "arterial roads" in cities and surrounding areas are for the lack of a better word "disappearing".

Arterial roads are two lane roads in both directions, they have no driveways in/off them and no traffic lights/signals. They allow higher speed travel compared to city streets, or a suburban street, but are slower then a hwy thought the concept is similar.

Most of these higher speed roads are being turned into "strodes" that are neither a street nor a road. This means multiple traffic lights and intersections, as well as driveways on/off the road (similar to a suburban street with driveways on the left/right).

This IMO increases the amount of time you may spend in your car driving from one side of a city to another, thus increasing fuel consumption while idling at lights. It also means more "conflict areas" between the users of the "stroad", such as pedestrians/specialists/transit.

What we need is a complete reclassification of our roadways, as I guarantee if you thing of a street or a road or a avenue they may all look the same in our minds.

[–] PipedLinkBot@feddit.rocks 1 points 9 months ago

Here is an alternative Piped link(s):

https://www.piped.video/watch?v=Fh4H9qZ-_6Y

Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.

I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.

[–] theyoyomaster@lemmy.world 3 points 9 months ago* (last edited 9 months ago)

Trying to force a switch to pure EVs before the technology is actually mature and viable is one thing, but simply cracking down on absolutely monstrous SUVs/trucks could do a lot of good to bridge the gap in the meantime. Not everyone needs a freakin MRAP to drive around a suburb. Just bringing cars back could help immensely.