warhawkmcdaniel

I saw a news story that Colorado is considering adopting the California emissions standard.I have a spot at a dealer in Colorado for a C8.

Will this affect the cost or performance of the car?

Thanks!

RonnieC6Z

Corvette used to have a 49 state car and a California car. That has not been the case for years.

ByByBMW

nyca

The current EPA is trying to get CARB decertified in court to being able to set their own emissions standards. There should be one standard for the entire country. As it stands now, California and the states which join them, can set their own standards and rules and can effectively outlaw specific engines and push more EVs no matter what the federal standard is, and the manufacturers will comply with those states as opposed to the federal standard. CARB and the states which join them will be able to set their own agenda for autos going forward if they aren't stopped now.

msm859

The. EPA will lose. California has had the independent power to set their own standards for over 40 years. The last thing we need is a former coal lobbyist heading the EPA. Perhaps more importantly is the rest of the world is in line with California. If US car makers want to compete on the world stage they need to embrace the tougher standards not run away.

Michael A

CARB spends $700 million a year in taxpayer money, and accomplishes nothing that the EPA isn't already doing. They have outlived their usefulness. They have people working there with fake degrees, and they aren't fired even after it has been found out. The reports are fake. They are unelected officials making law on behalf of the ruling party (I'm sure you can figure out what party that is).. The entire organization is corrupt.

NY09C6

it is refreshing to see someone try. California lawmakers are living in their own little fantasy world. not to mention they are a completely out dated group with the switch the electric cars beginning.

Atari_Prime

No. California cars are the same as in every other state.

LawrenceFromTorrance

"Perhaps more importantly is the rest of the world is in line with California"
Is this really true? What about China, India? Tell me is this true or just more Fake news?

The HACK

Have you seen the smog problems in China and India?

vndkshn

I don't believe that is the case. Comparing emissions laws in Europe versus US versus California, Cali appears to be the strictest (but not by much), followed by the US, followed by Europe.

I remember BMW did not sell the e36 M3 with the same engine in the US as Europe largely because of the tougher emissions laws in the US. The e46 M3 in the states had a more restrictive catalyst system than e46 M3s for the rest of the world (robbed a little power) because of the emissions laws here.

vndkshn

Or Mexico? Brazil? Jeez, it's tough to breath in Mexico City and Guadalajara. The only thing that I think saves Rio is being on the ocean, but even there it's pretty noticeable.

jvp

I've no dog in this fight as I have no idea whether the EPA is actually trying to squash CARB or not. But your statement is incorrect. IF (that's a big IF!!) the EPA decides to "take on CARB", CARB loses. It's how our country runs. Simply and easily: if it's not specifically called out by the federal government, it's left to the states to define. But as soon as the federal government makes a law/statement/etc that contradicts something a state has done: the state loses. Full stop.

So rest assured: IF the EPA comes after CARB and decides to press Congress for specific laws that contradict CARB, CARB loses.

The HACK

I don't know if there's anyone here that grew up in Los Angeles during the 60s and 70s. I've seen some historical archival footage and photos of the city around that time, and also read some first hand accounts of the smog issues faced by Californians during that period of time. The pictures reminded me of Shanghai today. There's a particularly poignant shot of down town L.A. engulfed in a white haze not unlike San Francisco when the fog rolls in, but the caption underneath by the photographer was "that's not fog."

We all like to blame the CARB for the stringent air quality control devices put into modern cars. I for one, would gladly give up a few ponies in my car for the ability to breath clean, fresh air. Not all of us can or choose to live out in the open country where the concept of a single car contributing NOx to the atmosphere is irrelevant compared to MILLIONS of cars all moving about in a few hundred square miles all throughout the day.

And at the end of the day? We're looking at a 500+ hp BASE Corvette in the C8. 500. That meets the EPA and CARB's stringent standards. More power in a base Corvette than ANY OTHER base Corvette that came before it.

I believe that is proof that we CAN have our cake and eat it too?

The HACK

The world is never as simple as we all like it to be.

In theory? The way U.S. laws are written the federal government does not have absolute power over state.The Feds have appropriation power, they can determine how funds are distributed and managed. However, to a state like California? That's irrelevant. CARB is fully self contained, the only way Federal government and the EPA has any real control over CARB is if the central government pulls other funding (Medicare and Medical funds, for example) through budgetary means and appropriation, and stipulate that CARB capitulate in exchange for the funds.

It's funny and ironic how, for decades the Right stood for state rights. Like State's rights to apply their own voter registration laws. State's rights to dole out laws governing gun sales. State's rights to control late stage abortions. State's rights to pass laws that restrict civil rights...etc. But when it comes to laws governing the left's favorite issues, environmental protection, all of a sudden states no longer have the rights to set their own laws and rules.

Hypocrisy at its best. It's a slippery slope y'all. You let EPA mandate what California MUST do regarding CARB rules? Why can't the Department of Commerce regulate arms sales across state lines? Or Dept of Health and Human Services mandate rules regarding abortion?

jvp

In this case: it actually is.

Actually, that's not 100% the case here. But it would have to be a contradiction in law specifically. And that's the challenge. The EPA isn't a law-passing body, they're a law-enforcement body (specific to emissions/FE/etc). So they can't craft up a law that contradicts something a state has in place and then pummel the state with it.

Congress, on the other hand: can. So my initial point stands: IF the EPA somehow lobbies and convinces Congress to write new emissions laws that are FORCED upon states and then the Pres signs them, CARB's choke-hold over California is null and void. All the way up to and including visits to the Supreme Court, if need be.

What's the likelihood of this happening? I have no idea; I'd guess basically zero.

Tom73

Humm, first thing that comes to mind is troops at Little Rock High School. Nothing about appropriation power there.

Atari_Prime

Well this conversation has morphed.

It comes down to two areas of Constitutional law, rights and interstate commerce. Putting it in simple terms, you are guaranteed certain rights under the Constitution, the states may add rights to that list but they cannot take any that are on the list away. In this context, cars were not a big thing in the late 1700s so there is nothing in the Constitution about cars at all. As a result, a state, any state, can make whatever laws they want regarding what cars can be on the roads in their state at least with respect to their citizens. Without getting too heavy into whether a federal law is binding upon the states, generally the pattern follows the same. The federal government makes a law, the states add to it if they so desire. So in this respect states are free to add emissions laws, license plates, heck they could even require armor plating if they wanted. If the federal government wishes to challenge a state law, they have one recourse and one recourse alone, does the law have a detrimental impact on interstate commerce. Essentiatially it works out like this, State wants to do X, the fed gov't says you can't do X, the matter goes to the Supreme Court and the court determines if the state law creates a substantial negative impact on interstate commerce. If yes, the law goes away, if no, the law stays. The state is free to control what emissions govern vehicles in its state, but this is limited to vehicles registered in that state because if they attempted to control the emissions of vehicles registered in other states and only driving through their state that would have an impact on interstate commerce and another concept in the Constitution of free travel among the states. Cutting to the end of this, the federal government has no power whatsoever to say that a state cannot place additional emissons requirements on vehicles in a given state. By doing so the state is adding additional rights to protect its citizens. Some might say what about my right to live free and without interference by the government. Sorry, when it comes to your car, you don't have any rights in that regard because no one is asking you to change what you already own, thus it is not another concept under the Constitution called a 'taking'.

vndkshn

Double edged sword there though (and the right isn't the only group of hypocrites). What happens if California bans all cars that don't meet CARB requirements? Now a US citizen can't take a non-CARB car into California? Or what about a Californian with a classic car that gets banned? That too is a slippery slope.

The balance between Federal power and State power has always been a difficult balancing act. That was actually a major factor in the Civil War.

Atari_Prime

See earlier post. A car can be brought into the state and nothing anyone can do to stop them. However if the car becomes registered in that state due to someone living in that state that’s a different story. The state can restrict that activity. With regard to a classic car, if suddenly a classic car became non-compliant causing someone to change the car or get it out of state, that would be a taking, again not allowed. Therefore no one‘s classic car will ever be bothered.