Comment by jhall1468
8 years ago
> So, I am harmed by CA's standards and have no recourse - I can't vote in CA state elections because I don't live in CA.
You aren't harmed by California's standards by any stretch of the imagination:
You can't show any actual harm by not being able to purchase specific diesel engines.
> Meanwhile, up to 29% of SF Bay Area smog is from China (I found different quoted numbers ranging from 20 to 29%)... which has nothing to do with cars being driven by Americans.
Sure, let's sign a bill telling the smog it can't go to LA anymore. That should do the trick. Do you understand the purpose of the regulations are to give Bay-area residents breathable, healthy air, and these regulations are the ones California can actually enact?
But hey, it's a conservative mantra to only think of the individual, so you fit the mold pretty well. Poor guy, can't buy a BMW 320d, and the damn Bay-area residents should get sick and breath horrible air so he can.
My point is that people in the other 49 states are harmed by CA's action and have no representation to fix it due to CA's veto power over diesels.
If a 320d is MORE efficient than a Prius, even though it doesn't have batteries, wouldn't you want it to be sold in the USA?
EDIT to add: it seems that the latest gen of the 320d is sold in the USA, as the 328d. The previous generation was not, which is what my comments were based on.
> My point is that people in the other 49 states are harmed
I know that's your point. But your point is without merit. You aren't being harmed because you aren't showing harm. California isn't vetoing diesels. They are regulating their environment and businesses are responding by not producing vehicles that meet the smog requirements.
You keep talking about efficiency, it's not about that. It's about pollution. You aren't being harmed, even had you been more informed about the 328d.