4 ms·

>Reversing the finding would reduce automobile manufacturers' spending by $2,400 per vehicle, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters. If t

>Reversing the finding would reduce automobile manufacturers' spending by $2,400 per vehicle, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt told reporters. If this is true, that is a monstrous 5% of an average new vehicle. And it's not just the cost of the vehicle, emissions equipment also can make the vehicle slightly less reliable, especially diesel engines, so it's likely to reduce the cost of vehicles by more than the initial 5%. ----- edit since I am throttled ----- I know for a fact the prices are lower non-emission vs emission. I own a tractor that is detuned 0.1 HP under the emission limit and with zero emissions controls. They sell the exact same tractor with the exact same engine with a fuel screw turned up over the limit to increase hp, plus emissions controls, and it's about $4,000 more. Manufacturers absolutely will charge more for emissions models than non-emissions models.

ceejayoz 9mo ago
Now do the cost of unchecked emissions. (And Leavitt is hardly a reputable source.)
insane_dreamer 9mo ago
Wonderful. And will these amazing cost savings offset the costs of future disasters related to climate change? Or are we taking more of "the band played on" Titanic approach, now?
- fragmede 9mo ago
  https://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a16995 https://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a16995
xorbax 9mo ago
So what? Are you fantasizing that they'll reduce the price of cars because of this and somehow benefit people? And they'd have to take the time to redesign. And Democrats will (hopefully) reinstate it in a few years, and carmakers probably recognize that. Along with the threat of legal challenges by environmental groups. And, further, if we eventually do get these inefficient polluting cars - who's going to want to buy them? They certainly wouldn't be able to sell them in same countries. Seems pointless overall for carmakers, generally. Just a gift to polluting corporations and billionaires who want profit at our expense.
yndoendo 9mo ago
You really think big business will pull back pricing with this? It is as reasonable to believe that removal of the tariffs will bring back the lower prices on goods. CEOs want to maximize their golden parachutes and their stock value ... prices will be the same or go up. USA capitalism is about maximize profits not the buying power of their citizens.
- bakies 9mo ago
  A new $2,400 dealer adjustment fee! Not looking forward to replacing my car I got before COVID
hdhdhsjsbdh 9mo ago
Acidified oceans, poisonous air, and frequent multibillion dollar extreme weather events are a small price to pay for a purely hypothetical $2,400 off my next car, which I am forced to own because the same companies that lobby against climate change regulations are the ones that tore up all the public transit infrastructure that would otherwise allow me not to own a car at all. Americans love getting fucked by our corporate overlords, we can’t get enough of it, it’s our way of life.
ceejayoz 9mo ago
> I know for a fact the prices are lower non-emission vs emission. I own a tractor that is detuned 0.1 HP under the emission limit and with zero emissions controls. They sell the exact same tractor with the exact same engine with a fuel screw turned up over the limit to increase hp, plus emissions controls, and it's about $4,000 more. Manufacturers absolutely will charge more for emissions models than non-emissions models. This is flawed logic. BMW tried charging a subscription fee for heated seats (https://www.thedrive.com/news/bmw-commits-to-subscriptions-even-after-heated-seat-debacle https://www.thedrive.com/news/bmw-commits-to-subscriptions-e...). All the cars had the seat heaters; "exact same [car] with the exact same [seats]". (I'd also note that you yourself acknowledge that people are paying for the extra horsepower, not the emissions controls.) You're describing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination, not necessarily an actual difference in the BOM.
- mothballed 9mo ago
  No they're paying for the emissions controls. The people that buy the tractor I have, usually illegally turn the screw and get the horsepower back. Nothing is stopping them from doing it, it is all over youtube, can be done in a few minutes. If it was actually about "price discrimination" they would do something to stop you from tuning them back to the full horsepower other than "please definitely don't do this thing we made it super easy for you to do, hint at in your repair manual, and is plastered all over youtube probably indirectly by advice of our own mechanics." To use your BMW analogy, it would be "we put a screw to turn on the heated seats, but please don't do that". That would not indicate someone actually seeking price discriminations, but rather providing people a way to save money getting around an expensive rule, but also they will charge you $4000 if you really want to comply with the law and add a big "save the environment" doohickey on to the seat heater. ----------- re: below due to throttling----------- You cutoff my quote to change the context of what I was saying. Preponderance of the evidence is pretty clear what you're saying doesn't apply here, even if it applies to something else.
  - ceejayoz 9mo ago
    > If it was actually about "price discrimination" they would do something to stop you from tuning them back to the full horsepower… No, not necessarily. Plenty of price discrimination is the exact same thing sold to different crowds at different prices, like pink razors or "dude wipes". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_tax / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dude_Wipes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dude_Wipes Or how Teslas let you pay for more range in an existing car, with no physical difference, just some code. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/27/business/teslas-pricing-hurdle-not-hindrance.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/27/business/teslas-pricing-h...

ceejayoz 9mo ago

Now do the cost of unchecked emissions. (And Leavitt is hardly a reputable source.)

insane_dreamer 9mo ago

Wonderful. And will these amazing cost savings offset the costs of future disasters related to climate change? Or are we taking more of "the band played on" Titanic approach, now?

fragmede 9mo ago
https://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a16995 https://www.newyorker.com/cartoon/a16995

xorbax 9mo ago

So what? Are you fantasizing that they'll reduce the price of cars because of this and somehow benefit people? And they'd have to take the time to redesign. And Democrats will (hopefully) reinstate it in a few years, and carmakers probably recognize that. Along with the threat of legal challenges by environmental groups. And, further, if we eventually do get these inefficient polluting cars - who's going to want to buy them? They certainly wouldn't be able to sell them in same countries. Seems pointless overall for carmakers, generally. Just a gift to polluting corporations and billionaires who want profit at our expense.

yndoendo 9mo ago

You really think big business will pull back pricing with this? It is as reasonable to believe that removal of the tariffs will bring back the lower prices on goods. CEOs want to maximize their golden parachutes and their stock value ... prices will be the same or go up. USA capitalism is about maximize profits not the buying power of their citizens.

bakies 9mo ago
A new $2,400 dealer adjustment fee! Not looking forward to replacing my car I got before COVID

hdhdhsjsbdh 9mo ago

Acidified oceans, poisonous air, and frequent multibillion dollar extreme weather events are a small price to pay for a purely hypothetical $2,400 off my next car, which I am forced to own because the same companies that lobby against climate change regulations are the ones that tore up all the public transit infrastructure that would otherwise allow me not to own a car at all. Americans love getting fucked by our corporate overlords, we can’t get enough of it, it’s our way of life.

ceejayoz 9mo ago

> I know for a fact the prices are lower non-emission vs emission. I own a tractor that is detuned 0.1 HP under the emission limit and with zero emissions controls. They sell the exact same tractor with the exact same engine with a fuel screw turned up over the limit to increase hp, plus emissions controls, and it's about $4,000 more. Manufacturers absolutely will charge more for emissions models than non-emissions models. This is flawed logic. BMW tried charging a subscription fee for heated seats (https://www.thedrive.com/news/bmw-commits-to-subscriptions-even-after-heated-seat-debacle https://www.thedrive.com/news/bmw-commits-to-subscriptions-e...). All the cars had the seat heaters; "exact same [car] with the exact same [seats]". (I'd also note that you yourself acknowledge that people are paying for the extra horsepower, not the emissions controls.) You're describing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Price_discrimination, not necessarily an actual difference in the BOM.

mothballed 9mo ago
No they're paying for the emissions controls. The people that buy the tractor I have, usually illegally turn the screw and get the horsepower back. Nothing is stopping them from doing it, it is all over youtube, can be done in a few minutes. If it was actually about "price discrimination" they would do something to stop you from tuning them back to the full horsepower other than "please definitely don't do this thing we made it super easy for you to do, hint at in your repair manual, and is plastered all over youtube probably indirectly by advice of our own mechanics." To use your BMW analogy, it would be "we put a screw to turn on the heated seats, but please don't do that". That would not indicate someone actually seeking price discriminations, but rather providing people a way to save money getting around an expensive rule, but also they will charge you $4000 if you really want to comply with the law and add a big "save the environment" doohickey on to the seat heater. ----------- re: below due to throttling----------- You cutoff my quote to change the context of what I was saying. Preponderance of the evidence is pretty clear what you're saying doesn't apply here, even if it applies to something else.
- ceejayoz 9mo ago
  > If it was actually about "price discrimination" they would do something to stop you from tuning them back to the full horsepower… No, not necessarily. Plenty of price discrimination is the exact same thing sold to different crowds at different prices, like pink razors or "dude wipes". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_tax https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pink_tax / https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dude_Wipes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dude_Wipes Or how Teslas let you pay for more range in an existing car, with no physical difference, just some code. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/27/business/teslas-pricing-hurdle-not-hindrance.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/27/business/teslas-pricing-h...