What Is The Reasons Of The California Federal Emission Standards?

Often times these more stringent standards are put in place by the EPA as federal standards after research and testing has been accomplished by those states. An example of this is the required use of Catalytic converters on pollution controlled motor vehicles in 1974 in California, two years later in 1976, the EPA required the use of Catalytic converters on all pollution controlled motor vehicles nationwide.

There are a couple factors that cause the “sky-high” gas prices in California, but a main contributor is an anti-carbon regulation.

First and foremost, we established that EAs are to be treated as intangible assets, as specifically stated by Polluter Corp, and supported by the Accounting Standards Codification. In the SAB Topic 10.F, under section S99-1 - Summary of Decisions Reached to Date (As of November 18, 2010), it states that the Boards decided "purchased and allocated allowances should be recognized as assets.” This specific decision was in reference to emission trading schemes and tradable rights. Furthermore, the same section of the codification referred to above states that, "some entities follow an intangible asset model for emission allowances.” In December 2004, the International Financial Reporting Interpretations Committee (IFRIC) released IFRIC 3, Emission Rights, which stated that allowances are intangible assets and should be measured at fair value when received from the government.

Beginning January 1, 2017, at least 3% of the aggregate amount of bulk transportation fuel purchased by the state government must be from very low carbon transportation fuel sources. Beginning January 1, 2018, the required amount of very low carbon transportation fuel purchased will increase by 1% annually until January 1, 2024. California is doing their part by trying to minimize pollution until a safer alternative fuel has arrived. Yet, if

The plaintiffs are seeking an injunction, an equitable remedy, to prevent the state of California from enforcing its statute restricting carbon dioxide emissions.

There have been positive attributes from the regulations. One of the positive effects on businesses is that enhanced environmental security has allowed for more investors to start trade in the regions with effective regulatory measures. This is because increased regulatory measures have resulted in the investors gaining not only positive returns, but also consumer trust due to their compliance (Lieberman, 2010). Therefore, there has been significant growth in investment; however, the negative influences have managed to cover these positive influences. The government has also managed to generate substantial amounts of money from the charges and used them in establishing a friendly environment for other potential investors.

"Emission Standards: USA: California Diesel Risk Reduction Program." DieselNet: Diesel Emissions Online. Web. 07 Jan. 2012. <http://www.dieselnet.com/standards/us/ca_diesel.php>.

In 2008 California was faced with a huge budget crisis and governing crisis as the state governing was not nearly as efficient enough to respond to changes and problems that were happening in the state. This was due to a lot of poor laws that related to taxation and to the way our state government worked. There is also unique differences with California than other states, like our direct democracy system, and many of our laws are compromises that don’t work well between liberal and conservative ideologies. Our politicians are also not well motivated to serve the people and would rather server their own special interests that benefit their own career. While there are still a lot of problems that California needs to deal with, we did make adjustments

The Californian Air Resource Board (CARB) was enacted by the Californian legislation in 2002 to achieve the maximum feasible and cost-effective reduction of GHG’s from California’s motorcycle. CARB has proposed new near-term standards to be phased in from 2009 through 2012, and mid-term standards to be phased in from 2013 through 2016. The GHG emission standards will be incorporated directly into the current low emission vehicle (LEV) programs, along with other light-and medium-duty automotive emission standards. The LEV program applies to passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles weighing 8,500 to 10,000 pounds, and it establishes exhaust emission standards. Accordingly, there would be a GHG emission fleet-average requirement

It seems as humans evolve and advance, we also use nature to our advantage, and do not use any of our new-found technology to find ways to replenish those supplies which we so willingly take. Today, California is a test of our capability to adapt to human caused climate change. California’s first efforts to adapt started with the Assembly Bill 32 (the 2006 Global Warming Solutions Act), which has goals to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2020. Then the state later drafted its first climate

In this, they will be generating excess of allowed emission level in Phase 1 (1995-1999) and would have to buy those allowances. Starting Phase 2 (year 2000), they would be in a state to sell the allowances.

It is an alliance comprising of several public health and environmental agencies located in 24 U.S. states and Canada. This alliance has come together to promote cleaner motor vehicles, including vehicles that emit fewer greenhouse gas emissions. Each state in this alliance has its own governing body and the member organization in that state abide by its policies. The cost of membership has been set to zero, in order to avoid corruption and encourage more organizations to join the campaign. The Clean Cars Campaign first launched in California and by its authority the state has been setting stricter standards for automobile emissions that lead to global warming. In addition, twelve other states have adopted the Clean Air Act motor vehicle standards in order to prevent their residents from breathing in polluted air and also to prevent global warming [5]. The state of Massachusetts adopted the California automobile standards in 2006 and revised them in late 2012 along with California

Finally these standers will put an end to all of this pollution, these standards will eliminate the advantage of low cost power plants. Because some power plants are 40 years old and they have never been updated. So they will have to compete and give a fair share of the market to the newer plants.

3. Because Article III:1 is a more general provision than either Article III:2 or III:4, it would not be appropriate for the Panel to consider the complainant’s Article III:1 allegations to the extent that the Panel were to find the respondent’s measures to be inconsistent with the more specific provisions of Articles III:2 and III:4.”The present Panel agreed with this reasoning, and therefore did not find it necessary to examine the consistency of the Gasoline Rule with Article III:1.

The same way that there are various uncertain factors when accounting for climate change (clouds, ocean temperature, aerosols’ effect, etc.), there are various microeconomic principles that can be applied to help reduce emissions, with equally diverse results. One of the most limiting forms of creating clean emissions standards is a renewable portfolio standard (RPS) limited to renewable technology (Paul, Palmer & Woerman, 2011). This is restrictive because of an unfair distribution of credits dependent upon which technology the RPS is being applied to. For example, an RPS that treats all renewables equally would highly encourage the low-cost renewables like bio-mass and wind, while high-cost renewables like solar would not be promoted as fairly (Paul, Palmer & Woerman). Some states help address this disproportion allotment with ‘carve-outs’ or portions of the RPS that addresses separate renewables