In a study for Transport & Environment, Bloomberg New Energy Finance claims electric cars and vans will cost less to manufacture in Europe than conventional vehicles by 2027.
Some major car companies are still trying to limit US exhaust emissions rules. Why buy cars from them?
Dear Automakers,
You should support the environment. In fact, without it, we would not be able to buy your cars. I mean, we would be dead if we didn’t have clean air to breathe. Same problem if a climate disaster kills us, or ruins our livelihood.
The governor of New Mexico has signed an executive order making hers the 19th state to join the US Climate Initiative. The goal is to reduce the state’s carbon emissions 45% in the next 12 years.
The Trump maladministration wants you to believe that poor people can’t buy new cars because they are too expensive. It fails to realize that very few poor people ever buy new cars. Its argument is nothing more than smoke.
I was recently invited along for an exploration of horse whispering in Costa Rica. I made plans to stay at a horse ranch with 11 horses, 2 goats, countless roosters crowing all night long (no, not cock-a-doodle-doo, but “You woke me up”), 4 cats, 1 dog, birds, iguanas, cows (peeking into the wide open bathroom windows — as my traveling companion said, “The neighbors are spying on me”), and so many critters.
The EPA plans to announce this week it is cancelling the fuel economy rules put in place during the Obama administration and revoke California’s waiver under the Clean Air Act. The madness in Assington continues.
The Association of Automobile Manufacturers has filed a report with the US DOT and NHTSA filled with lies and distortions provide by the fossil fuel industry.
The German auto industry faces increasing pressure from Tesla and Chinese auto makers. Can it survive the transition to electric cars?
It’s called “urban biomass,” and it’s ours (spsmw.org). Hard to imagine a subject that would find The Wall Street Journal and Grist in line with each other’s thinking, but burning wood for energy has achieved it. Neither outlet seems to view the topic positively. Both have cited the scientific work … [continued]
