“It’s not driving the wrong way if your car is in reverse for 3 blocks” - actual words spoken by SF resident.

I think speed limits are probably an inevitability in bike lanes. I’ve found that electric scooters are about the same speed as an avid commuter bicyclist. I’m also a bad case though, because I’m actually conscientious about how I ride if I take one. Most people ride them like idiots but I think that would change with…

I think speed limits are probably an inevitability in bike lanes. I’ve found that electric scooters are about the same speed as an avid commuter bicyclist. I’m also a bad case though, because I’m actually conscientious about how I ride if I take one. Most people ride them like idiots but I think that would change with…

There have been two standards since 1967 when Ronald Reagan signed the Mulford-Carrell Act. That was enabled by the federal Clean Air Act of 1963, which saw the MCA coming and carved an exemption for it.

This would have been a fine compromise IMO.

This would have been a fine compromise IMO.

Can we start including electric scooters and electric bikes in this discussion rather than Critical Mass? For one, the scooter companies have money and that fixes problems. Second, critical mass is the Planned Parenthood of cycling. It tends to be more divisive than unifying.

Yeah but nothing stops California from saying “ships that run bunker fuel during their journey will no longer be allowed in California ports by 2021".

I wish I could find the clip, but searching has Youtube failed - mainly because I can’t remember which rep said it, but he had called for exactly that. The quote was along the lines of “we’re going to fight everything you do, good or bad.” which is a really sad way to lead.

Okay, so here’s the problem with those examples (and it’s kind of what I expected): They’re examples where nothing got done. According to Freaknomics, that’s actually the ideal outcome of most regulation (I wish I had the episode number, but there was a podcast episode showing that most new laws don’t produce the…

Source:

They still allow the dirtiest of dirty ships into their ports as long as they behave for 12 miles. That’s like saying “terrorists are fine as long as they terrorize someone else”. 

I’ve heard this “he doesn’t negotiate in good faith” with democrats in several comments. Is there actual documented evidence of this when it comes to regulation? 

I’m not talking about modern Kei cars. I’m talking about classics. Classics can be imported in the 25 year rule but can’t be registered in California due to emissions non-compliance. And please don’t try to tell me that 100 kei cars are going to choke us all to death, because even CARB knows that’s not true.

Yeah, I made a similar point in a separate comment but I think you made it even better. Regulatory certainty is the only thing that gets the automakers to sign some kind of weird public relations deal with California.

I’m really not sure what point you’re making. I think it’s that you have a problem with his weight and that California has existing air resource regulations. The later has been stated previously and the former sounds like a real hot take ;)

Yeah, I wasn’t speaking about while at US ports. You’re entirely correct about people having to obey while in US waters. In international waters or other countries, all bets are off. Malaysia in particular is more worried about pirates than emissions. 

I think it would be difficult but not impossible. The impossible part is that they’d have to work with California. Specifically these two people would have to work together, which is pure LOL.

I feel like this better sums up what I was getting at. One of the nice things about government is that you can more easily deprecate a standard than you can in private industry.