EPA changes and rule rollbacks

[HammaMan]

PM'd reply to keep it politics free

Sponsored

 

[JCsTruck]

What we’re seeing is a big correction that the majority of the people want. Like many, I’m tired of the unelected fourth branch of government going out of control.

Making references to going back to 1970 when there was lead in gasoline is ridiculous and not relevant. That simply is not going to happen and is just fear mongering. I think you will see a more common sense approach and rollback of regulations like eliminating the electric vehicle mandate and relaxing the CAFE standards. A lot of the crazy stuff they applied to washing machines and dishwashers will also be going away. The ICE is not going away but neither is the electric car. People will just have more clean air vehicle choices to pick from with all technologies. I see this as a win, win situation for everyone.

I’m optimistic for the future with the rollback of these more recent regulations and red tape. I think we may see more innovation come into play and new technologies may emerge, especially with AI now part of the equation. I think hybrids are the future, or at least the immediate future, and the electric car is here to stay. We’re still going to have clean air, and people are going to have more choices, but also more affordable choices for the average hard working American family.

 

[v8440]

To be fair, I think the references to the leaded gasoline days and the flaming river stuff were to illustrate the point he was making-that we don't want to go too far in the other direction. I don't think he was literally saying we're heading back to those days.

 

[JCsTruck]

To be fair, I think the references to the leaded gasoline days and the flaming river stuff were to illustrate the point he was making-that we don't want to go too far in the other direction. I don't think he was literally saying we're heading back to those days.

v8440, I think you’re correct but its an over exaggeration in my opinion and not even close to what is happening so that makes it irrelevant. It implies that we’re going way back which is simply not true.

 

[Bunker]

Technically we’ve never stopped using leaded gasoline. Nearly every propeller airplane uses it. Sorta feel bad for all the people at the end of the runway of every small airport.

 

[JCsTruck]

Technically we’ve never stopped using leaded gasoline. Nearly every propeller airplane uses it. Sorta feel bad for all the people at the end of the runway of every small airport.

Interesting! I asked Grok AI about this and this was the response.

”Yes, leaded fuel is still used in many small airplanes. The most common aviation fuel for small piston-engine aircraft is known as "avgas" (aviation gasoline), specifically Avgas 100LL (low lead). Despite the "low lead" designation, it still contains tetraethyllead (TEL) to boost octane and prevent engine knocking, which is critical for the performance and safety of these engines.

The use of leaded avgas has been a topic of debate due to environmental and health concerns, and efforts have been underway to develop unleaded alternatives. However, as of now, Avgas 100LL remains the dominant fuel for general aviation aircraft with piston engines, such as those used for training, recreation, or small-scale transport. Jet aircraft and larger planes typically use jet fuel (like Jet A), which is unleaded, but that's a different category from the small planes you're likely referring to.

So, in short: yes, small airplanes commonly use leaded fuel, though the industry is slowly moving toward unleaded options.”

 

[turbopilot]

So, in short: yes, small airplanes commonly use leaded fuel, though the industry is slowly moving toward unleaded options.”

I have flown these lead eating airplanes my whole life. The reality is there is no harm from the minor amounts of lead coming from these aircraft since they spent most of the time high up in the atmosphere. On the other hand we don't want the lead since it fouls airplane engines with nasty deposits. But common aircraft engines are last century dinosaurs. They need lead because ignition and fuel management is not automated, like modern automobiles. So without this automation a certain percentage of aircraft engines cannot deliver rated power without distructive detonation.

EPA issued an "endangerment finding" for leaded aircraft fuel in 2023 and California CARB said they are banning leaded AVGAS in the state by 2030. With the recent political changes all that may change.

 

[HammaMan]

There are lead free alternatives already on the market like G100UL. Engines need to be certified to run on it, but I hope it goes mainstream soon. 100 octane fuel at your local airport for ~$4/g? Yes please.

 

[turbopilot]

There are lead free alternatives already on the market like G100UL. Engines need to be certified to run on it, but I hope it goes mainstream soon. 100 octane fuel at your local airport for ~$4/g? Yes please.

Nope. G100UL is currently not approved for use by all general aviation manufacturers. Basically this fuel uses high octane aromatic solvents to replace lead. While the fuel works fine but there are many reports of incompatibility with fuel system components, structural components and paint.

 

[Probity]

What we’re seeing is a big correction that the majority of the people want. Like many, I’m tired of the unelected fourth branch of government going out of control.

Making references to going back to 1970 when there was lead in gasoline is ridiculous and not relevant. That simply is not going to happen and is just fear mongering. I think you will see a more common sense approach and rollback of regulations like eliminating the electric vehicle mandate and relaxing the CAFE standards. A lot of the crazy stuff they applied to washing machines and dishwashers will also be going away. The ICE is not going away but neither is the electric car. People will just have more clean air vehicle choices to pick from with all technologies. I see this as a win, win situation for everyone.

I’m optimistic for the future with the rollback of these more recent regulations and red tape. I think we may see more innovation come into play and new technologies may emerge, especially with AI now part of the equation. I think hybrids are the future, or at least the immediate future, and the electric car is here to stay. We’re still going to have clean air, and people are going to have more choices, but also more affordable choices for the average hard working American family.

This is well put. I really hope most people are OK with the concept/original intent of the EPA but abhor what the actual workings of the EPA have become. The EPA is just one part of the amorphous blob called the administrative state (or 4th branch of government or shadow government or whatever you want to call it) which is so large now that the exact number of current agencies are unknown - it really is 'too big to fail' (hence the huge pushback we're seeing now), and if you run afoul of EPA/HHS/whatever rules and are prosecuted, the rules are 'different'. Near as I can tell, Ballotpedia isn't agenda-drive from the left or right, they just try and outline what the administrative state currently is and how it works.
Administrative state - Ballotpedia
TASP Primer Final

Some excerpts:

The modern administrative state is made up of a complex combination of executive agencies and independent federal agencies—though the exact number of current agencies is unknown. Estimates from the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) range from 78 to 137 independent federal agencies and between 174 and 268 executive agencies.

There is no definitive number of executive agencies and every list of federal agencies in government publications is different. For example, FOIA.gov lists 78 independent executive agencies and 174 components of the executive departments as units that comply with the Freedom of Information Act requirements imposed on every federal agency, according to the Sourcebook. This appears to be on the conservative end of the range of possible agency definitions. The United States Government Manual lists 96 independent executive units and 220 components of the executive departments. An even more inclusive listing comes from USA.gov, which lists 137 independent executive agencies and 268 units in the Cabinet.

The majority of administrative agencies are housed in the executive branch. These agencies operate under the Executive Office of the President, within one of the 15 Cabinet departments, or as independent agencies with top officials who are nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Depending on the agency, these entities may house additional sub-agencies, bureaus, divisions, and commissions. A handful of agencies are also housed in the legislative and judicial branches, including the Government Publishing Office (GAO) and the United States Sentencing Commission, respectively.

------------------
From a book I read ~6 years ago:

If you are prosecuted for violating a regulation by the EPA, OSHA, HHS, DOE, or any of the myriad other federal regulatory agencies, you appear before an administrative law judge (ALJ) sitting in an administrative law courtroom. An ALJ is selected by the agency whose cases he/she will hear, and is subsequently an employee of that agency. The agency gets to choose its preferred candidate from among the three top-rated candidates identified by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). An ALJ is exempt from performance reviews and other oversight by the regulatory agency, but may be overruled by the head of the agency.

There’s no jury. When appearing in an administrative court, you do not get a lawyer unless you pay for it. Most rules of evidence used in normal courts do not apply. The legal burden of proof placed on the lawyer making the case for the regulatory agency is “a preponderance of the evidence”, not “clear and convincing evidence”, let alone “evidence beyond a reasonable doubt” that you are guilty. If the ALJ thinks that it’s a 51/49 percent call in favor of the regulatory agency that accused you, you’re found guilty. If the administrative court judge’s decision is adverse, you may, in most cases, appeal that decision to another body within the agency.

 

[HammaMan]

This is well put. I really hope most people are OK with the concept/original intent of the EPA but abhor what the actual workings of the EPA have become. The EPA is just one part of the amorphous blob called the administrative state (or 4th branch of government or shadow government or whatever you want to call it) which is so large now that the exact number of current agencies are unknown - it really is 'too big to fail' (hence the huge pushback we're seeing now), and if you run afoul of EPA/HHS/whatever rules and are prosecuted, the rules are 'different'. Near as I can tell, Ballotpedia isn't agenda-drive from the left or right, they just try and outline what the administrative state currently is and how it works.
Administrative state - Ballotpedia
TASP Primer Final

Some excerpts:

The modern administrative state is made up of a complex combination of executive agencies and independent federal agencies—though the exact number of current agencies is unknown. Estimates from the Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS) range from 78 to 137 independent federal agencies and between 174 and 268 executive agencies.

There is no definitive number of executive agencies and every list of federal agencies in government publications is different. For example, FOIA.gov lists 78 independent executive agencies and 174 components of the executive departments as units that comply with the Freedom of Information Act requirements imposed on every federal agency, according to the Sourcebook. This appears to be on the conservative end of the range of possible agency definitions. The United States Government Manual lists 96 independent executive units and 220 components of the executive departments. An even more inclusive listing comes from USA.gov, which lists 137 independent executive agencies and 268 units in the Cabinet.

The majority of administrative agencies are housed in the executive branch. These agencies operate under the Executive Office of the President, within one of the 15 Cabinet departments, or as independent agencies with top officials who are nominated by the president and confirmed by the U.S. Senate. Depending on the agency, these entities may house additional sub-agencies, bureaus, divisions, and commissions. A handful of agencies are also housed in the legislative and judicial branches, including the Government Publishing Office (GAO) and the United States Sentencing Commission, respectively.

------------------
From a book I read ~6 years ago:

If you are prosecuted for violating a regulation by the EPA, OSHA, HHS, DOE, or any of the myriad other federal regulatory agencies, you appear before an administrative law judge (ALJ) sitting in an administrative law courtroom. An ALJ is selected by the agency whose cases he/she will hear, and is subsequently an employee of that agency. The agency gets to choose its preferred candidate from among the three top-rated candidates identified by the Office of Personnel Management (OPM). An ALJ is exempt from performance reviews and other oversight by the regulatory agency, but may be overruled by the head of the agency.

There’s no jury. When appearing in an administrative court, you do not get a lawyer unless you pay for it. Most rules of evidence used in normal courts do not apply. The legal burden of proof placed on the lawyer making the case for the regulatory agency is “a preponderance of the evidence”, not “clear and convincing evidence”, let alone “evidence beyond a reasonable doubt” that you are guilty. If the ALJ thinks that it’s a 51/49 percent call in favor of the regulatory agency that accused you, you’re found guilty. If the administrative court judge’s decision is adverse, you may, in most cases, appeal that decision to another body within the agency.

Yeah, ALJ is some nonsense and a perversion of due process IMO

 

[Probity]

Yeah, ALJ is some nonsense and a perversion of due process IMO

Yep. Administrative law is BIG..............couple thousand ALJ's, 10,000 AJ's and 'non-ALJ adjudicators'...........

The U.S. Office of Personnel Management (OPM) reported 1,931 administrative law judges working for federal agencies as of March 2017, the most recent year for which comprehensive data was available at the time of this article's last update in March 2024. The vast majority of these ALJs (1,655) were employed at the Social Security Administration. The role of the ALJ was created and standardized under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) of 1946. When an agency is required by statute to use a formal adjudication proceeding, an ALJ must preside. ALJs are recruited and examined by OPM, then hired and paid by agencies. When an agency needs to fill an ALJ position, OPM will offer a list of three candidates for the agency to choose from. Agencies may also hire ALJs from other agencies, either permanently or on a temporary basis, with the approval of OPM.

The federal government employed nearly 2,000 administrative law judges and more than 10,000 administrative judges and other non-ALJ adjudicators as of 2017, the most recent year for which comprehensive data was available at the time of this article's last update in March 2024. Unlike administrative law judges, who are officers of the United States and must be appointed by the president, the courts, or agency heads, administrative judges are hired directly by agencies. As such, administrative judges do not share in the statutory protections from removal, discipline, and performance reviews that ALJs receive under the Administrative Procedure Act. According to Paul Verkuil, former chairman of the Administrative Conference of the United States, administrative judges generally have less independence than administrative law judges, are compensated at a lower rate, and have less job security.

The Administrative Conference of the United States (ACUS), an independent federal agency tasked with developing recommendations to improve federal administrative processes, published a draft report on non-ALJ adjudicators on February 14, 2018. The report contained the most up-to-date data as of the last update for this article in March 2024. The report included survey data about non-ALJs collected from at least one subcomponent of 53 federal agencies. Surveys were sent to 64 agencies. The ACUS report highlights the difficulty of describing non-ALJs and the work they do, noting in the introduction that "these Non-ALJ Hearings do not share a statutory framework. Nor do the non-ALJs themselves." The report later describes the variety of titles used by non-ALJs:

"One of the difficulties in studying non-ALJs is simply describing them because of their numerous titles. Agencies reported having 37 types of non-ALJs, meaning that one agency or subcomponent may have more than one type of non-ALJ (for instance, Administrative Judges and Hearing Officers). Those 37 separately identified types of non-ALJs share 23 titles (meaning, for example, that more than one agency may employ non-ALJs with the title “Hearing Officer”). ... Seven of those titles include “judge” in them and are held by nearly 1,000 (964) of the non-ALJs. And nearly 200 of those non-ALJs are referred to as “Administrative Judges,” a title very similar to “Administrative Law Judge.”

 

[JohnMcClane]

Left for a minute and y’all talking airplane fuel. ?

I think as battery technology improves we’ll see further adoptions like Pipistrel.

 

[22stx]

Everyone is on the wagon about the USA going clean but about all the other countries that are polluting a whole lot more than us. We can't do it by ourselves but we the consumer here in the USA sure have to pay for all the crazy regulations they think are best for us. Just my opinion.

 

[amschind]

I think that there is a middle ground between dumping heavy metals into the ocean and atmosphere and regulating vehicles to the point that they rapidly become unusable. Modern utility tractors have lifespans of about 3000 hours, not because the tractor is used up, but because the DPF service is so great a fraction of the residual value of the machine that replacement is more attractive than maintenance. If the tractor shuts itself down until the DPF is replaced,the tractor is often replaced rather than being repaired. Destroying capital goods at a fraction of their useful service life is not an environmentally friendly practice. Environmental regulation is far from the only reason for that issue, but in some arenas it is a major one.

As an aside, a well adjusted diesel should smoke little if at all. It's a false dichotomy between "DPF" and "rolling coal" (though many folks with illegal DPF delete kits also have ludicrous steam locomotive tunes just to be annoying). ULS diesel is much harder on components, and it's tougher to generate knock resistance without TEL, but chemistry has made a lot of that ground back. At the same time, EGR or DPF on a diesel is a time bomb, and we should be incentivizing longevity far more than we are.

Sponsored