This new regulation is stupid. The EPA probably doesn't have any engineers on staff. They are the Pres meat puppets. They have have no idea how a jet engine works. The new engines built by GE and Rolls Royce are the most advanced fuel efficient ones developed so far. Boeing and other builders so say to the govt give us the ET antigrav technology that is hidden by the "other military" then we can build non-polluting passager air craft. That will stop the EPA in their tracks.

Wow, you've met them too!

Well, we do have a Constitution and a Bill of Rights, it's just they are underfoot right now being used as door mats...

Indeed, I had to book a flight for my wife to go get our grand daughter, and the EE are now Business class. Another way to torture you or pay more.

Nice...

Some airlines you have to pay extra for the Emergency Exit seats because of the extra leg room.

I would like to regulate the emissions that come out of the EPA bureaucrats mouths...

nickursis -

I would favor abolishing the EPA, but I cannot see a path to that happening (other than wishful thinking). I can see a path to downsizing them and minimizing their power: one of the threads that leads to this is their implementation of draconian controls that cause inconvenience to a large segment of the population. There would also need to be a pretty plain cause-and-effect (since we humans are not good at that). If they slowly increase pollution standards for airplanes over a 20 or 30 year period, nothing will trigger. If they implement strict regulation that has massive impact on business, then we might get some of the EPA's power taken away.

So I am hoping for them to be idealistic and unwise.

Jan

Dog, you are correct, Term Limits have been nothing but a game and manipulation tool. The dynastys just want people to think they want it, so people will always wait for "next year", "next congress" or "next president", rinse and repeat and pretty soon another generation of Kennedy's are spawned. Or Clinton's, or... Nope, they definitely have no interest, or reason to ever let it through.

I agree, but must say that there was one thing that (god forgive me) they actually made work with regulation: airlines. When regulated, there was a really good level of service, and some sanity to the system. Now, airlines couldn't give a crap less about the customer, you go where they want you to go, and by buying up all the smaller competitors, you have 3 or 4 giants who will squeeze you till you drop, pack you in a seat three sizes to small for a midget, and then make you pay to get your bag, encouraging people to shove potato sacks in the overhead that cripple you when the lady opens the bin to get her purse and it falls on you. With the stranglehold, the start ups have to go cheaper and make it worse, and if successful, get bought out again. You used to be able to get a flight nonstop across country, now you tour every hub, and pay a premium for the privilege of getting there with only one or two visits to some exotic destination. I know this is sacrilege, but I flew through the 60's until last year, and the last 8 years have seen it become a tortuous experience fit for an S&M movie. Unless you get lucky and become the emergency exit dude...

Yes, the whole idea of the government regulating CO2 emission from jet engines is ridiculous. Nobody is more concerned about that than the airlines themselves, because CO2 emissions are directly proportional to fuel burned, and the engine maker that produces an engine that is 1% more efficient than its competition sells more engines to the airlines. So why does the government need to get involved when the whole air transport industry is already highly motivated to reduce fuel burn? Getting the gummint more involved will only lead to poorer service.

There"s been talk of term limits since FDR. If everyone wants it, why isn't it a reality? The pols don't want it, that's why.

That is a good comparison, and quite applicable. Voodoo science mixed with politics and forced on the unsuspecting.

Beware the "climate fixing subsidy" effort. Just like the electric car subisdy etc, they will want more from us to give to an airline, just to buy new so they can claim "victory". Seems to be the pattern, and I really do not want to pay for their agenda.

Jan, I think it all depends on how they implement their plan. They could do like they did with trucks and just make the average over time go down, or they could require some kind of draconian cuts that cannot be done. Right now, it seems to be a lot of claims and statements and assorted BS, with little substance. The point is, what else will he idiots add to their list of items to control? I think they wanted to control cow farts once but gave that up as a bad job....

I agree with you completely. If only....

That's why they must be put out to pasture after every two terms max.

Well, in reality yes. I was speaking of the insanity usually presented to government as "The Plan" which never makes any sense, but either a special interest bought (remember "grapefruit"?) or some genius sold as a bill of crap to the unwitting drones in the cubicles as a "good idea"...

It is interesting that the very same creatures that have poisoned our environment with stupidities, cronyism and the shear lack of environmental knowledge should now go after a system of mass transportation that actually is more efficient than any other type of transportation. Will they reduce the level of climate engineering chemicals that were and perhaps still being sprayed upon us? Probably not, however, I am sure they have a plan to put a catalytic converter in your pants next! These creatures are not scientist, not smart nor conscientious...they are just another part of the Kakistocracy.

If we cannot get the EPA abolished or severely limited right now, then one of the options is to hope that they become so excessive that they alienate their own power base. You will note that the date of implementation for these regulations is a couple of decades away (since it grandfathers aircraft existing before the reg was passed).

The presumptive ability to fly across the country at a moment's notice is part of the model of every corporation and I think that restricting this will be a shoe that pinches very tightly for business. I will note that I have been wrong on issues like this before - I never thought that CA would vote to strangle agriculture in its Central Valley - but the cause and effect _should_ be near enough for most businessmen to see.

Jan

That's not an accident. EPA is controlled by far-left ideologues whose real purpose is to shut down industrial civilization, starting with the US.

And the reason so much "science" seems to favor that view is that EPA and its foreign equivalents hold nearly all the purse strings. Scientists who publish anything that disagrees with that party line have their careers destroyed. Reason did an article on this some time ago. This is why I equate EPA with the State Science Institute.

This sounds like the government-industrial complex. General Electric and Boeing are at the forefront of airliner efficiency. EPA regulation will force airlines to buy new aircraft. An inefficient "Clunker" may be more cost-effective than a new vehicle. It may take a regulation or a subsidy to replace them.