EPA sets strict new emissions standards for heavy-duty trucks and buses in bid to fight climate change


Washington — The Environmental Protection Agency on Friday set strict emissions standards for heavy-duty trucks, buses and other large vehicles, an action that officials said will help clean up some of the nation’s largest sources of planet-warming greenhouse gases.

The new rules, which take effect for model years 2027 through 2032, will avoid up to 1 billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the next three decades and provide $13 billion in net benefits in the form of fewer hospital visits, lost work days and deaths, the EPA said. The new standards will especially benefit an estimated 72 million people in the United States who live near freight routes used by trucks and other heavy vehicles and bear a disproportionate burden of dangerous air pollution, the agency said.

“Heavy-duty vehicles are essential for moving goods and services throughout our country, keeping our economy moving. They’re also significant contributors to pollution from the transportation sector — emissions that are fueling climate change and creating poor air quality in too many American communities,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said.

“Reducing emissions from our heavy-duty vehicles means cleaner air and less pollution. It means safer and more vibrant communities. It means lower fuel and maintenance costs for truck owners and operators. And it means healthier Americans,” Regan said.

The new rules for heavy trucks and buses come a week after the EPA announced new automobile emissions standards for passenger vehicles. Those rules relax initial tailpipe limits proposed last year but get close to the same strict standards set out by the EPA for model year 2032.

The auto industry could meet the limits if 56% of new passenger vehicle sales are electric by 2032, along with at least 13% plug-in hybrids or other partially electric cars, the EPA said.

The new emissions rules

The rule for trucks is more complex, with a range of electric-vehicle or other non-traditional sales projected, depending on the type of vehicle and use, the agency said. For instance, 30% of “heavy-heavy-duty vocational” trucks would need to be zero-emission by 2032, the EPA said, while 40% of short-haul “day cabs” would need be zero emission vehicles.

Motor vehicle traffic moves along I-76 in Philadelphia on March 31, 2021.
Motor vehicle traffic moves along I-76 in Philadelphia on March 31, 2021. 

Matt Rourke / AP


The new rules for cars and trucks come as sales of EVs, which are needed to meet both standards, have begun to slow. The auto industry cited lower sales growth in objecting to the EPA’s preferred standards unveiled last April for passenger vehicles, a key part of President Biden’s ambitious plan to cut planet-warming emissions.

“Our Clean Trucks plan works in tandem with President Biden’s unprecedented investments in America and delivers on this administration’s commitment to tackling climate change while advancing environmental justice,” Regan said.

The new rule will provide greater certainty for the industry, while supporting U.S. manufacturing jobs in advanced vehicle technologies, Regan said. Over the next decade, the standards “will set the U.S. heavy-duty sector on a trajectory for sustained growth,” he said.

Industry groups strongly disagreed. They lambasted the new standards as unreachable with current electric-vehicle technology and complained about a lack of EV charging stations and power grid capacity limits.

The American Trucking Associations and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association, which represent large swaths of the industry, predicted supply chain failures and said that smaller independent firms would likely hang onto older diesel trucks that spew more pollution, running counter to the EPA’s goals.

The new limits lower zero-emission sales rates proposed for the 2027 through 2029 model years but require higher sales later, resulting in a practical mandate for electric and hydrogen-powered trucks, the trucking associations said in a statement. The EPA rule limits choices for trucks and buses to unproven technology, the group said.

“The post-2030 targets remain entirely unachievable,” said Chris Spear, the trucking group’s CEO. “Any regulation that fails to account for the operational realities of trucking will set the industry and America’s supply chain up for failure.”

Todd Spencer, president of the independent drivers association, which represents small trucking companies, said the Democratic administration “seems dead-set on regulating every local mom-and-pop business out of existence with its flurry of unworkable environmental mandates.”

The American Petroleum Institute, the top lobbying group for the oil and gas industry, said in a joint statement with the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers that the new rule “is yet another example of the Biden administration’s whole-of-government effort to eliminate choices for American consumers, businesses and industries.”

The rule relies principally on zero-emission vehicles and “disincentivizes the development of other fuel-based technologies — including American-made renewable diesel — that are working in today’s heavy-duty fleet to reduce emissions,” the groups said.

They called for the rule to be overturned by Congress but said they are prepared to challenge it in court.

Regan said the EPA crafted the limits to give truck owners a choice of powertrains including advanced combustion vehicles, hybrids and electric and hydrogen fuel cells.

EPA Administrator Michael Regan speaks on Capitol Hill on Sept. 27, 2023.
EPA Administrator Michael Regan speaks on Capitol Hill on Sept. 27, 2023.

Mark Schiefelbein / AP


“There’s a list of options that truck drivers, owners and operators can choose from … while we [do] not sacrifice the very stringent environmental goals that we have set,” he told reporters Thursday.

The EPA calculated that new trucks would save operators a total of $3.5 billion in fuel and other costs from 2027 to 2032, paying for themselves in two to four years. The 2022 Inflation Reduction Act also provides tax credits that subsidize the purchase price of new electric vehicles, Regan said.

The new emissions limits will bring immediate health benefits, especially in communities burdened by heavy truck traffic, said Harold Wimmer, CEO of the American Lung Association.

“Transportation is the largest source of pollution driving climate change,” he said in a statement. “These strong standards that will help drive toward a zero-emission future for trucks, buses and other heavy-duty vehicles are a critical part of the solution.”

Margo Oge, a former director of the EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality, said medium and heavy diesel trucks make up less than 6% of vehicles on the road “but spew more than half the smog and soot Americans breathe” and contribute to global warming. The EPA standards “are a big step in the right direction to fight climate change and help us breathe cleaner air,” she said.



Source link

Thailand’s move to legalize same-sex marriage sets precedent in Southeast Asia


Semafor Signals

Supported by

Insights from the London School of Economics, Thai.News, and The Diplomat

The News

Thailand is close to becoming the first Southeast Asian country to guarantee marriage equality after lawmakers on Wednesday passed a bill to legalize same-sex marriage.

Of the 415 lawmakers in the lower house of the parliament, 400 voted in favor of the bill, which now heads to the Senate, where it will likely pass, before the country’s King endorses it.

A new liberal government and youth activism have made LGBTQ+ inclusion a priority in Thailand, where conservative Buddhist values have sometimes posed obstacles to the community. The bill’s passage could also serve as a framework for LGBTQ+ laws in other countries in the region, as polls show growing support for the community.

SIGNALS

Semafor Signals: Global insights on today’s biggest stories.

Youth activism helped to change Thai attitudes around LGBTQ+ issues

Sources:  TIME Magazine, London School of Economics, Reuters, Voice of America, Thai.News

Thailand has faced hurdles in passing legal protections for LGBTQ+ people because of its conservative Buddhist culture — despite being known among tourists for its “‘ladyboy’ cabarets, and LGBTQ+ beachfront resorts,” TIME magazine reported. However, a rise in youth activism has led to more liberal attitudes, according to a researcher at the London School of Economics. Prime Minister Srettha Thavisin’s government — elected after months of student-led protests against the previous conservative government — vowed to reform conservative-era laws, such as the censorship of movies considered offensive for depicting LGBTQ+ themes. Prominent Buddhist monks have also become key voices in the movement for equality, breaking tradition by speaking out on gender and sexual politics. The latest bill is “a declaration of Thailand’s ethos” that marries open attitudes with deeply rooted Buddhist values, according to the editorial team of website Thai.News. “It solidifies Thailand’s reputation as a sanctuary for love,” they wrote.

Thailand’s framing of same-sex marriage as strengthening social fabric carries lessons for Southeast Asia

Sources:  Pew Research Center, The Diplomat, The Nation, Reuters

Most people in Cambodia, Vietnam, and Thailand support same-sex marriage, yet the issue has in the past gained little momentum because of governmental anxiety over identity politics, often seen as a cultural import of the West, Southeast Asia-based journalist David Hutt wrote for The Diplomat. Former Myanmar leader Aung San Suu Kyi, for instance, was a vocal LGBTQ+ rights supporter while in opposition, but once in office was silent on introducing any legislation. “Gender issues are not important” in Myanmar, one of her close aides said in a 2016 interview with The Daily Beast.

Thailand’s government has managed to advance the cause of same-sex marriage it by framing it around extending societal rights and family responsibilities to gay couples, rather than as granting equality to a historically oppressed minority. Making the case that marriage equality strengthens the social fabric is likely to be the more persuasive argument in Southeast Asia, Hutt wrote, adding that “Thailand should be an example that you get conservatives and reactionaries on board.”

Muslim-majority Southeast Asian countries are cracking down on LGBTQ+ people

Sources:  Reuters, Associated Press, CNN

While Thailand moves towards greater equality, Muslim-majority countries in Southeast Asia are becoming more resistant to LGBTQ+ movements within their borders. In Indonesia, gay rights groups have had to cancel events due to security threats from religious political leaders in the country, and Malaysia’s government has threatened prison time for people wearing pride-themed Swatch watches. Malaysia’s LGBTQ+ organizers, meanwhile, are hesitant to draw on outsiders’ support. In 2023, they slammed musician Matt Healy’s on-stage kiss with his male band-mate during a performance in Kuala Lumpur aimed at protesting Malaysia’s homophobic laws. Activists said the kiss “may have done more harm than good” by provoking the government to crack down further on the community, CNN reported. “He thought he was doing something for us, but it’s giving white savior complex,” one Malaysian drag performer told the outlet.



Source link

Judge in Trump “hush money” case sets April 15 trial date


Judge in Trump “hush money” case sets April 15 trial date – CBS News

Watch CBS News


On Monday, a New York appeals court slashed the bond in former President Donald Trump’s civil fraud case to $175 million. In his “hush money” case, a judge scheduled an April 15 trial date, rejecting Trump’s attempt for a further delay. CBS News’ Robert Costa and Major Garrett join to unpack the latest developments.

Be the first to know

Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.




Source link

Judge sets hearing date for Trump protective order in Jan. 6 case


Judge sets hearing date for Trump protective order in Jan. 6 case – CBS News

Watch CBS News


A federal judge set a hearing for Friday to address the special counsel’s request for a protective order in former President Donald Trump’s Jan. 6 case. Trump’s lawyers say the request is asking the court to censor his political speech. CBS News legal contributor Jessica Levinson breaks down the latest developments.

Be the first to know

Get browser notifications for breaking news, live events, and exclusive reporting.




Source link

Ohio ballot election sets the stage for a major abortion fight in November


Ohioans head to the polls Tuesday to decide whether to make it more difficult to pass ballot measures in the state.

Issue 1 would raise the threshold of support required to pass state constitutional amendments to 60% instead of a simple majority. Tuesday’s ballot measure says nothing about abortion rights, but the issue is at the heart of a fight that has received outsize attention for an off-year ballot election.

If Issue 1 passes, it will make it harder for a ballot measure enshrining abortion rights in the state constitution to pass this fall.

People vote in Kent, Ohio, on May 3, 2022.
People vote in Kent, Ohio, on May 3, 2022.Jeff Swensen / Getty Images file

Tuesday’s ballot measure would also toughen rules for groups trying to place future ballot measures before voters, as they would need to obtain signatures from voters in all of Ohio’s 88 counties, instead of the 44 now required. In addition, the measure would eliminate a 10-day “curing” period during which groups are currently allowed to gather additional signatures to replace any previous signatures that officials deem invalid.

Reproductive rights groups have long contended that Issue 1 is designed to make it harder for the abortion measure to pass, and several Republican lawmakers in the state have admitted so as well.

If voters pass the threshold measure Tuesday, then the proposed November ballot amendment to enshrine abortion rights in the state Constitution would need the support of 60% of voters to pass. If it fails, the November measure would need only a simple majority.

In January, Ohio Republicans enacted a law that effectively scrubbed August special elections from the state’s calendar, with several GOP state lawmakers calling them expensive, low-turnout endeavors that weren’t worth the trouble.

But months later, as reproductive rights groups moved closer to placing their own proposed constitutional amendment on the November ballot, state Republicans reversed themselves and scheduled the August election.

In June, local news outlets published a video of Republican Secretary of State Frank LaRose — a candidate for U.S. Senate — acknowledging that the purpose of the summertime ballot measure was “100% about keeping a radical pro-abortion amendment out of our constitution.”

Groups on both sides of the issue have spent millions of dollars on ads to turn out their supporters.

Protect Women Ohio, a prominent anti-abortion rights group and the biggest spender among groups supporting Issue 1, committed $9 million to television, radio and digital ads to run in the state.

The group has also so far committed $25 million for ads opposing the November ballot initiative.

Their ads largely highlight attempts to tie the proposals in both races to parental rights restrictions. The strategy has also leaned heavily into attacks on groups like the American Civil Liberties Union of Ohio, which Protect Women Ohio says is advocating to restrict parental rights. Nonpartisan experts, however, have said the ads are inaccurate and misleading, and reproductive rights advocates argue that they are misdirected and designed to distract voters from protecting abortion rights, an issue on which the public does not side with the anti-abortion rights movement.

On the other side, the main group working to defeat the August ballot measure, called One Person One Vote, has allocated more than $1.1 million to ads over the past two months. And officials with the reproductive rights coalition supporting the November amendment have said they plan to spend at least $35 million through November.

The ads by One Person One Vote focus mainly on the alleged hypocrisy of Republicans and highlight LaRose’s comments admitting the August measure was designed to make it harder to enshrine abortion rights in the Ohio Constitution.

Recent polling has suggested that groups hoping to pass Tuesday’s measure face an uphill battle: A USA Today/Suffolk University poll released last month found that 57% of registered Ohio voters said they opposed Issue 1, with 26% saying they supported it. Another 17% said they were undecided.

Raising the threshold for passage of any future constitutional amendments would mark a major shift in Ohio, where only a simple majority has been required since 1912. Several former Republican officeholders, including four GOP ex-governors, have publicly opposed the measure.

But if the measure were to pass, it would complicate the prospects of passage for the proposed November amendment. 

Public polling has shown that about 59% of Ohio voters support including abortion rights in the state Constitution — just shy of the newly proposed higher threshold.

The effort in Ohio to use the state Constitution to protect abortion rights closely mirrors others across the U.S. in the year since the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.

While abortion rights advocates enjoyed a clean sweep of victories last year in the six states — including in conservative states like Kentucky and Kansas — where abortion rights were on the ballot, voters in two states (progressive strongholds California and Vermont) passed pro-abortion rights measures with at least 60% of the vote. None of the anti-abortion rights measures were defeated with 60% or more of the vote.

The proposed November amendment in Ohio was designed to counteract Ohio’s “heartbeat bill,” which snapped into place immediately after the Supreme Court overturned Roe. That law effectively bans most abortions — with exceptions for the health of the pregnant woman and in cases of ectopic pregnancies — but remains temporarily blocked by a state judge.



Source link

High-stakes Ohio ballot measure sets the stage for another hostile Senate race


CLEVELAND — The first battle of Ohio’s Senate race — already awash in hostilities among the three Republicans angling to unseat Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown in 2024 — arrives Tuesday with a special election on a hot-button ballot measure.

One of the GOP candidates, Ohio Secretary of State Frank LaRose, is the highest-profile champion of Issue 1, which would raise the bar for voters to ratify future state constitutional amendments from the 50%-plus-one currently required to 60%.

If it passes, the new threshold would apply to a separate November ballot measure that’s aimed at enshrining abortion rights in the state Constitution, making it harder for Democrats to challenge the Republican stranglehold on power in Ohio and highlighting Brown’s lonely, endangered status in an increasingly red state.

LaRose’s central role in the ballot measure campaign has emerged as a tension point in the Senate primary. Losing would do little to ease those feelings.

He has argued that his two wealthy rivals for the nomination haven’t done enough to support Issue 1. A moderate by reputation who has heavily courted the GOP’s conservative base, LaRose also is facing scrutiny — on the right and the left — for emphasizing the abortion angle ahead of Tuesday’s vote, as well as for what his critics call a divided focus between his political ambitions and the special election he is responsible for administering.

“A victory on Tuesday will give LaRose a story to tell donors and some much-needed credibility with the conservative grassroots around the state,” said Scott Guthrie, a veteran of Republican Senate campaigns in Ohio who is not aligned with any of the 2024 candidates. “If the issue fails, LaRose will have spent the vital early days of his campaign as the face of a losing effort and he will be open to criticism from the already skeptical conservative base.”  

Reliable polling on Issue 1 has been scarce. A survey last month by USA Today and Suffolk University found 57% of respondents opposed to Issue 1. Both sides have poured millions of dollars into television advertisements, and Republican leaders in favor of the measure expressed optimism after seeing an uptick in early votes from rural counties.

“I don’t really give a darn whether it helps me or hurts me,” LaRose said in an interview with NBC News. “I’m confident we’ll win this. But even if we don’t, I think it’s better to fight and lose than to not fight at all when it’s a worthwhile cause.”

He rang alarm bells last week, though, when his Senate campaign called on businessman Bernie Moreno and state Sen. Matt Dolan — the other Republicans seeking the seat — to each contribute $1 million to the effort in support of Issue 1. 

Dolan, whose family owns the Cleveland Guardians, an MLB team, is already self-funding his Senate bid, while Moreno, a former car dealer, has the wealth to do so. And Moreno, through one of his companies, had already contributed $100,000 to the Protect Women Ohio Fund, which opposes the abortion rights amendment set for the November ballot.

Political watchers in the state saw LaRose’s plea as a signal that he was looking to spread the blame in the event of a defeat Tuesday. The rival campaigns dismissed it as a stunt. 

“It’s really sad that days before the monumental Issue 1 vote, Frank is spending his time humiliating himself and attacking fellow Republicans to the mainstream media,” Moreno spokesperson Conor McGuinness said. “While too many career politicians only seem to care about getting credit to advance their political careers, the only thing Bernie cares about is doing everything in his power to ensure Issue 1 passes.”

LaRose, an Army veteran and longtime politician, said he lacks the means to contribute financially to the cause. He did, however, help raise $1 million for Leadership for Ohio, a nonprofit group that launched ahead of his Senate bid and is now aligned with it.

LaRose said he did not urge the group to donate to Issue 1 in the months he was able to coordinate with the group, before he became an official candidate and campaign finance laws prohibited him from doing so. He asserted that he has put in “sweat equity” by promoting the measure at almost 70 events. 

Moreno and Dolan also have advocated for Issue 1 in their appearances across Ohio. 

Mike Gonidakis, president of Ohio Right to Life, which supports Issue 1, singled out LaRose and Moreno for praise while expressing frustration that the special election had digressed into Senate race showmanship.

“Bernie Moreno and Frank LaRose have been pillars during this entire endeavor for Issue 1 from start to finish,” he said. “I don’t keep a running ticker of who’s at the most events, but I can assure you that no one is working harder than Frank and Bernie on this. For either of them to start nitpicking each other, I think, is rather unfortunate.”

Gonidakis’ comments excluded Dolan, who emphasizes fiscal issues and border security while standing out as the only GOP contender who has not endorsed former President Donald Trump’s 2024 comeback bid. But Dolan’s campaign pointed to multiple events in which the state senator has plugged Issue 1. A senior adviser, Chris Maloney, also said Dolan would “actively oppose” the abortion rights measure in November.

“Matt Dolan has stepped up time and again, as a state leader but also in his personal capacity, and we’ve worked together to make sure Issue 1 is successful not just with words and resources, but through hard work,” Gayle Manning, a Republican state representative who has endorsed Dolan, said in a statement provided by his campaign.

No matter who the GOP nominee for Senate is next year, Brown can paint him as anti-abortion, a message that could be particularly potent if Issue 1 passes and the November measure fails with a majority short of 60%. With early polls showing LaRose leading the primary field and suggesting he is Brown’s strongest general election opponent, the secretary of state is already the focal point of Democratic attacks in one of the country’s premier Senate races.

“No matter the outcome, LaRose made himself the biggest loser and is now the face of an effort designed to help special interests and silence Ohioans,” said Reeves Oyster, Ohio Democratic Party spokesperson.

LaRose also is under scrutiny for how he’s talked about Issue 1 and how his office has administered the special election. Just last year, he characterized August elections as a shady way to pass ballot measures while voters are on summer vacation and paying little attention. (Statewide issues, he has since argued, are different because they generate widespread media coverage.) And Moreno has grumbled about LaRose’s comments at a spring GOP function, at which he described the Issue 1 vote in part as being “100% about keeping a radical pro-abortion amendment” out of the Ohio Constitution.

“He said it’s 100% about abortion, which has screwed up the messaging, because it’s 100% about protecting the Constitution,” Moreno said last month on the Common Sense Ohio podcast. 

Moreno added: “I don’t love that it’s being done in August.”

More recent problems include a scramble to secure enough poll workers before Tuesday’s vote and an email to voters from LaRose’s office last week that gave the wrong date for the special election. Critics wonder if LaRose is distracted or spread too thin. He announced his Senate campaign three weeks ago, right as the Issue 1 homestretch began. LaRose rejects the insinuation. 

“Those are political attacks by people with a political motivation,” he said. “The reality is that we’ve run the secretary of state’s office very well. I am personally somebody with a very high level of attention to detail.”

Ryan Stubenrauch, a veteran of Republican Gov. Mike DeWine’s campaigns in Ohio, said he is skeptical that LaRose’s campaign would be irreparably damaged by an Issue 1 loss. But he acknowledged the tricky politics of it. 

“There’s always a risk when you’re running statewide to take some position, especially on a statewide issue,” Stubenrauch said. “If it wins, he’s counting on getting a lot of credit. And if it loses, he’s hoping it’s not squarely on him.”





Source link

South Korea sets nationwide civil defense drill, citing North’s ‘provocations’


As tensions with North Korea spike, South Korea will hold its first nationwide civil defense drill in six years later this month, requiring most of the country’s 51 million residents to practice evacuating to shelters or underground safe spaces during the 20-minute exercise.

The drill, scheduled for 2 p.m. on Wednesday, August 23, will see many drivers required to pull over to the side of roads and the exits to subway stations closed with commuters required to remain inside, a statement from the South Korean Interior Ministry said.

“We expect to strengthen the response capacity of the nation through a practical drill reflecting the aspects of provocations of North Korea,” Prime Minister Han Duck-soo said in a news release this week.

The release said the 20-minute drill is part of a larger exercise to test the South Korean government’s response to potential threats including “advanced nuclear missile threats, cyber attacks, drone terrors, etc.”

The prime minister also called on South Koreans to take the drills seriously, something that hasn’t always been the case.

Many South Koreans have become resigned to the fact that much of the population would only have minutes to respond to any possible North Korean missile or airstrike.

The capital Seoul, for example, lies just 30 miles south of the demilitarized zone that separates the South from the North, which maintains a vast array of artillery along its border.

But Han said citizens should “follow the lead of the nation during the exercise and actively participate in it.”

Instructions from the Interior Ministry said 17,000 shelters would be open nationwide, and locations are searchable in popular Korean apps.

To minimize disruption to key services, the ministry said hospitals, airlines, railways, subways and commercial sea traffic would not be affected by the emergency drill.

It also said 13 areas of the country designated as a disaster zone following recent heavy rainfall would be excluded from the drill.

South Koreans have long become used to periods of fractious relations with the North, but the current level of tensions are especially high.

North Korea last month launched an intercontinental ballistic missile with its longest flight time ever, the latest advancement in a missile program that has been testing at a breakneck pace over the past two years under leader Kim Jong Un.

The launch of the Hwasong-18 missile was conducted “at a grave period when the military security situation on the Korean Peninsula and in the region has reached the phase of nuclear crisis beyond the Cold War,” a statement in North Korean state media said.

Later in July, a US Navy nuclear-capable ballistic missile submarine called in the South Korean port of Busan, prompting more threats from Pyongyang, with North Korean Defense Minister Kang Sun Nam saying the presence of the vessel may meet the country’s criteria for use of nuclear weapons.

Pyongyang tested short-range ballistic missiles after the US sub made its call in Busan.

Han, the South Korean prime minister, said the civil defense drill would be held in conjunction with large-scale US-South Korea military exercises that have drawn sharp criticism from Pyongyang in the past.

It will also come less than a week after South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol travels to the United States for a trilateral meeting with US President Joe Biden and Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, where “the continued threat posed by” North Korea will be on the agenda, according to a White House statement.

For more CNN news and newsletters create an account at CNN.com



Source link