Court rejects challenge to California’s clean air rules trump said he’d kill
The US Supreme Court today rejected a bid by Ohio and other states to stop California from implementing its own clean air rules, a legal right that California has had since the 60s which Donald Trump has repeatedly tried and failed to remove.
Ever since the 1960s, California has been able to set its own clean air rules, as long as they are at least as strict as federal clean air rules. California was granted this waiver in the Clean Air Act as recognition of its unique air quality challenges.
When the link between gasoline-burning vehicles and smog was discovered, California was building its own clean air rules at the same time as the federal government was.
At the time (and still), Los Angeles was choked with smog. The city is built around car transportation (after public transit in the city was destroyed by literal cartoon villians), has unique geography which traps smog above most of its population, and is also currently home to the largest container ports in America, through which ~40% of the country’s containerized traffic now comes.
The central valley of California is also home to a lot of smog – with the most agriculturally productive land in the country producing half of the nation’s fruits, nuts and vegetables. But it’s surrounded by mountains, and smog has nowhere to go.
Since the federal government didn’t want to pre-empt efforts that were already underway in California (under then-Governor Ronald Reagan), and acknowledging that California’s challenges were unique, it allowed the EPA to review California’s rules and grant it a waiver to run under its own clean air regulations as long as they are at least as good as the EPA’s.
Other states are allowed to follow these rules, but only if they copy them exactly. These are known as “section 177 states,” named after the section of the Clean Air Act that grants this waiver, or “CARB” states, named for the California Air Resources Board which creates the state’s regulations.
So for the last 60 years, California has mostly run under its own clean air rules. There was a brief period during the Obama administration where California and federal rules were harmonized – but industry lobbying and the meddling of an ignorant reality TV host resulted in a shattering of that harmony, giving companies a more difficult regulatory environment.
These clean air rules have been a success, resulting in a >98% reduction in vehicle-based pollutants in the LA area, even as total vehicle miles traveled have gone up (and that news was from 2012 – it’s gotten even better since then due to EVs).
However, there’s still more work to be done, as LA and the nearby Inland Empire still have quite dirty air.
And so, California released a new set of clean air rules in 2022, which the EPA is expected to approve this week.
But other states immediately challenged those rules, despite that the rules do not affect them.
The challenge was brought by Ohio and 16 other republican-led states who sought to end the California’s long-supported state’s right to protect its residents from dirty air.
The states argued that the Constitution doesn’t allow the government to treat states unequally (despite that all of the states bringing the lawsuit have more Congressional representation per capita than California does), so letting California set clean air rules is unfair. The states seem to think that Californians should be required to breathe just as much poison as their republican leadership is forcing onto their citizens.
The case has already made its way through the court system, with courts reasonably ruling that the law, which has been effective for 60 years at reducing pollution and health costs for Californians and other CARB states, should stand. In April, the DC court of appeals affirmed California’s right.
But that wasn’t enough for Ohio and the 16 republican states, who brought their desire to poison Californians all the way so the Supreme Court of the United States.
That Court today denied the states’ petition, thus affirming the DC Court’s decision will stand. 8 of the 9 individuals sitting on the Court agreed not to review the case and to let the lower court’s decision stand, though Clarence Thomas stated that he would have taken the case.
In addition, last Friday, while the Court did agree to hear a case involving an oil industry challenge to California’s clean air rules, that case is narrowly limited to the issue of standing, or deciding what entities are allowed to bring cases to court. When it accepted that petition, the Court said it will not consider review of California’s right to set its own emissions standards.
Electrek’s Take
Well, I’ll take this as my opportunity to eat a little bit of crow. Even as late as last week, I thought there was a good chance the Court would torture itself into some sort of extra-legal reasoning to try to stop California’s rules, as it has before on CO2 emissions and Chevron deference.
But on Friday and today, the Court denied review of not one but two separate cases in that respect, so it seems like it either doesn’t want to hear cases about California’s well-established legal authority – or perhaps that it’s just waiting until the time is right to strike. We’ll have to see which one it is – I still don’t trust them given their explicit corruption, but we can take a breath for now.
All of this happens just over a month before convicted felon Donald Trump, who finally received more votes than his opponent on his third attempt (despite committing treason in 2021, for which there is a clear legal remedy), will once again find himself squatting in the White House. Mr. Trump has stated repeatedly that he wants to reverse clean air policies, thus saddling Americans with dirtier air, higher costs and poorer health, and to destroy the US EV market and send US manufacturing jobs to China.
And one of his common targets has been California, the state that has done the most in favor of advancing clean air – which is obviously anathema to a dirty air advocate like himself. He has signaled that he wants to “rip up” California’s waiver, an effort which he tried and failed to do before. So expect a fight to come in the coming years, with California once again on the side of clean air, and Mr. Trump once again on the side of poisoning Americans.
If you’d like your electric vehicle to be even cleaner, charge it at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Environment
HappyRun G300 Pro review: It’s an electric motorcycle with pedals and I’ve got some thoughts
The HappyRun G300 Pro is the epitome of an out-of-class electric bike. That is to say, it has many of the components of an electric bicycle, key among them the functional pedals, but its extremely high power and speed place it well outside the limits of traditional e-bike classifications. The result? Basically, an electric motorcycle with pedals. And I’ve got some thoughts about that.
But before I dive into those, this is one of those rides that you’ll want to see in action. Check out my review video below. Then keep reading for the full details.
HappyRun G300 Pro Video Review
HappyRun G300 Pro Tech Specs
- Motor: 3,000W continuous and 6,500W peak-rated rear hub motor
- Top speed: Up to 50 mph (80 km/h)
- Range: Claimed up to 70 miles (121 km)
- Battery: 72V 30Ah (2,160 Wh)
- Weight: Heavy (well off the scale on my 100 lb scale)
- Brakes: Quad-piston DYISLAND hydraulic disc brakes
- Front suspension: inverted front fork
- Rear suspension: “Yopi Box” rear spring suspension
- Extras: Looks like a Sur Ron or Talaria-style bike, color LED display, included fenders, LED headlight and tail light with turn signals, very nice kickstand, two color options available.
What is this even for?
Despite looking like a bicycle in some regards, I definitely felt wrong using this in the bike lane. That meant for 95% of my road riding, I was simply in the lane like a motorbike. The only times I would use the bike lane were when I could see it was completely empty, and it was basically just a shortcut past the stopped traffic at red lights. And even then, it just didn’t sit right with me. I’m an e-biker and I live a car free life, so the safety of bike lanes is an important issue for me. I’m not going to jeopardize other riders or even make them feel unsafe in the tiny little sliver of asphalt that is supposed to feel like home for us, and so I ride this thing in the road when I’m on the road.
That being said, I don’t even think the road is the right place for this bike. Where it really shines is off-road. Between the long travel suspension, the enduro-style seat, and the unnecessarily high power for commuting purposes, the HappyRun G300 Pro is at home in the dirt and on the trails. In fact, I even enjoyed overlanding on it, going places where trails couldn’t take me. It felt like a great exploring-the-outdoors type of ride!
If you watch my video above, you’ll see that this type of riding, recreational and exploring, is where the HappyRun G300 Pro really came into its own, and I think that’s precisely where it belongs. Just like how Sur Rons and Talarias shouldn’t really be taking over the streets, but instead should stick to the dirt trails they excel at, this is a great bike for that purpose. You’ll also notice in the video that I prefer to wear my motorcycle gear when I ride these types of bikes, and I’d make that recommendation to anyone else. A t-shirt and a bike helmet just don’t feel like enough here.
With that in mind, the included bicycle pedals start to seem superfluous though, and I really only pedaled at slow speeds, or when ghost pedaling because a cop was in the area and I didn’t want to get a bike impounded before I was even done reviewing it. So if you ask me, it doesn’t really need the pedals, and it doesn’t even really need the roads.
What about the build?
The HappyRun G300 Pro is an interesting mix of quality parts and merely acceptable parts. Nothing about it seemed terrible or dangerous, and a few components like the Sur Ron kickstand actually impressed me. But then the use of a bicycle-level handlebar stem and budget-level shocks seems to undercut that message.
On the other hand, the massive 72V 30Ah battery is huge and likely more than most people would need. I’d have preferred to see it being UL-listed, but I guess at least it claims to be underwritten by some Chinese insurance agency. I guess that’s better than nothing?
The geometry actually kind of sticks the landing, at least for me and my 170 cm (5’7″) height. The saddle is plenty comfortable, though my off-roading had me out of the saddle much of the time anyway and letting my legs join the full-suspension to better absorb the terrain.
What’s my verdict?
Here’s the thing: nothing about this bike is top shelf, but it still offers an incredibly fun, solid feeling ride. The power is more than most people need, the speed is faster than most people should ride (especially on trails), and the battery has more capacity than most people would require. So it’s not like they’re cutting corners on performance.
Some components could have been beefed up, and the decision to lean more towards bicycle-level components does make me question what a few years of hard off-road riding could do to this bike. But when used correctly, in an area where the bike is meant to be used (i.e., not where it legally isn’t allowed to be ridden), then it seems to fulfill the role of a fun adventure-style bike. At a price of $2,599 (or $100 off with the code ELECTREK), it significantly undercuts the cost of a Sur Ron or Talaria bike while giving a similar type of ride, even if the components don’t live up to the level of those costlier light electric dirt bikes.
My biggest worry, though, isn’t about the bike, but rather the potential for it to be misused. Look, it’s a fun ride and offered me more performance than I needed for all the different types of riding I tested it with. But like any bike, it has to be used in its element. We don’t blame the hammer if someone hits their thumb while driving a nail, and we shouldn’t blame the bike if someone wraps it around a parking meter. But it also really shouldn’t be used in that kind of environment, and it definitely shouldn’t be used in a way that could put others at risk.
It’s a fun ride for exploring, but this level of power requires some serious personal responsibility. If you’re a parent wondering if you should get this for your 16-year-old, the answer is probably “No.” But if you’ve got a fully developed prefrontal cortex and you want a fast and powerful ride without breaking the bank, this might be a decent option.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Toyota is finally getting into the game in the world’s largest EV market. On Friday, Toyota officially broke ground on the new Lexus EV plant in Shanghai, its first fully owned manufacturing facility in China and the second in the region, following Tesla.
Toyota is building a new Lexus EV plant in China
After officially announcing it would open a wholly-owned EV plant in China to build new energy vehicles (NEVs) for its luxury Lexus brand in February, Toyota is already kicking off construction.
Toyota finalized a deal with the Shanghai government on April 22 to build the facility. Just over two months later, the company is making swift progress in what’s being called “Lexus speed” locally.
The facility, which spans roughly 1.13 million square meters, could be one of Toyota’s most important to date. Following Tesla, which broke ground on its Shanghai Gigafactory in early 2019, Toyota is the second foreign automaker to construct a wholly owned auto plant in Shanghai.
Construction is expected to be completed in August 2026, with production set to commence in 2027. According to local news outlet The Paper, the facility will be capable of producing up to 100,000 NEVs annually.
Although Toyota will use the new standalone Lexus plant to accelerate EV output, it will also be used to develop vehicles tailored to local buyers.
Since the plant is overseas in Shanghai Bay Area Hi-Tech Zone, Toyota established a “two-line collaboration,” which will enable “24-hour uninterrupted work.”
The first Lexus electric vehicle is scheduled to roll off the assembly line in 2027. Much like for Tesla, local authorities are providing generous support.
For example, the Jinshan District Investment Promotion Office introduced an “order-based” business agreement, addressing Toyota’s “demand list” in advance.
Electrek’s Take
Toyota will use the new Lexus plant as it looks to keep pace with BYD and other domestic EV leaders in China. After launching several new vehicles over the past few months, the Japanese automaker is already starting to gain some traction.
After launching the bZ3X in March, Toyota’s electric SUV was the best-selling foreign EV in China in April, its second month on the market.
Toyota’s electric SUV already outsold the Volkswagen ID.3, ID.4 Crozz, and BMW i3. The bZ3X is Toyota’s most affordable EV, launched in China with a starting price tag of just 109,800 yuan, or about $15,000.
Earlier this month, Toyota launched another electric SUV, the bZ5. The bZ5 is about the size of Tesla’s Model Y, but costs about half as much in China, starting at 129,800 yuan ($18,000).
These electric SUVs are significantly more advanced and feature-rich than the Toyota vehicles we’re accustomed to seeing. They feature advanced smart driving tech, massive touchscreens, and some added bonuses like a built-in refrigerator.
During its EV Tech Day event earlier this month, Toyota’s joint venture, GAC Toyota, announced partnerships with several “car industry bigwigs,” including Huawei, Xiaomi, and Momenta.
Can Toyota keep pace in China with an intensifying EV price war and influx of new low-cost domestic rivals? So far, the new vehicles are helping.
In April, Toyota’s sales in China increased by 20% compared to the same period last year, with 142,754 vehicles sold. Through May, Toyota’s sales are up 7.7% with 530,000 vehicles sold.
Source: The Paper
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Tesla has hired Henry Kuang, the former ‘Head of Autonomy’ at GM’s failed self-driving startup, Cruise.
The automaker has had difficulties with turnover in its Autopilot and self-driving division.
Tesla has lost many leaders over the years and the departures have ramped up as of late. Here’s a list of Tesla leaders related to Autopilot and self-driving efforts who have left the company:
| Name | Role | Departure |
|---|---|---|
| Sterling Anderson | Head of Autopilot | Jan 2016 |
| Chris Lattner | VP, Autopilot Software | Jun 2017 |
| Jim Keller | VP, Autopilot Hardware | Apr 2018 |
| Andrej Karpathy | Dir. AI & Autopilot Vision | Jul 2022 |
| Zheng Gao | Dir. Autopilot Hardware | Dec 2024 |
| Marc Van Impe | Global Vehicle Automation & Safety Policy | –2024 |
| Drew Baglino | SVP Powertrain & Energy Engineering | Apr 15, 2024 |
| David Lau | VP, Software Engineering | Early Apr 2025 |
| Milan Kovac | VP, Optimus Engineering (ex-Autopilot engineer) | Jun 6, 2025 |
| Omead Afshar | Senior Executive (AI/Robotics/Roadmap) | Late Jun 2025 |
Meanwhile, there haven’t been many high-profile hires as Tesla prefers to hire younger, more junior engineers and promote within.
Amidst brand damage in recent years, Tesla has also faced more difficulties securing top hires. A recent leaked recording from a Tesla training session confirmed that the automaker has had a culture problem within its workforce.
However, Electrek has found a rare new executive-level hire in Tesla’s self-driving division.
According to his LinkedIn profile, Henry Kuang has been hired by Tesla as “Director of AI and Deep Learning for Autonomous Driving.”
Kuang was a long-time Facebook engineer who joined Cruise in 2020 to lead the perception team and later became Senior Director in charge of Autonomy:
Cruise was founded in 2013 to develop self-driving technology. It was acquired by GM in 2016. It operated its own self-driving fleet independently of GM, but it also contributed to the development of the automaker’s ADAS system.
A series of accidents and failures in 2023 led the company to withdraw its fleet of over 100 self-driving vehicles from the road.
They have tried to bring back their autonomous ride-hailing service in California, but GM announced that it would stop funding the company in December and commenced a restructuring to entirely discontinue autonomous fleet operations and fold some of Cruise into GM’s ADAS operations for consumer vehicles.
Kuang has reportedly exited Cruise in 2024 and now joined Tesla last month, according to an update on his LInkedIn profile.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike