Re “A fuel-efficient future,” editorial, Jan. 27How...

Re “A fuel-efficient future,” editorial, Jan. 27

How does adding a great burden ensure the survival of Detroit’s automakers? “Spending billions to retool” and building cars that would “cost consumers more” is a plan to keep our industry in business?

I never have seen a business plan that, in tough economic times, strives to make sure costs go up. I suppose it makes perfect sense to the government, as it approves more loans to the car companies.

The costs of a cleaner future

Richard Fisk

Granada Hills

::

Re “Obama makes move on emissions,” Jan. 26

Now that President Obama is directing the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider California’s request for a waiver to allow states to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles, it is important to recall the main motivation for that waiver request.

The California waiver request came about primarily because of the adamant refusal of the Bush-era EPA to take meaningful action on the issue. With new leadership in Washington, that situation should no longer exist, and the need for individual states to act should be moot.

An effective, all-encompassing national rule, in concert with similar efforts in Europe and Asia, would be far better than a patchwork of state regulations.

John Schutz

San Luis Obispo

cutline>##le-friday30#ke5s6cnc#2P30KQ0A# Associated Press## Ervin Lupoe and family.