From the article:
April 18 (Bloomberg)-- Chevron Corp. helped write California's first-in-the-nation law ordering reduced carbon emissions from cars and trucks. Now Chevron is active in lobbying and public relations efforts to undercut the mandate. Bloomberg's Kevin Thrash reports.(Source: Bloomberg)
Yes. As they reported they were included in creating the law. THe motive for now defying it is the point.
From the article:
“We’ve looked at 100 feedstocks, 50 conversion technologies, worked to shape this law the best we can, and we have not come up with a solution to be able to comply,” said Rhonda Zygocki, Chevron’s executive vice president of policy and planning, in a Feb. 4 talk at the Commonwealth Club in San Francisco. Rick Zalesky, the Chevron official who celebrated the order’s signing with Schwarzenegger, was blunt last June when he declared the low-carbon standard “not achievable.”
Yet the justification they use in 'not achievable' is that it isn't profitable as oil. i.e it is not achievable with the same fat profits and subsidies as with conventional oil.
Remember ethanol? From food stock? We know producing ethanol is more costly both financially and environmentally; and producing it from food stock is relatively easy.
That is YOUR claim. The facts have two focusses.
1: It is important as an oxygenator and octane booster, replacing a very toxic compound recently justifying a major fine from toxic contamination and also lowering the refining necessary to product 'base stock' for gasoline.
2: The VAST majority of corn is used for industrial and feedstock. Nobody will go hungry due to the small diversion of corn for ethanol, and very low grade (damaged by drought) corn may be used, which is NOT in demand for other processes. For that matter, a lot of ethanol is produced by other grains such as wheat.
The lack of context and nuance in your post shows that you are just an 'one topic troll'.