Congress OKs CAFE hike

House approved it by a 314-100 margin yesterday, Senate approved it last week and Bush is expected to sign it today. I hope the US automakers can adapt.

Anyone notice they cut out programs for wind and solar while leaving in the tax subsidies for big oil. That seems counter productive to what the CAFE increase is supposed to achieve.

Bush wouldn't sign it any other way. IIRC, he has a lot of stake in Oil companies......:mad:

Whats real scarey is that "13 states are trying to impose their own more stringent standards that would require a 30% reduction in vehicle tailpipe emissions by 2016. Those rules, which would start in 2009, would require an average of 43.7 mpg for passenger cars, which is far above the new federal mandate. California needs a waiver under the Clean Air Act to put its new rules in place because its proposal would regulate carbon dioxide from tailpipe emissions. In April, the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA had the right to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. The EPA has said it will make its decision on California's waiver request by year's end." By David Shepardson, Detroit News Washington Bureau.

YIKES!

People are getting carried away with this Climate change stuff. Wayyyy carried away.

Anyone notice they cut out programs for wind and solar while leaving in the tax subsidies for big oil. That seems counter productive to what the CAFE increase is supposed to achieve.

[censored] ass kissing [censored] :mad:

Whats real scarey is that "13 states are trying to impose their own more stringent standards that would require a 30% reduction in vehicle tailpipe emissions by 2016. Those rules, which would start in 2009, would require an average of 43.7 mpg for passenger cars, which is far above the new federal mandate. California needs a waiver under the Clean Air Act to put its new rules in place because its proposal would regulate carbon dioxide from tailpipe emissions. In April, the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA had the right to regulate carbon dioxide as a pollutant. The EPA has said it will make its decision on California's waiver request by year's end." By David Shepardson, Detroit News Washington Bureau.

YIKES!

As someone who has lived in Cali many years, I can say with all honesty that California is a schizophrenic state.

We have the highest number of cars per person of an state in the US. We have perhaps the most liberal state speed enforcement of just about any highly populous state (most rural interstate streches, the CHP won't even pull you over unless you're doing over 85). Southern California has a massive concentration of speed and aftermarket shops and companies. Pretty much every automotive fad begins in California.We have the highest concentration of Camaros, Mustangs, Hummers, BMWs, and just about any performance oriented car you can imagine. Even in treehugging areas of Northern California, we have world famous racetracks like Laguna Seca smack in Monterey and the former Sears (now Infineon Raceway) just North of San Francisco, right smack in the middle of wine country. One of the biggest antique shows on the planet, Concours de Elegance, is just between Carmel and Monterey.

Yet... we have some of the most vocal and retarded treehuggers in the world.

Even in San Francisco, there seems to be a generally moderate community that's drowned out by a smaller group that feels things done here (a city with the population of Denver... both nearby San Jose and Oakland have much larger populations) is going to dictate to the world how things should be.

I can assure you that most people in California are at least indifferent to being granted waivers and setting it's own greenhouse standards... as long as it doesn't affect their own ability to buy SUVs or performance cars (one measure attempting to rein in sales of large SUVs failed not to long ago). But when that line's crossed, that seems to be the point where the adults come in and bring the childeren that run our politics here under control.

The Governator is highly popular, and if anyone is going to get any "Green" legislation for California pushed through the US congress, it's him. But his term's going to be over soon.

Remember, California elected Arnold after recalling and kicking out a Governor that went too far off on the liberal side. The next governor is going to be a regular politician... and won't get as much of a free ride.

From the same article: "The bill will for the first time require the largest work trucks to meet efficiency standards-vehicles exempted from regulation when the fuel economy rules were created [in 1975]."
This sucks. I wonder what the exempt GVW will be moved up to. Will a fuel efficient 3/4 ton truck be able to pull a 10,000 pound trailer?
"The house bill also droped the so-called Porsche exemption for small manufacturers that sell 64,000 vehicles or less in the United States."
Will there be a resurgence in grey market cars?
"The legislation also calls for boosting ethanol production significantly. Next year, the bill requires 9 billion gallons of ethanol be produced, up from 7 billion this year, and the target jumps to 11.1 billion gallons by 2009. The impact of this increase will extend beyond the auto industry, which promotes ethanol as an alternative to gasoline, because ethanol is produced from corn in the United States. The price of corn has doubled amid growing demand for ethanol and animal feed prices are up about 25 percent this year, in large part due to rising corn prices. House speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., called the deal "groundbreaking." She touted the fact that the bill was delivered to the White House Tuesday in a hybrid Toyota Prius."
Well, the farmers should be happy.

I think the CAFE goal is good, sound, and reasonable. Every US automaker is capable of reaching these new goals in 13 years easily, with one hand tied behind their back unless gas drops back to $1 per gallon.

I imagine the "Porsche Rule" simply means the fines will be passed on to Porsche buyers. I'm not in the market for a new Porsche, nor do I suspect the profile of a Porsche buyer includes cost conscious as a factor, so I don't see that as a issue.

The 2 issues I have with this bill is first, it dumps the tax on oil companies. Gas consumption hasn't gone into the stratosphere over the past few years, yet prices have doubled and when oil companies suddenly make more profit than any other corperation in all history (supposedly by selling less fuel that's supposedly more expensive to import as oil) then it doesn't take much to see something's amiss.

The second issue I have with this bill is it's blind, and actually quite stupid Ethanol production goals.

New ethanol production goals are to rise to 11 billion gallons per year by 2009.

The US uses 10.1 billion BARRELS of oil per day!

To make matters even worse, it takes more ethanol to get the same power as you do from gasoline.

If that's not bad enough, as noted, given a choice between selling grain for food or getting more by selling it for fuel, food is going to lose out and we're seeing the results in higher grain prices that's going to drive up food prices.

The second issue I have with this bill is it's blind, and actually quite stupid Ethanol production goals.

New ethanol production goals are to rise to 11 billion gallons per year by 2009.

The US uses 10.1 billion BARRELS of oil per day!

To make matters even worse, it takes more ethanol to get the same power as you do from gasoline.

If that's not bad enough, as noted, given a choice between selling grain for food or getting more by selling it for fuel, food is going to lose out and we're seeing the results in higher grain prices that's going to drive up food prices.

The only thing I can think of is that ethanol will be used as an additive for fuel, in much the same way as it is in many states (10% in MO and IL). Perhaps they are trying to reduce the other additives used?:confused: Just thinking out loud.

How do cars like the volt factor into the CAFE measurements? If I drive a volt and keep in under 40 miles a trip then it will never use the gas powered generator. So that means 1000's and 1000's of miles without a single drop of gas.

B

The US uses 10.1 billion BARRELS of oil per day!No way. The number is in the 10s of millions.

Your point is valid, though. Banking on corn ethanol is stupid. Which is why we should be pushing (read funding) for other methods of production.

I heard on NBC news tonight that the EPA/supreme court has shot down and denied the tougher emissions and higher CAFE requirements that at least 13 states wanted to enact.
Thats good news but it was also stated that California was going to file a class action law suit to overturn the decision.