Automotive News / Industry / Future Vehicle Discussion Automotive news and discussion about upcoming vehicles

New Fuel-Economy Rules To Spare BMW, Daimler .

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Jul 27, 2009 | 09:54 PM
  #1  
95redLT1's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,505
From: Charleston, WV
New Fuel-Economy Rules To Spare BMW, Daimler .

WTF? Why not Caddy & Lincoln as well?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124873997073285323.html

German luxury auto makers including BMW AG and Daimler AG's Mercedes-Benz are close to benefitting from a U.S. concession that will allow them and a few other foreign makers to keep selling cars that emit more greenhouse gases than those made by mass-market rivals such as General Motors Co. and Toyota Motor Corp.

Under a provision of a plan to curb greenhouse gas emissions, the Obama administration has proposed to set less stringent standards for car makers that sell fewer than 400,000 vehicles a year in the U.S. That target defines the major German brands as well as a few smaller Asian manufacturers such as Suzuki Motor Corp. and Mitsubishi Motors Corp.

The easier targets are expected to apply to a limited portion of a car maker's sales volume, and last for about four years -- unless the government grants an extension.

"Once companies become dependent on these provisions, they have an incentive to hire lobbyists and exert political pressure to extend those same provisions," said John Graham, who helped craft automobile fuel-economy regulations under President George W. Bush.

"The German provision" -- as it is known to industry lobbyists -- resembles a California law that effectively exempts some foreign car makers from having to meet the same emissions standards as their U.S. rivals. BMW and Daimler declined to say whether they lobbied for the provision.

In effect, the provision would make it easier for Mercedes to keep selling cars like its $147,000, 12-cylinder S600 sedan, rated at 13 miles per gallon, while GM or Toyota would be required to meet tougher mileage standards with smaller, more efficient cars.

The rules are expected to be formally proposed later this year by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Transportation to enforce the administration's mandate that makers boost the average fuel efficiency of their fleets to 35.5 miles mpg by 2016.

Executives from most major car makers doing business in the U.S. backed Mr. Obama's fuel economy plan at a White House ceremony in May.

"We wanted to make sure that the entire proposal was something the industry could support," said Jody Freeman, counselor in the White House Office of Energy and Climate Change, who helped negotiate the agreement among car makers.

Between 2007 and 2008, the U.S. collected $76 million in fines from German auto makers for violating fuel-economy regulations, according to a government report published this year. The German companies say the U.S. rules are unfair, since as makers of sporty, powerful vehicles they cannot offset their most gas-guzzling models with smaller, more fuel-efficient models as easily as can high-volume car manufacturers with broader product ranges.

A spokesman for GM -- now majority-owned by the federal government -- said the Obama administration's proposal "creates fewer concerns" than California's policy because it is expected to exempt only a quarter of each qualifying auto maker's fleet, rather than all vehicles sold by those companies. It also would be in effect for only four years, compared with seven under the California program.

Other industry experts and some former government policy makers take a more critical view of the administration's plan.

David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research at the University of Michigan, said the provision would hand "a distinct competitive advantage" to German and other exempted companies that compete with the major U.S. and Japanese brands in the U.S.

Daniel Becker, director of the Washington-based Safe Climate Campaign, which advocates tougher regulation of automotive fuel economy and greenhouse-gas emissions, said BMW and Mercedes "should be required to meet the same standards as General Motors and Ford."

"Once companies become dependent on these provisions, they have an incentive to hire lobbyists and exert political pressure to extend those same provisions," said John Graham, who helped craft automobile fuel-economy regulations under President George W. Bush.

Spokespeople for Daimler and BMW said the provision would be consistent with similar regulations adopted by the European Union as well as California regulators.

Vehicles made by Mercedes and some other lower-volume manufacturers, a Daimler spokesman added, "typically are heavier due to more safety equipment and enhanced electronics that are absent from vehicles in the large-volume manufacturer segment."

A spokesman for Porsche AG said the German sports-car company "will comply with any future fuel and emission standards but cannot discuss the details on how this will affect us until we have seen the key provisions and exact language of the rules."
Old Jul 27, 2009 | 10:05 PM
  #2  
Z284ever's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
w.t.f?

Last edited by Z284ever; Jul 27, 2009 at 10:12 PM.
Old Jul 27, 2009 | 10:17 PM
  #3  
formula79's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 3,698
From: USA
Originally Posted by Z284ever
w.t.f?
So make it easier for smaller, foriegn companies?
Old Jul 27, 2009 | 10:20 PM
  #4  
OutsiderIROC-Z's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 2,688
From: Middle of Kansas
Well isn't that just f**king wonderful...
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 01:14 AM
  #5  
AdioSS's Avatar
West South Central Moderator
 
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 3,371
From: Kilgore TX 75662
If Cadillac and Lincoln were not a part of GM and FoMoCo, then they would probably be eligible also.

I wonder if SAAB and Saturn will be eligible now that they are owned by Koenigsegg and Penske instead of GM? Maybe GM could "split up" the brands to get around this?
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 01:29 AM
  #6  
Z28x's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Originally Posted by formula79
So make it easier for smaller, foriegn companies?
Or small American companies like AM General, Saturn, and Tesla.

Last edited by Z28x; Jul 28, 2009 at 01:34 AM.
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 01:38 AM
  #7  
DAKMOR's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,406
From: Philaduhphia
i always wondered why any of them were even allowed to sell their cars in california without a huge tax add-on. now i know, lobbysits.
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 02:04 AM
  #8  
SSbaby's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2005
Posts: 3,123
From: Melbourne, Australia
That's a joke isn't it?

Then persons will either be complaining or gloating about the fact that the GM vehicles are not as 'efficient' as the German/Imported brands.

It's a case of haves vs have nots!
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 02:46 AM
  #9  
teal98's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,132
From: Santa Clara, CA
Originally Posted by 95redLT1
WTF? Why not Caddy & Lincoln as well?
You mean GM and Ford. I would think that Lexus, Infiniti, and Audi will be in the same boat as Caddy and Lincoln, while Jaguar and Saab will be in the happier BMW/Mercedes boat.
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 07:11 AM
  #10  
Z28Wilson's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Nothing like a level playing field is there?
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 09:01 AM
  #11  
Ed 2001 SS's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 499
From: Miami, Fl USA
Originally Posted by Z28Wilson
Nothing like a level playing field is there?
Looks like American automakers can't even catch a break on their own turf.
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 09:08 AM
  #12  
Plague's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,448
From: Irving, TX
This makes no sense. All cars makers should have to play by the same rules.
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 09:08 AM
  #13  
Darth Xed's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 8,504
From: Ohio
This is lame.

Why would exceptions to this rule be predicated on sales volume? It's like saying nobody is allowed to **** in the pool, unless you belong to a family with less than 5 members... then it's OK.

Old Jul 28, 2009 | 09:22 AM
  #14  
Sixer-Bird's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,215
From: Coppell, Texas
Looks like MB and BMW leaned hard on their political correspondents. Good to know that German interests can get such quick results here in America.

As Jay said to Silent Bob: "I swear the whole f'ing world's against us."
Old Jul 28, 2009 | 09:29 AM
  #15  
Z28x's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Originally Posted by Darth Xed
This is lame.

Why would exceptions to this rule be predicated on sales volume? It's like saying nobody is allowed to **** in the pool, unless you belong to a family with less than 5 members... then it's OK.

With out the rule you would have no Ferrari or niche companies.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:30 PM.