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

35 MPG CAFE by 2019 might become a reality

Old May 8, 2007 | 12:22 PM
  #1  
scott9050's Avatar
Thread Starter
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 1999
Posts: 1,547
From: Panhandle of West Virginia
35 MPG CAFE by 2019 might become a reality

I don't see this being good for performance:

WASHINGTON -(Dow Jones)- The U.S. Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee is likely to approve on Tuesday a bill that would increase fuel efficiency standards in combined automaker's passenger car and light truck fleets to 35 miles a gallon by 2019.

Although the legislation has been opposed by both the U.S. and international auto industries - which fear it may be another costly measure that adds to ongoing financial woes - a new amendment offered late last week as well as many of the provisions in the bill may appease the sector's concerns and reflect their lobbying power.

If passed by the panel, it is likely to face debate in the Senate given that some view it as too weak, although the dialog is expected to be more over the details of how Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, is reformed rather than if it is reformed. A raft of proposed CAFE bills both in the House of Representatives and the Senate all push for improved efficiency to at least 35 miles per gallon.

Higher fuel efficiency is seen as one aspect of a broad energy package that lawmakers are piecing together under the Democrat-controlled Congress as majority leaders seek to reduce U.S. dependency on foreign crude supplies and cut greenhouse gas emissions thought to cause global warming. CAFE reform - along with other energy legislation, is likely to gain political momentum as gasoline prices are expected to hit record highs during the summer driving season.

The committee is scheduled to mark up Sen. Dianne Feinstein's, D-Calif., S. 357, or the Ten-in-Ten bill, which would increase fuel efficiency of the nation's combined fleets of passenger cars and light trucks by 10 miles per gallon from 2009 to 2019. The bill is co-sponsored and supported by several key Senate Democrats, including Commerce Committee Chairman Daniel Inouye, D-Hawaii, and Chair of Environment and Public Works Committee, Barbara Boxer, D-Calif.

Current law requires each automaker's fleet must average 27.5 miles a gallon for cars and 22.5 miles a gallon for light trucks for model year 2008.

Competing against alternative versions of varying degrees of stringency and application, under tough lobbying from auto manufacturers and even opposition from the Democrats' own ranks, Feinstein's bill seems to seek to walk a line of compromise between conflicting concerns of CAFE advocates and manufacturers.

Environmentalists and advocates for higher CAFE standards have been pushing for strict 40 miles per gallon reform that wouldn't allow for off-ramps if the annual increase was economically unfeasible to implement. They claim fuel efficiency technology is advanced enough to move ahead at a rapid pace.

Domestic car manufacturers such as the Chrysler unit of DaimlerChrysler AG ( DCX), Ford Motor Co. (F) and General Motors Corp. (GM) worry that re-tooling plants and re-designing their entire fleets may cause further economic trouble for the distressed industry. In the past decade, they've relied prominently on U.S. consumer's desire for heavy and power-hungry sports utility vehicles and have recently suffered a series of billion-dollar losses and job cuts. Foreign car makers such as Toyota Motor Corp. (TM) and Honda Motor Co. (HMC) worry they won't get credit for advances they've made in fuel efficient cars; their fleets are already near-to or surpassing reform targets.

But Feinstein told the Commerce panel at a hearing last week, "Neither American nor foreign manufacturers will be especially advantaged or disadvantaged. Each manufacturer will have to improve the vehicles it makes to meet the standards that the (Administration) sets."

Heeding industry's recommendations, Feinstein's bill would be based on size and weight and give the National Highway Traffic Administration the authority to set the fuel efficiency standards each year for each vehicle class. The standards set would ultimately bring the nationwide average for combined light trucks and passenger cars to 35 miles a gallon by 2019, starting in model year 2010. Although each manufacturer would have to meet a standard determined by the administration, if its fleets don't meet the requirement, it could buy credits from those companies whose fleets were over the required CAFE level.

Michael Stanton, president of the Association of International Automobile Manufacturers, said his members prefer that Congress not to set specific targets, but rather let the Department of Transportation establish rule-making based on the rate of technological advance and economic feasibility. "AIAM unequivocally opposes the adoption of a uniform percentage improvement standards format, or any other similarly discriminatory program," Stanton told the panel last week. "Simply put, such standards represent bad public policy," he said.

Environmentalists and advocates for tougher standards are likely to be disgruntled about an amendment proffered by panel chairman Inouye and ranking member Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, that allows the administration to lower the rate of annual improvement if it deems it economically unfeasible, the off-ramp that industry was seeking. Feinstein was a co-sponsor of the amendment.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers - which has called the target unattainable - also wants the committee to ax the provision that combines the car and light truck CAFE standards, said Alliance President Dave McCurdy. Starting with the 2010 model year, the overall car and truck fleet would face an increase in CAFE requirements of more than 40% by 2019, he said.

"Based on today's 50/50 split between cars and light trucks, achieving this level would require the car fleet to reach nearly 40 miles a gallon and the truck fleet to reach nearly 32 miles a gallon," McCurdy said.
Old May 8, 2007 | 12:32 PM
  #2  
stereomandan's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,620
From: Saginaw, Michigan
I'd prefer the market to drive the demand for fuel efficient cars, not mandates from government or radical environmentalists.

Dan
Old May 8, 2007 | 12:38 PM
  #3  
bbqz28's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 61
From: Birmingham, AL
Originally Posted by stereomandan
I'd prefer the market to drive the demand for fuel efficient cars, not mandates from government or radical environmentalists.

Dan
I agree wholeheartedly
Old May 8, 2007 | 01:54 PM
  #4  
Z28x's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Originally Posted by stereomandan
I'd prefer the market to drive the demand for fuel efficient cars, not mandates from government or radical environmentalists.

Dan
To slow consumption they would have to add more fuel tax then instead of raising CAFE. Or maybe just a $1000 per MPG tax on new and used cars that come in under say 25mpg combined. That would slow demand for gas guzzlers while allowing those with the means to still be able to buy a Hummer or Bentley.

The last thing I want is gov't GPS on my car, I'd rather have a fuel tax than a GPS based mileage tax.
Old May 8, 2007 | 02:10 PM
  #5  
graham's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,887
From: northeast Miss.
How is that supposed to work with that weak burning E85 their helping the farmers get rich with?
Old May 8, 2007 | 02:21 PM
  #6  
mastrdrver's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,817
From: O-Town
Say goodby to all trucks and SUVs. There is no way that you can make a current gas truck or SUV pass 35mpg average. There are only a hand full of cars that currently do it, and they are either hybrids or the small economy cars.

This is a joke.
Old May 8, 2007 | 02:46 PM
  #7  
shock6906's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,577
From: Sandy VJJville
Those are some pretty lofty goals and I just don't see it happening, especially for the trucks. Not if they want the trucks to have the same utility that they have now. Also, are these new standards to be met on the new mile per gallon figures or the old MPG figures? If it's the new figures that have to meet those standards, it's just going to be that much harder to make happen.
Old May 8, 2007 | 03:29 PM
  #8  
graham's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,887
From: northeast Miss.
Its a shame the public cant vote on social issues like this. (no need to give me a lesson on how we elect officials that represent us and what not. I fully understand how it works and you know what I mean)
Old May 8, 2007 | 03:37 PM
  #9  
shock6906's Avatar
Banned
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,577
From: Sandy VJJville
Originally Posted by graham
Its a shame the public cant vote on social issues like this. (no need to give me a lesson on how we elect officials that represent us and what not. I fully understand how it works and you know what I mean)
The problem with that is that you have too many weak minded people who are controlled by what they see on TV. And what they see on TV is that the big bad gas guzzling SUV's and performance cars are single-handedly ruining the earth.
Old May 8, 2007 | 03:54 PM
  #10  
TOO Z MAXX's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Sep 1999
Posts: 666
From: Stockton, Ca. USA
Just like in the 60's, the gov has to go and ruin all the fun. With gas going through the roof I think the market will determine gas mileage rates.
Old May 8, 2007 | 04:04 PM
  #11  
Z28x's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Originally Posted by shock6906
Those are some pretty lofty goals and I just don't see it happening, especially for the trucks. Not if they want the trucks to have the same utility that they have now. Also, are these new standards to be met on the new mile per gallon figures or the old MPG figures? If it's the new figures that have to meet those standards, it's just going to be that much harder to make happen.
People probably said the same thing about getting 25mpg in a truck 25 years ago.

Originally Posted by shock6906
The problem with that is that you have too many weak minded people who are controlled by what they see on TV. And what they see on TV is that the big bad gas guzzling SUV's and performance cars are single-handedly ruining the earth.
I think they are worried about the social unrest that $300 oil would bring and they want to soften the blow.
Old May 8, 2007 | 05:40 PM
  #12  
CLEAN's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 2,574
From: Arlington, Texas
I love it. People obviously prefer gas guzzlers based on their buying habits, and the guys they vote in to represent their interests propose legislation to eliminate the very vehicles their constiuents want to drive. Who are the politicos representing anyway?
Old May 8, 2007 | 05:47 PM
  #13  
stars1010's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 3,121
From: Houston
I wonder what these Politicians drive to work everyday?
Old May 8, 2007 | 05:48 PM
  #14  
unvc92camarors's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 3,769
From: cinci
Seems like a high goal but will be lowered at the last minute to get it passed.
Old May 8, 2007 | 06:44 PM
  #15  
graham's Avatar
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 1999
Posts: 2,887
From: northeast Miss.
Originally Posted by stars1010
I wonder what these Politicians drive to work everyday?
35mpg E85 private jets, lol...

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:40 AM.