Senators harp on Detroit for not providing better fuel economy, push for tougher CAFE standards
.jpg)
Four US Senators took to the microphone yesterday to accuse Detroit of "stonewalling" and "getting into a bunker mentality" when it comes to providing vehicles with better fuel economy. Dianne Feinstein, Dick Durbin, Olympia Snowe, and Lincoln Chafee are sponsoring a bill they call "Ten in Ten" that would call for increasing the fleetwide Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) to 37 MPG by 2017 - trucks and all. Also included is a requirement for on-board mileage displays by 2013. The proposal is said to save up to 2.5M barrels of oil each day. Manufacturers who could not comply with the new standards would be allowed to purchase credits from those who exceed the fleet mileage requirements.
Chrysler's VP of communications Jason Vines has already fired back, stating that the proposal isn't technically feasible and that automakers would already be making mainstream vehicles with better fuel economy if they could. Toyota's Jo Cooper also voiced concerns about the proposal, stating that the increased requirements don't "sound like much, but that's a huge leap forward".
[Source: Detroit News]
Get a WordPress.com Blog
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 4)
Swat Lax 3:06PM (6/22/2006)
You guys need to check your dates. I was there when they announced this on Tuesday, not yesterday.
Reply
chewy 3:10PM (6/22/2006)
Best solution to fuel economy problems: Put gas guzzler taxes on SUVs and pickups.
Reply
Chris 3:14PM (6/22/2006)
Let this be proof to the rest of the world! The United States has, hands down, the dumbest politicians on Earth.
BTW, every one of them probably left the convention, promptly got in an armored limo/SUV of some kind and flew a jet back to where ever they came from. They probably stopped for a juicy steak on their way out of town.
When politicians offer a solution we'll start listening.
Reply
Corey 3:15PM (6/22/2006)
Must be close to election dates.
Reply
iQuack 3:18PM (6/22/2006)
Oh, goodie! The political ninnies are at it again.
CAFE is and has always been bad law.
As gasoline prices rise, people will voluntarily cut back on driving and/or will move to more economical vehicles without any CAFE or other silly laws to complicate matters.
Every auto maker is scrambling to offer more economy cars and doesn't need the government's "help."
There is currently a powerful incentive for car buyers to seek gas sippers instead of gas guzzlers, and all the dopey grandstanding by the mostly Democrat (and the most ignorant Republican) senators is 100% crap.
Reply
Carpooler doing his part 3:20PM (6/22/2006)
China has tougher fuel economy standards than the United States. Remember when we were progessive?
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2004/11/chinese_fuel_ec.html
Also interesting to note is that Ford is a fuel economy leader in China. Go figure.
Reply
Paul 3:27PM (6/22/2006)
The senate should shut down the US auto industry and any other american company with sales greater than $10 million. The world and the country will be a better and cleaner place.
Reply
Scott 3:39PM (6/22/2006)
Those senators are idiots.
Reply
Chris 3:40PM (6/22/2006)
Paul must not have his $10M yet :-) What are you waitin' for Paul? Where else would senators get their money from?
Reply
Ben 3:41PM (6/22/2006)
Leave it to the Senate to blame it on everyone but themselves.
That's the kind of non-leadership existing in the political system today.
Reply
Corey W. 3:47PM (6/22/2006)
"When politicians offer a solution we'll start listening."
I agree, the problem is, they usual don't...and WE KEEP VOTING FOR THEM!!
Was there some kind of meeting with representatives from the auto industry and whatever committee pushes CAFE, to sit down and iron out some realistic goals... Probably not!!
Reply
cellularcoffee 3:51PM (6/22/2006)
engineers offer solution in increasing fuel economy, not some dumb politicians with no concept of car design
Reply
Paul 3:53PM (6/22/2006)
Wait, wait. How in the world is BETTER fuel economy a BAD thing? It's obvious that the industry as a whole hasn't been able to take care of things itself, so this is absolutely a case where the gov'mint should step in on behalf of drivers/constituents.
I just can't understand why better fuel economy is bad. Educated responses are welcomed.
Reply
DarkKnight67 4:04PM (6/22/2006)
The four stooges speak up again. All they needed was Kerry to chime in with a plan and it would have been complete. I agree with #3 ... no way they could armor a Toyota Corolla for protection and have them drive home.
Reply
Jennson 4:05PM (6/22/2006)
but... volkswagen already has a display on board that tells you how many miles you have left to drive!
Reply
iQuack 4:12PM (6/22/2006)
Better fuel economy is good, of course. But as people suffer shock from increasingly costly fill-ups, they'll compensate by driving less and/or eventually buying a more economical car.
No law is needed--companies that offer economical cars are selling every car they can make now.
Try to get a Honda FIT or even test drive one! Try to discount a Prius!
The argument by some senators that the auto industry needed laws to enforce seat belts isn't the same. Nash offered seat belts in 1949, but people thought seatbelts in cars were a gimmick to make cars emulate airplanes.
Once it was established that seatbelts save lives, people wanted them (at least smart people did).
To the extent that dopes who don't use seatbelts raise medical costs for the rest of us, a seatbelt law does make sense.
But gas mileage is a different matter because as gas prices rise, people's wallets are affected immediately and there isn't anything else to learn.
Unless somebody actually ENJOYS paying more for fuel, they don't need any law to encourage economy.
CAFE is 100% nonsense and isn't needed.
Reply
UH2L 4:17PM (6/22/2006)
Better fuel economy is a good thing and the Big 3 could have made more efforts to improve fuel economy in smaller vehicles, but they're not so bad with mid size cars and larger trucks. Don't forget that other foreign companies aren't the angels they seem to be; they sell more efficient vehicles because that's what sells in their home markets, (although the Big 3 could bring over some more Euro or Asian market vehicles). But why don't we start blaming consumers who keep wanting more power (at the expense of fuel economy)? As a nation, we really don't care about the environment, and we don't want to sacrifice for anything, even for lower gas prices in the long run.
I do believe the government needs to raise the fuel efficiency of vehicles sold here, but the only things that will work are tax rebates for efficient vehicles, (not just hybrids), and extra tax for gas guzzlers. A gas tax would never fly so those are the only options that will work. If these are rolled in gradually over time, then the car companies would adjust their production over time. For the government to ask for a 10 mpg increase in 10 years is bordering on unreasonable. These people have never worked at an automobile manufacturer to know how much development, manufacturing/capacity planning and investment it takes to overhaul plans so severely.
Reply
Matt 4:18PM (6/22/2006)
I love it. If I understand it correctly, the Toyota guy says that the increase request wasn't very big. That's hillarious.
Senators don't need to kill Detroit. It's been taking care of that by itself for 30 years.
Of course, higher mileage concerns play right into Toyota's court. Toyota, Honda, and other non-US companies are the only ones that can make a profit on small cars.
Everyone can make a profit on trucks, but it's a trick to sell Japanese trucks to rednecks. You gotta be very slow about it, inching up a little every year.
Reply
David Lazarus 4:29PM (6/22/2006)
I agree CAFE is not needed, just add a hefty $3 to gas taxes per gallon and then live like the Europeans. Then the consumer will go for a car that they can afford to run. no more SUV's. Who knows they could reduce taxes for many so that if you are willing to alter your behaviour then you could pay a lot less in tax overall.
As to who is to blame for the current debate, its part politician, for not pushing through higher standards years ago, part oil companies and auto makers for lobbying to keep the standards low, and partly the consumers for not demanding more efficient cars and finally voters for voting in politicians in the pockets of Big Oil. Whilst these politicians are now doing something, what really will happen once they have those petro dollars in their election funds?
Reply
epp_b 4:31PM (6/22/2006)
Yet another example of clueless politicians shoving us buzzwords and rhetoric on things they know nothing about.
What baffles me is that they are actually dumb enough expect a semi truck to get 37MPG, let alone a "normal" truck.
Reply