xcel
03-20-2007, 03:47 AM
Most favor higher standard, but not at Detroit's expense. (http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070320/BUSINESS01/703200387/1014)
http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Dodge_Durango_Hybrid.jpgJustin Hyde - Detroit Free Press - March 20, 2007
Dodge Durango rated at 12/17 city/highway on the 08 schedules. Why does Detroit continuing to build such a non-fuel efficient machine? Profits!
A majority of Michiganders favor higher fuel economy standards for cars and trucks, with some supporting increases to 40 miles per gallon or more, and many would pay hundreds of dollars extra for more-efficient vehicles.
But a similar majority would oppose sizable fuel-efficiency increases if they threatened jobs at Detroit automakers and increased Japanese competitors' inroads into the U.S. market.
That's according to the latest Detroit Free Press-Local 4 Michigan Poll, which asked 801 state residents about their feelings on the fuel economy debate.
The numbers reveal a rift that runs through many Michigan households, where concerns about rising gasoline prices and the environment clash with worries about increasing the financial demands on struggling Detroit automakers in a weak state economy.
Kenneth Chapman III, 35, of Detroit said he'd support higher mileage standards as long as they didn't hurt the domestic auto industry.
"The better the fuel economy, the less money you spend on gas, especially with fuel prices going up the way they are," said Chapman, who's looking for work. But "the automotive companies are doing bad enough as it is. We don't need any more kinks in the chain."
The Bush administration has set a 4% annual increase as a goal, but said the final decision should be left to regulators, and estimated the plan could cost the industry $114 billion, with $85 billion from Detroit automakers.
The battle over fuel economy has just begun on Capitol Hill, where former Vice President Al Gore is to testify Wednesday before Rep. John Dingell's energy subcommittee and give his recommendations to reduce global warming.
Meanwhile, many bills have been introduced from Democrats and Republicans to raise standards that now require automakers to average 27.5 m.p.g. for cars and 22.2 m.p.g. for pickups, SUVs and vans.
Although 58% of those polled favored higher standards, 36% said the rules should be left alone. When asked how much tougher the standards should be, 26% favored an increase to 40 m.p.g. or more, 16% favored 35 m.p.g. and 15% chose 30 m.p.g.
Bryan Blair, 32, a network engineer in Canton, said he'd support an increase to 35 m.p.g. In his last job, Blair traveled up to 50 miles a day for six years, averaging about 20 m.p.g.
"I'm sick of the auto industry not doing anything about it," Blair said. "They just keep putting out all of these cars that stay the same over the years, and they have all this technology. I would think by now they could increment it gradually."
When asked how much they would be willing to pay for an 8-m.p.g improvement in fuel economy for vehicles similar to what they drive now, 47% said they would pay $1,000 to $2,000 more, and 20% said they'd be willing to spend $500 to $700.
Naomi Kneller, 39, a homemaker in Pinckney, said she would be willing to pay $1,000 extra if it meant getting 30 m.p.g. "I don't think that's asking too much," she said.
Thirty percent of those who answered said they wouldn't be willing to spend anything more.
"Look at our economy," said Irene Beebe, 56, a mother of eight from Holly. "Can anybody afford it with the cost of living? ... Cars are expensive, and people can't afford them now."
Support for higher standards melted when it was tied to the financial health of Detroit's automakers. If a significantly tougher mileage requirement would lead to lower sales for Detroit and higher sales for Japanese automakers, 61% said they would oppose it, and 28% said they would still support it.
Dorie Bays, 35, a homemaker in Macomb Township, said any increase would have to be reasonable, but that higher standards were necessary even if it meant some pain for Detroit.
"I feel bad saying it," she said, "but we would catch up out of necessity."
The poll of 801 Michigan adults 18 and older was conducted by Selzer & Co. of Des Moines, Iowa. It was taken March 11-14 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.
http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Dodge_Durango_Hybrid.jpgJustin Hyde - Detroit Free Press - March 20, 2007
Dodge Durango rated at 12/17 city/highway on the 08 schedules. Why does Detroit continuing to build such a non-fuel efficient machine? Profits!
A majority of Michiganders favor higher fuel economy standards for cars and trucks, with some supporting increases to 40 miles per gallon or more, and many would pay hundreds of dollars extra for more-efficient vehicles.
But a similar majority would oppose sizable fuel-efficiency increases if they threatened jobs at Detroit automakers and increased Japanese competitors' inroads into the U.S. market.
That's according to the latest Detroit Free Press-Local 4 Michigan Poll, which asked 801 state residents about their feelings on the fuel economy debate.
The numbers reveal a rift that runs through many Michigan households, where concerns about rising gasoline prices and the environment clash with worries about increasing the financial demands on struggling Detroit automakers in a weak state economy.
Kenneth Chapman III, 35, of Detroit said he'd support higher mileage standards as long as they didn't hurt the domestic auto industry.
"The better the fuel economy, the less money you spend on gas, especially with fuel prices going up the way they are," said Chapman, who's looking for work. But "the automotive companies are doing bad enough as it is. We don't need any more kinks in the chain."
The Bush administration has set a 4% annual increase as a goal, but said the final decision should be left to regulators, and estimated the plan could cost the industry $114 billion, with $85 billion from Detroit automakers.
The battle over fuel economy has just begun on Capitol Hill, where former Vice President Al Gore is to testify Wednesday before Rep. John Dingell's energy subcommittee and give his recommendations to reduce global warming.
Meanwhile, many bills have been introduced from Democrats and Republicans to raise standards that now require automakers to average 27.5 m.p.g. for cars and 22.2 m.p.g. for pickups, SUVs and vans.
Although 58% of those polled favored higher standards, 36% said the rules should be left alone. When asked how much tougher the standards should be, 26% favored an increase to 40 m.p.g. or more, 16% favored 35 m.p.g. and 15% chose 30 m.p.g.
Bryan Blair, 32, a network engineer in Canton, said he'd support an increase to 35 m.p.g. In his last job, Blair traveled up to 50 miles a day for six years, averaging about 20 m.p.g.
"I'm sick of the auto industry not doing anything about it," Blair said. "They just keep putting out all of these cars that stay the same over the years, and they have all this technology. I would think by now they could increment it gradually."
When asked how much they would be willing to pay for an 8-m.p.g improvement in fuel economy for vehicles similar to what they drive now, 47% said they would pay $1,000 to $2,000 more, and 20% said they'd be willing to spend $500 to $700.
Naomi Kneller, 39, a homemaker in Pinckney, said she would be willing to pay $1,000 extra if it meant getting 30 m.p.g. "I don't think that's asking too much," she said.
Thirty percent of those who answered said they wouldn't be willing to spend anything more.
"Look at our economy," said Irene Beebe, 56, a mother of eight from Holly. "Can anybody afford it with the cost of living? ... Cars are expensive, and people can't afford them now."
Support for higher standards melted when it was tied to the financial health of Detroit's automakers. If a significantly tougher mileage requirement would lead to lower sales for Detroit and higher sales for Japanese automakers, 61% said they would oppose it, and 28% said they would still support it.
Dorie Bays, 35, a homemaker in Macomb Township, said any increase would have to be reasonable, but that higher standards were necessary even if it meant some pain for Detroit.
"I feel bad saying it," she said, "but we would catch up out of necessity."
The poll of 801 Michigan adults 18 and older was conducted by Selzer & Co. of Des Moines, Iowa. It was taken March 11-14 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.