Archives

Good news: it passed Bad news: it took 20 years (http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.htm?programID=08-P13-00003&segmentID=2)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/Congress.jpgBruce Gellerman - Living on Earth - Jan 18, 2008

RealAudio for this Story (http://loe.org/audio/stream.m3u?file=http://stream.loe.org/audio/080118/080118cafe.mp3)


Transcript

Gellerman: Well, GM and the other U.S. automakers are heeding the call: thar's gold in them thar plants and fuel-efficient cars. And the manufacturers are finally diggin' the message. But environmental lawyer and commentator Dan Becker says it's taken some kicking and screaming.

Decker: After 30 years of making more and more gas guzzlers, Detroit is finally poised for a turnaround. The reason for the change isn't enlightened self-interest by the likes of General Motors. It is because Congress passed a law, voting for the first time since 1975 to update the Corporate Average Fuel Economy or CAFE law that sets mile per gallon standards for cars, SUVs and other light trucks.

The new law requires automakers to make their vehicles average 35 mpg by 2020, up from 25 mpg today. This will save America over 1 million barrels of oil a day—about half our Persian Gulf imports—it will slash global warming pollution by 20 million tonnes per year, and save consumers over $20 billion at the pump. The good news is that we have won the biggest single step to curbing global warming, the most important environmental victory since the 1990 Clean Air Act. The bad news is what this effort bodes for the next Congressional climate battle...http://www.loe.org/shows/segments.htm?programID=08-P13-00003&segmentID=2

So it took 20 yrs to pass, and another 12 yrs to take effect. Most of the really good parts of this were stripped out before the vote. Too little too late.

I wish it was a real world 35mpg average which is the message communicated and perceived by the general public. Further, I regret the democrats did not stand stronger against the billions of dollars that were given to the oil companines in this bill or the renewable energy requirement for energy companies that was dropped. Yes, it's a good starting point but not the monumental change touted by the politicians on both sides.

...and the search for loopholes begins. Remember, SUVs became popular because they passed through a loophole in the old CAFE law.

What was so wrong about letting $3 gas do its magic?

...and the search for loopholes begins. Remember, SUVs became popular because they passed through a loophole in the old CAFE law.

What was so wrong about letting $3 gas do its magic?Put another way, a 50-something guy realizes he has high blood pressure, on diabetic medication, may have severe blockage in a couple of arteries...275 total cholestrol is "doing it's magic" just like $3.00 a gallon gas is doing. :eek: You have a few well-publized instances of former Govenor Mike Huckalbee dramatically getting fit in a couple of years, but many more do nothing and die. :(

As a nation, we knew our dependance on foreign oil was bad for our national security and economy since the 1970's. Like many middle-aged men, we let ourselves go and went into denial...the longer this nation delays serious action, the smaller the American auto industry and it's supproting businesses become, the weaker our national economy.

I would have LOVED for Detroit in the 70's or 80's getting serious on fuel-efficient vehicles without government badgering - that would have been the best scenerio. Sadly, Detroit and Washington lacked self-discipline to avoid the loopholes.

Government regulation is not my prefered solution - it's because Detroit has utterly failed to show self-dicipline in a lower-regulated environment. It's like with children - when they don't behave, you lay down the law. ;)

Nah - $1-$2/gallon gas and 75mph+ "suggested" speed limits in the last 20 years has probably influenced much of the vehicle design (and marketing) that went on.

So to borrow your analogy, the fat guy continues to get fat. Instead of losing weight and controlling himself, it is incumbent on the pharmas to develop a drug to make him lose cholesterol.

That's CAFE for you. It forces the manufacturer to change, but not the consumer.

Big Dave is right on.


Put another way, a 50-something guy realizes he has high blood pressure, on diabetic medication, may have severe blockage in a couple of arteries...275 total cholestrol is "doing it's magic" just like $3.00 a gallon gas is doing. :eek: You have a few well-publized instances of former Govenor Mike Huckalbee dramatically getting fit in a couple of years, but many more do nothing and die. :(

As a nation, we knew our dependance on foreign oil was bad for our national security and economy since the 1970's. Like many middle-aged men, we let ourselves go and went into denial...the longer this nation delays serious action, the smaller the American auto industry and it's supproting businesses become, the weaker our national economy.

I would have LOVED for Detroit in the 70's or 80's getting serious on fuel-efficient vehicles without government badgering - that would have been the best scenerio. Sadly, Detroit and Washington lacked self-discipline to avoid the loopholes.

Government regulation is not my prefered solution - it's because Detroit has utterly failed to show self-dicipline in a lower-regulated environment. It's like with children - when they don't behave, you lay down the law. ;)

So to borrow your analogy, the fat guy continues to get fat. Instead of losing weight and controlling himself, it is incumbent on the pharmas to develop a drug to make him lose cholesterol.

That's CAFE for you. It forces the manufacturer to change, but not the consumer.

Big Dave is right on.Of course, quite a few of those guys die, so what good is the latest statin? :(

Some of you remember the mechanic in the commercial: "Pay me now or pay me later" ....guess you favor spending more after this situation is worse?

=Big Dave;65994What was so wrong about letting $3 gas do its magic?

What $3.00/gallon gas? It's down to $3.30 here, from a high of $3.40. It will soon be $3.50 or $4.00.

And since the price of gasoline won't drop because of new CAFE standards, both are in play and hopefully will do something.

Yes, as I have pointed out numerous times, when someone blames the government for high gasoline prices, I say, "Look in the mirror for the culprit." Fat Americans buying fat automobiles.

As far as cholesterol goes, Lipitor will cut the bad, LDL cholesterol, but it won't help with low HDL, good cholesterol. Your health depends on your cholesterol ratio, so take all the Lipitor you want, if you don't maintain an adequate HDL, by avoiding trans fats that lower HDL, you still aren't in that great a shape.

Harry

I'd be willing to cut Detroit a little slack if they actually showed a voluntary willingness to exceed CAFE standards. However, their actions (such as exploiting flex-fuel loopholes and fighting tougher standards tooth-and-nail) have shown that they only want to do the bare minimum with regards to FE.

I really wish that "the market" would take care of things. However, the people behind the market have shown little initiative to actually improve the situation, and that's why "forceful" measures such as CAFE are needed. Besides, how can people demand greater FE cars when they aren't being widely produced (at least relative to behemoths)?

Until car companies show some initiative to really, honestly push the ceiling higher en masse, instead of just clinging to the floor, CAFE is a necessary "evil".

The Governor of Maryland is poised to raise the gas tax by 40 cents per gallon. That would push the price to $3.50/gllon overnight.

Besides, how can people demand greater FE cars when they aren't being widely produced (at least relative to behemoths)?



Good question.

My answer to it was to buy a Prius.

Not only to I get to enjoy fuel savings and benefits to the environment and national security, I send a message to Detroit that there are plenty of people like me who demand fuel efficient cars, and if they want our business they had better get off their duffs and deliver.

Harry

The Governor of Maryland is poised to raise the gas tax by 40 cents per gallon. That would push the price to $3.50/gllon overnight.


I heard the same thing attributed to the Governor of New York.

There is a national movement underway to raise the tax on gasoline by 40 cents/gallon. A lot of it has to do with local governments not being able to keep up with the rising costs of road and bridge work.

Harry

The Governor of Maryland is poised to raise the gas tax by 40 cents per gallon. That would push the price to $3.50/gllon overnight.

There are already too many Marylanders in my town, I don't need more of them wasting gas and clogging the highways to come here to buy gas!

There are already too many Marylanders in my town, I don't need more of them wasting gas and clogging the highways to come here to buy gas!Warning: Let's avoid getting personal.

There are already too many Marylanders in my town, I don't need more of them wasting gas and clogging the highways to come here to buy gas!


If you get too high a price differential between adjacent states, then you'll end up with a situation where lots of people are going to the cheaper state to buy their gas, swamping the gas stations near the state line with long lines, while gas stations in the more expensive state go bankrupt for lack of business. If the price differential is great enough that there are high profits for gas illegally transported into the more expensive state, then you could see a black market developing with Mob involvement, etc.

Expensive ($2.83 here on the frozen steppes) gas is working ots magic. dealers can't give away gas-hogs and fuel-efficient cars get snapped up - even at a premium price. Top-down solutions never work because bureaucrats can't keep up with what people want. top-down thinking is what undermined the USSR.

Let the "unseen" hand do its thing.

States that raise taxes risk a big turnover of politicians. And rightly so.

Expensive ($2.83 here on the frozen steppes) gas is working ots magic. dealers can't give away gas-hogs and fuel-efficient cars get snapped up - even at a premium price. Top-down solutions never work because bureaucrats can't keep up with what people want. top-down thinking is what undermined the USSR.

Let the "unseen" hand do its thing.

States that raise taxes risk a big turnover of politicians. And rightly so.


State that have large bridges collapse or don't plow the snow promptly because they don't fund the highway maintenance risk an even bigger turnover of politicians. I don't think that you believe as some do that government activities can be funded without some source of present or future revenue. Personally I prefer that road users pay for road maintenance with some form of usage based tax instead of through property, sales or income taxes. My understanding is that many jurisdictions currently fund road and highway maintenance largely from general revenue (i.e property, sales, and income taxes:mad:. ) I favor at least restoring gas taxes to their inflation adjusted values from the Reagan era.

Your "unseen hand" is not free to work if some transportation networks are funded by general revenue (e.g. the highway system) while others (e.g. railroads) are funded by users.

Aside: Comparing others' positions to USSR/Nazi Germay/Apartheid South Africa is often considered an appeal to emotionalism that identifies your own argument as lazy or irrational. (Google Godwin's law)

The real need for CAFE is that politicians are unwilling to tax gas appropriately. So gas is still way cheap for all the damage it does including road damage. CAFE was the easy way out by focusing on the corporate side. It is wrong economically and doesn't work nearly as well as increasing gas taxes/prices. But look at the EU - they have focused on both sides of the equation and are still having trouble holding back usage (although they do much better than us).

I agree that the main reason for so many fuel efficient vehicles in Euroland is the extremely high cost of gasoline. The only people who are buying the gas hogs are the relative few who can afford one and don't mind burning the carbon. I've come to accept that they are in the same class as all of the people who drive gasoline powered recreation vehicles, from Quads, to motocross bikes, to power boats and RV's. Do I want to deny people their ability to enjoy life to the fullest and to have as much fun as they can afford?
Meanwhile, here in the US, raising the CAFE standards is the only way to make Detroit move beyond their marketing message that has gotten most Americans to purchase the product with the greatest profit margin...the SUV. If it weren't for the sales job on these behemoths, I don't know how many of them really would have been produced. A jeep Cherokee went from being a fringe vehicle to status symbol overnight thanks to product placement and marketing.

I really don't understand the arguments about "making" Detroit change. We live in a largely free market, and you can buy cars from a variety of carmakers not based in Detroit. Many people have, witness the success of Toyota, Honda and others. Incidentally, their sales growth really took off not because of their small, fuel efficient cars, but because they started making and selling larger vehicles. Big fat porky Camrys, SUVs, and even venturing into the once-thought-impenetrable pickup truck market. Vehicles which had traditionally been the domain of the domestics. But in any case, there are many small fuel efficient cars to buy, and more and more are coming. This is good. There are plenty of choices. The Detroit automakers can rise or fall by the laws of economics.

I have a lot of reasons why I think CAFE is a bad policy, but the foremost reason is that I really think it's a cop-out. It's the populist Michael Moore impulse to pass blame onto some "big" entitity (big oil, big Detroit, big Pharma, Wal-Mart, big government, or whatever boogieman). Americans don't have the stomach to look at themselves to solve their problems.

Detroit did not force SUVs down peoples throats. How many SUVs does Toyota have in it's product portfolio now, compared to 20 years ago? People willingly bought these, there's not a conspiracy. Part of the reason for the SUV craze is due to earlier versions of CAFE, which effectively legislated large cars (and station wagons) out of existence. Hence SUVs, classified as 'trucks' and not 'cars' escaped through the CAFE loophole. In the meantime, Americans demand for large vehicles did not abate, so SUVs filled the gap.

The focus needs to be on the demand and not the supply.

The problem I have with CAFE, and the politics surrounding it, is that it gives the impression to the average American that fuel consumption is a technical problem to be overcome. Individual actions and responsibilities are not part of the equation, it's all Detroits fault that they can't make a 4000lb minivan get 40 mpg.


I agree that the main reason for so many fuel efficient vehicles in Euroland is the extremely high cost of gasoline. The only people who are buying the gas hogs are the relative few who can afford one and don't mind burning the carbon. I've come to accept that they are in the same class as all of the people who drive gasoline powered recreation vehicles, from Quads, to motocross bikes, to power boats and RV's. Do I want to deny people their ability to enjoy life to the fullest and to have as much fun as they can afford?
Meanwhile, here in the US, raising the CAFE standards is the only way to make Detroit move beyond their marketing message that has gotten most Americans to purchase the product with the greatest profit margin...the SUV. If it weren't for the sales job on these behemoths, I don't know how many of them really would have been produced. A jeep Cherokee went from being a fringe vehicle to status symbol overnight thanks to product placement and marketing.

I'll take the other position for a moment: regulation is bad and impedes progress.

Let's get rid of CAFE, emissions laws since the 1960's, requiring E10 in urban areas, manidatory seat belts, airbags, 5mph bumpers, safety glass, padded interiors, requiring drivers to have their cars insured....they are a drag on the economy and socialist - let the people decide if they want to do this on an individual basis. Then American society will be all the better. ;)

One of the problems I have seen on GM and Chrysler is the packaging. Say you want the small 6 cyl ICE. Now you also want to get the latest safety features and a few luxuries. So now you have to get the big 6 for the safety features and the 8cyl ICE in order to get the Nav system. What does the engine have to do with the Nav system?? Why can't you get the nav system with the small 6cyl.

In summery if you could get features separately from the engine, I think that a lot more people would get the smaller ICE. They really don't have a choice.

I feel the price we pay for gasoline is being fixed by the Oil cartel. They seem to me to be limited by the effect their increases have on the U.S. economy. The higher the cost of gasoline the more chaotic the stock market becomes, the more wary consumers become to spending, the more banking, credit and inflation problems pile up. Regular here has backed down to 2.99/gal from 3.39 a few months ago. It seems they (the oil price fixers) have had to back down because things were (and still are) pretty darn wild. So, although raising the cost of gas does slow down peoples purchase of low MPG cars and retards their use of gas slightly, the problems that are whelped by it seems to far outweigh the benefit.

We could, of course, turn to our Congress and elected officials to legislate laws that move us to more energy efficiency, but, as Samuel Clemens said, "Congress is America's only distinctly native criminal class." They are genetically, greedy criminals. It is in their DNA. I don't think we should hold our breath waiting for them to act, especially when our pres is in the oil cartel bag.

Our government has put our country in critically bad shape. They cater to their own greed. Bushenomics has swelled our national debt to an unbelievable number that our system is totally incapable of paying back. The median income for Americans has gone down from 2001 to 2005 by $2000.00 (65 & under). The stock market is tumbling. The Bush administration has been printing up and pumping so much money into the economy that the Feds stopped publishing the M3 in 2006. Inflation has become hyperinflation. All of our standard of living continues to sink.

John Quincy Adams said that Democracy without morality will not work. We, in my opinion, have to find a way to inject morality back into our government. I can't see much success ahead until we do.

Bob.

I really don't understand the arguments about "making" Detroit change. We live in a largely free market, and you can buy cars from a variety of carmakers not based in Detroit. Many people have, witness the success of Toyota, Honda and others. Incidentally, their sales growth really took off not because of their small, fuel efficient cars, but because they started making and selling larger vehicles. Big fat porky Camrys, SUVs, and even venturing into the once-thought-impenetrable pickup truck market. Vehicles which had traditionally been the domain of the domestics. But in any case, there are many small fuel efficient cars to buy, and more and more are coming. This is good. There are plenty of choices. The Detroit automakers can rise or fall by the laws of economics.

I think the main argument revolves around Detroit not willing to change on its own. The price of gas has gone up >200% over the past decade, and FE has remained largely the same. They've been fighting higher standards tooth-and-nail and have exploited every loophole in the law to its fullest extent (*cough* FLEX FUEL *cough*). I also doubt the availability of truly efficient vehicles. Car commercials are heralding 29 MPG highway as efficient (which usually means 25 MPG combined and probably 30 MPG combined by pre-2008 standards). My old '93 Nissan Sentra POS got that, it's not impressive.

The other issue is that the classic laws of economics tend to break down with regards to technological development and production. Technology and developing standards take such a huge initial investment that it's difficult for anyone except the big boys to play. You have a small set of players and a small set of "winning" technologies predetermined. This means that the big boys determine supply and determine what's available. A lot of people have wanted greater FE for some time, and yet there aren't a wide array of big FE vehicles. That should tell you something about the market "working its magic."

Plus, lobbying, marketing, and general influence skew supply and demand. The laws of economics may still be working, but having the "manly SUV" image rammed down our throats for a decade ensures that the demand is not "pure".

I have a lot of reasons why I think CAFE is a bad policy, but the foremost reason is that I really think it's a cop-out. It's the populist Michael Moore impulse to pass blame onto some "big" entitity (big oil, big Detroit, big Pharma, Wal-Mart, big government, or whatever boogieman). Americans don't have the stomach to look at themselves to solve their problems.

I agree with you that American culture is a wasteful one and half of the solution would be to get people to (even slightly) change their habits and attitudes. One only needs to look at the news whenever there is a story about rising gas prices to see the hypocrisy in action (cue SUV driver saying "it's ridiculous").

However, I can't start my own car company, for lack of investment capital and lack of engineering expertise. Most people can't start Pharm companies, or even have a sit-down with legislators. The big whatever control so much that is out of the control of the general population, to the relative immunity of whatever public opinion may say. As I've said before, it's practically oligarchy.

Detroit did not force SUVs down peoples throats. How many SUVs does Toyota have in it's product portfolio now, compared to 20 years ago? People willingly bought these, there's not a conspiracy. Part of the reason for the SUV craze is due to earlier versions of CAFE, which effectively legislated large cars (and station wagons) out of existence. Hence SUVs, classified as 'trucks' and not 'cars' escaped through the CAFE loophole. In the meantime, Americans demand for large vehicles did not abate, so SUVs filled the gap.

The focus needs to be on the demand and not the supply.

From a business standpoint, Toyota is just trying to cash in on the market and image that Detroit created. Personally, I hate it. But half of the demand for trucks, vans, big cars, and SUVs is image and marketing. Few people actually need that kind of car, and even fewer actually use it for what it's supposed to (how many empty truck beds and SUVs with one passenger do you see per day?). But it's "manly" and "patriotic" and "safer" and "you must have one or else you will be ridiculed".

CAFE didn't legislate the large car out of existence. As you said yourself, Detroit exploiting the amorphous "light truck" loophole in CAFE killed the large car. Laws, technology, and economics do very little on their own, it's the *people* using them and creating them and influencing them that create the situation in which we find ourselves.

The problem I have with CAFE, and the politics surrounding it, is that it gives the impression to the average American that fuel consumption is a technical problem to be overcome. Individual actions and responsibilities are not part of the equation, it's all Detroits fault that they can't make a 4000lb minivan get 40 mpg.

However, it is Detroit's fault that they are exploiting loopholes in CAFE, it is Detroit's fault that they haven't put out anything that gets 50-60 MPG, it is Detroit's fault that they've been fighting tougher standards with everything they have, and it is Detroit's fault that they've been pushing giant behemoths for the past decade.

Half of the issue is technical, though. People could get by on less of a car (less HP, less weight, smaller size overall), and a lot of new techs (clean diesel, HEVs, PHEVs) could do wonders toward improving FE. Detroit could create and market those to be sexy and sleek and fun, but they don't. Doesn't that tell you something?

I will wholeheartedly agree with you that the average American needs to own up to their share of the responsibility. However, Detroit owns a majority share of that responsibility, and for things that the average consumer has little power over.

John Quincy Adams said that Democracy without morality will not work.Bob.Thank you, Bob! :)

Paul Harvey has been quoting that for years.

@aca2983
The only way you can realistically curb demand is to artificially inflate the prices of the products through taxes. This too would have to be done through legislation. No amount of government commercials will change peoples driving habbits, as is shown by the number of speeding, drunk , and seatbeltless drivers. Because of that, it is a technical problem to be overcome. Like many solutions it is best to attack the problem from both sides rather than just 1.

Raising taxes is a sure-fire way for a politician to be out of office next election. America is at its max tolerance level of taxation. Ask GHW Bush about raising taxes. Here in Indiana, a popular mayor in Indianapolis raised property taxes and got beat by an absolute nobody. Bart Peterson was thought of as gubernatorial or senatorial timber and now he is politcal matchsticks. All because he raised taxes.

Raise taxes if you don't want to run again.

Letting the economy go is the surest way to leave office.

Banks and stocks were unregulated in the 1920's...the Dow Jones took 20 years to recover from The Crash.

In the past, I've recommened a proportional reduction in income tax to balance the hike at the pump.

Hi Big Dave:

___Maybe you should ask all of those that get nailed with AMT every year about taxes being raised? It was preset in the laws from years ago without inflation indexing.

___And those that earn their income through capital gains … well we all know about that 15% tax break (I mean tax rate) :rolleyes:

___Raising fuel taxes will not be politically doable but either way, gasoline has more then doubled the previous 5 years and it will more then likely double again in the next 3. Supply and demand will take care of the problem all by itself although with a lot of pain that shouldn’t have happened if we thought about our actions today vs. tomorrow? God bless the US of A I guess.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

@Big Dave

Someone has to make sure the country isn't run into the ground by the corporate greed. Although not the best at doing that, the government is the only entity that can keep the businesses from ruining the planet while robbing us blind.

@Big Dave

Someone has to make sure the country isn't run into the ground by the corporate greed. Although not the best at doing that, the government is the only entity that can keep the businesses from ruining the planet while robbing us blind.

A bit late for that, Koreberg.

Our economy has been run into the ground by corporate greed. I am truly afraid to see what the stock market does today. We have known for a long, long, long time that our greed motivated elected criminals have;

1. Let the national debt spin wildly out of control.
2. Been falsifying economic indicators like the CPI, unemployment, etc, for years and years.
3 Been printing up money like there is no tomorrow.
4. Been allowing rampant price collusion and price fixing.
5. Been allowing rampant violations of anti trust laws.
6. Been allowing flagrant restraint of trade.

This has all been going on because our elected officials are immoral, corrupt, greedy individuals who arrogantly justify that what is good for their pocket books is good for our country, and special interest groups and lobbying is, of course legal and as American as Chevrolet.

And the Auto/Oil cartel would chime in with "You see this is America", and I have a right to my opinion, just as you do. If I want to build hybrid Yukon's and tell the Americans that I am responsible in doing so, I have every right to do so"!!

"And I will tell you another thing", Klutz, would say. "I do not give one good hoot how many people you have to kill to get the oil we need". THAT IS WHAT GOD CREATED THE MILITARY FOR!! JUST GET IT, so I can have my American, Capitalistic, good as apple pie, profits.

Democracy without morality does not work.

What do we do now? :confused::eek::confused::eek::mad:

"And I will tell you another thing", Klutz, would say. "I do not give one good hoot how many people you have to kill to get the oil we need". THAT IS WHAT GOD CREATED THE MILITARY FOR!! JUST GET IT, so I can have my American, Capitalistic, good as apple pie, profits.


Reminds me of my favorite quote from one of my favorite movies - 3 Days of the Condor:

Higgins: It's simple economics. Today it's oil, right? In ten or fifteen years, food. Plutonium. Maybe even sooner. Now, what do you think the people are gonna want us to do then?
Joe Turner: Ask them?
Higgins: Not now - then! Ask 'em when they're running out. Ask 'em when there's no heat in their homes and they're cold. Ask 'em when their engines stop. Ask 'em when people who have never known hunger start going hungry. You wanna know something? They won't want us to ask 'em. They'll just want us to get it for 'em!

Industrial grade stuff, Tarabell, its real heavy duty. I'm going to have to stop by Blockbuster and revisit "Three Days of the Condor".

One of my favorite movies is the Trilogy, "Matrix". As with your flick they are trying to figure out what to tell the people.

"Give 'em a choice - Choice is what those with all the power offer those with no power, to project the illusion of freedom".

Have a nice day, Tarabell.

Bob.