Well, it’s certainly “game on” in the Senate as initiatives to actually improve fuel economy standards are on the table as the Energy Bill hits the floor. Here’s our action alert on the full bill so you can get a general sense of where we stand on the major issues. As you know, what we want to see is a loophole-free commitment for a 35mpg fuel economy standard like the original Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act.
Such a combination will push for broader application of both conventional and advanced technologies dedicated to fuel economy. So not only are we more likely to see more fuel efficient conventional SUVs, minivans, and sedans, put strong fuel economy standards will also push automakers away from muscle hybrid applications, as they’ll want to make the most out of hybrid technology to help meet these stronger standards.
As you know, the Auto Alliance is out with their anti-CAFE misinformation campaign, still leading with their fallacious claim that the current version of the Ten-in-Ten legislation attached to the Energy Bill would force automakers to meet a 52mpg standard by 2030. The legislation does call for continued increases in CAFE beyond 35mpg, but only with the blessing of the National Highway Transit Safety Administration. So leaving out any argument as to whether the automakers can actually get to 52mpg in a quarter of a century, the actual claim is just false.
There’s no one who can cut through the rhetoric that the automakers are dishing out quite like someone who’s been on the inside. That’s why I wanted to point out a Letter to the Editor in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. It’s written by a woman who was manager of engineering in Ford's automotive fuel economy and emissions department, and received an alert from Ford asking her to weigh in against fuel economy. Her frustration boils over as such:
I witnessed the company oppose every change while Honda and Toyota just used their talent to accomplish better fuel economy with lower emissions… We want the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards of 40 miles per gallon that we were supposed to have by 2000 and that the automotive industry got President Reagan to renege on.
This goes to the heart of UCS’s continued ask to the automakers to shelve their PR people and their lawyers and let loose their engineers. If you want to ask if we put our money where our mouth is, perhaps you’ll remember how we trumpeted Ford’s planned expansion of their hybrid staff to meet their 250,000 hybrids/year goal. Of course, that was matched by our frustration when that excellent engineering aspiration was replaced by the convenient PR pitch of more flex-fuel vehicles.
The automakers have backtracked too many times to give them free passes, such as the amendment Senators Levin (D-MI) and Bond (R-MO) are offering up in the sheep’s clothing of a “compromise.” This April survey (.pdf) shows once again the tri-partisan desire (67 percent of Democrats, 74 percent of Independents, and 60 percent of Republicans) of average Americans for standards that will guarantee them the fuel efficient choices they have been lacking. If you haven’t, please send your letter to Congress to help bolster their collective backbone.
Posted by: ScottN
P.S. Check out www.ucsaction.org on Monday afternoon for a follow-up CAFE action right on the cusp of the big Senate vote.
Comments