The Obama administration wants to significantly
increase the CAFE standards that govern fleet wide fuel economy for automakers.
The problem is that there is a huge amount of backlash from those in the
automotive industry. The backlash is so far keeping the Obama administration
and automakers from coming
to an agreement on proposed fuel economy standards moving into the future.
The Obama administration has put a concession forward
in an effort to woo the Big 3 automakers to agree to the economy standards. The
concession would see the makers of big trucks and SUVs forced to move to the
higher fuel economy standards at a much slower rate than makers of cars and
light SUVs. Hopes are high that the agreement between the Obama administration
and the Big 3 will be made by early next week.
Washington wants the CAFE requirements to be set
at 56 mpg by 2025. The concession would allow the Big 3 to adopt
the CAFE standards for the larger, gas guzzling vehicles, at a rate of 3.5% per
year rather than the 5% annual improvement rate that the Obama administration
wants for light trucks, cars, and light SUVs.
CAFE standards are currently targeting 35.5 mpg
fleet wide by 2016 and that number will grow to 56 mpg by 2025 under the
proposed regulations. The final rules are hoped to be ready by September.
However, automakers outside the Big 3 are not
happy at all about the proposed concession. Carmakers that do not produce large
SUVs and trucks see the concessions as giving the Big 3 an unfair advantage.
The companies feel that the concession would encourage consumers to buy less
quote: It's not the Governments job to tell automakers what they can provide to the consumer. End of story.
quote: If gas prices go up, people buy more efficient cars.
quote: Great idea, let's not prepare businesses who rely on heavy, expensive, inefficient vehicles to run operations. Let's pretend like they can all afford to replace their fleets all at once.
quote: Otherwise we'd all still be driving death traps without catalytic convertors that get 10mpg. But they'd also only cost $4000... You weigh the benifits and I'm sure you'll reconsider. Having a $20,000 safe car that is quiet, doesn't pollute much and gets 40mpg is far better than the $4000 alternative.
quote: Part of the job of government is to protect the people from their own freedom of choice
quote: but how far are you willing to let the government go, THX 1138?
quote: This is why we vote and have discourse in this country, to determine how far we all are to let the government go in determining how we as a people should handle anything in our lives.
quote: How far are you willing to let others freedom of choice go in affecting your life?
quote: Let's take your suggestion and go to the extreme of abolishing all penalties for murder, theft, and rape.
quote: Environmentalism = National Security. Yeah, I know that's sooooo liberal or whatever
quote: This wasn't done a whim, it was done because idiots like you thought it was okay that corporations should be able to pollute water, land, and air. It turns out that wasn't such a good idea.
quote: It prevents chaos, such as people murdering eachother, or determining boundaries of ownership. Because a completely "free market" has no incentive to solve these problems.
quote: Part of the job of government is to protect the people.
quote: Allowing automakers to sell high fuel consumption
quote: Such a shortsighted view.
quote: Only on DailyTech would that kind of Collectivist nanny state bullshit get a 5. Shortsighted? I think we've seen just where your point of view has taken us. We're drowning in it as we speak.
quote: Allowing automakers to sell high fuel consumption, less efficient vehicles only benefit the automakers and oil companies, and that benefit exists so long as gas exists, is readily available, and stays cheap.
quote: Business starts with customer demand.
quote: Securing and stabilizing the country's energy needs is and should be a job of the government to ensure that the market doesn't destroy itself. Sure, you may want that large vehicle, but if you want to keep driving it long term and make it affordable (affordability is something that everyone, including businesses want), conservation of petroleum to keep the price low is the only way to make it happen.
quote: I'm moving to Canada or Australia.
quote: Yeah it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that people like to buy large SUVs when they can afford them.
quote: The concession would see the makers of big trucks and SUVs forced to move to the higher fuel economy standards at a much slower rate than makers of cars and light SUVs.
quote: So does this mean that all a manufacturer has to do to qualify for these lower standards is make a single large truck or SUV?