Less Than Meets the Eye, NY Times, 5/15/2006

[Coastie for Truth]

President Bush recently discussed the idea of expanding a tax credit for drivers who buy hybrid cars. At first glance, the notion seems like a winner and generally consistent with Mr. Bush's newfound enthusiasm for alternative fuels and technologies. But on closer inspection, the idea looks like a self-serving political ploy — a quick fix to give the appearance of progress while obscuring serious contradictions in Mr. Bush's approach to oil independence.

The tax credit currently on the books offsets some of the extra cost of hybrid cars, but it is fully available only for the first 60,000 that a manufacturer sells. After that, the amount of the credit dwindles, eventually to zero. If Mr. Bush removed that 60,000-car cap it would presumably lead to the manufacture and sale of more hybrids than would otherwise be the case. That's fine. The problem is that more hybrids are unlikely to reduce overall oil consumption, unless there is a concurrent increase in fuel economy standards. Today's standard for cars — 27.5 miles per gallon— is a fleetwide average. So if carmakers sold more high-mileage hybrids, they could also sell ever-bigger gas guzzlers and still meet the target.

Mr. Bush is a happy man when he is doling out tax breaks. But he is clearly uncomfortable with imposing higher fuel economy standards on automakers.

His often-repeated claim that he awaits Congressional permission to raise the standard is a delaying tactic, and especially cynical for a president who has run roughshod over Congressional authority. Ditto his claim that it will take further study to determine a fair and practical new standard. The 27.5-m.p.g. benchmark is the same now as it was in 1985. In the more than two decades since then, there has been ample study and debate on achievable improvements to what is by now a pathetically low standard. What has been missing all those years, and is missing now, is the political leadership to make those improvements.

Without higher standards, more tax credits for hybrids are all carrot and no stick. That's pandering, and that's just what American drivers do not need.





Bottom Line - Raise CAFE!

[Old and In the Way]

1. Big Oil has their collective hands up his ass.

They want nothing that'll break the nice demand/supply curve they've got in place. No long term strategic thinking, it's all about short term profits.

[Dead_Parrot]

2. Like a broken pencil...

...Pointless.

[One_Life_To_Give]

3. Only If manufacturers have hit CAFE limits

If there is a surplus demand for 20mpg luxury cars. That manufacturers cannot meet because of maintaining their CAFE numbers. That is true, but;
I don't know where the manufacturers are in regard to meeting CAFE, although it has been many years since I last heard manufacturers complain about having to pay fines for not meeting it.
Under the Light Truck rules mandated by 2011 it could have a more significant impact. But then I am not certain you can get a 3/4 ton pickup able to do the work of a 3/4 ton truck while getting 21.5mpg can be done without HyBrid or Diesel.

Now that we have $3 fuel. The market is drving fuel efficiency better than we can reasonably expect to with CAFE requirements. Where I would look to congress is to address the regulations that have questionable value add. Where a vehical can be sold in Canada but takes conciderable additional effort to be sold in the United States. e.g. Smart Car Are we keeping cars out for technical reasons or are they burried under a mountain of red tape?