Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Visionary Genius Daniel Yergin Sees Chance Of Higher CAFE, Though Huge Loophole In Bill

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU
 
hatrack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-07-07 12:55 PM
Original message
Visionary Genius Daniel Yergin Sees Chance Of Higher CAFE, Though Huge Loophole In Bill
:eyes:

This week, legislation will emerge from committee, and almost certainly soon head to the floor of the U.S. Senate. It might not get that much notice in itself, but it ought to, because it tells you how much has changed on energy issues. And, given its probable passage (or that of something along its lines), the new legislation will have a big impact on the automobile industry, on gasoline consumption, and on what people drive.

The bill is the “Ten-in-Ten Fuel Economy Act,” and it is coming out of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Technology under the joint sponsorship of Democratic Chairman Daniel Inouye and Republican Vice Chairman Ted Stevens. Whether it is the provisions in this bill, or something like it, fuel efficiency standards for American vehicles are going to go up.

It’s no longer left versus right, Democrats versus Republicans, Congress versus the Administration. In this year's State of the Union address, President Bush cited the need to "reform and modernize fuel efficiency standards," and the Administration is working on its own proposals. Putting it simply, on this formerly contentious issue, bipartisanship prevails.

EDIT

There is still one hot issue – the appropriately named “off-ramps.” Tuesday’s legislation would give the National Highway Transport Safety Administration the authority to reduce or waive the 4% target in a given year if it was proving not cost-effective. Off-ramps are controversial, so expect much debate on that question before this is all over, but don’t expect the debate to go off road.

EDIT

http://www.cnbc.com/id/18518996

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Kolesar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-07-07 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
1. I am really skeptical about this "class of vehicle" loophole
There are some key characteristics of this "Ten in Ten." First, it will apply not only to cars, but also to SUVs, vans, pickups, and medium and heavy trucks, all at the same rate. Secondly, it will be based on "attributes." That is, it will allocated across class of vehicles (measured by weight and size and functionality). This will help eliminate the rigidities of the current Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency Standards, which measure changes across a company’s entire output – a problem when the public tilted to larger, less fuel-efficient vehicles, forcing companies to produce smaller, less-profitable or barely-profitable cars to meet the targets.
--o--

A motorist who can already afford more vehicle or capabilities beyond what they need (like huge towing capacity) will be able to pollute and consumer more. That last sentence sounds like B/S, too. Who sold "barely-profitable" cars?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 05:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Environment/Energy Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC