Car Fuel Efficiency standards...
How nice. The news lately about fuel efficiency standards is the Bush Administration's new plan to increase Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency rules.
It's already been reported how laughably minimal these rules are, requiring an increase in Fuel Efficiency of 10% by 2016, more than 10 years from now.
10% in ten years. That means that your SUV that currently gets 20 mpg is required to rise to a whopping 22 mpg over the next 10 years. (Yes, I know it's average across all vehicles sold, but the point is the same. 10% is a good goal for each year or two, not for ten years out).
But in fact, this legislation is not INTENDED to cut our use of OIL, at least not by much. Want to know why? Because buried hundreds of pages into the legislation is language making it illegal for states to impose higher standards for their own states.
Ever heard of California emissions laws? Not allowed, under this new bill. California and New York have both either enacted or are in the process of enacting higher in-state fuel efficiency standards for cars sold within their borders. The Bush Administration has reportedly filed suit against California to try to stop it and failed on the basis of there being no law that says California can’t enact higher standards.
So, we have a former OIL man and a former energy company CEO who have now given us an energy bill that subsidizes the OIL industry and does laughably little to foster new or sustainable energy sources, and then a new CAFE standard which does the bare minimum over a really short period of time, while making it illegal for local areas to have higher standards.
Does anyone still doubt that the OIL industry is really running the country?
Liam.
posted by Liam at 8/25/2005 02:39:00 PM
7 Comments:
Could you provide a link or two talking about how this bill makes it illegal for states to impose stricter standards?
Thursday, August 25, 2005 3:27:00 PM
I will try. I spent about 5 minutes looking for the text of the bill on line, but couldn't justify more than that from work.
It's apparently somewhere around page 150 in the bill (big bill!).
I plan to look around more for it later today.
Liam.
Thursday, August 25, 2005 3:43:00 PM
Well, I found what I think is the bill ("Energy Policy Act of 2005"), in html and pdf versions, but I couldn't find anything about state standards at all. Maybe you'll have better luck - it's probably in disguised language.
Where did you hear about it from?
Friday, August 26, 2005 9:59:00 AM
What you have is the energy bill, which is, as I understand it, a different piece of legislation.
I learned about it from a radio program that I occasionally listen to which has thus far always proven to be a reliable source. The host in question goes out of his way to mention when something he's reporting has not been verified, and whenever I've gone out to independently verify something he DID verify, I've almost always found the source.
This is the one exception, I can't seem to find the text of the bill on line. I'm thinking since it's only a few days old, it may take a few days to show up on line and in the search engines. Or I'm just doing the wrong search.
Liam.
Friday, August 26, 2005 10:18:00 AM
Found it. Click here and then look for section 32919. It says:
(a) General. When an average fuel economy standard prescribed under this chapter [49 USCS §§ 32901 et seq.] is in effect, a State or a political subdivision of a State may not adopt or enforce a law or regulation related to fuel economy standards or average fuel economy standards for automobiles covered by an average fuel economy standard under this chapter [49 USCS §§ 32901 et seq.].
(b) Requirements must be identical. When a requirement under section 32908 of this title is in effect, a State or a political subdivision of a State may adopt or enforce a law or regulation on disclosure of fuel economy or fuel operating costs for an automobile covered by section 32908 only if the law or regulation is identical to that requirement.
(c) State and political subdivision automobiles. A State or a political subdivision of a State may prescribe requirements for fuel economy for automobiles obtained for its own use.
(There are similar Preemptions for vehicle labelling (section 32304), Bumper Standards (s.32511) and theft prevention (s.33118).)
I do have to correct something I said earlier, though. It appears that this does NOT cover emmissions, only fuel economy. So "California Emissions" don't have to go away, only "California Fuel Efficiency Standards".
Liam.
Friday, August 26, 2005 10:45:00 AM
Thanks for the link.
After a bit of googling, it appears that this preemption clause has been in the CAFE act since it was first adopted in the 1970s. California never has had its own fuel efficiency standards, only emissions standards.
It appears to me that the 2002 California law however expanded "emissions" to include CO2, which seems to be an end-run around the fuel efficiency question -- if you consume more fuel, by definition you generate more CO2. And this is the subject of the GM lawsuit.
A very interesting topic, and I'm marginally better informed now than before. (But I'm still woefully ignorant about these issues.)
Friday, August 26, 2005 1:58:00 PM
I could be wrong, but I was pretty sure the older one said states couldn't enact efficiency standards which were LOWER than the Federal one, while the new version says states can't enact standards which are DIFFERENT.
But since you've been looking at it today, you're probably right.
Liam.
Friday, August 26, 2005 2:56:00 PM
Post a Comment
<< Home