CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world.


Policy & Politics tea_party_over_cliff

Published on August 1st, 2011 | by Susan Kraemer

8

Huge Obama Win on Fuel Economy Under Investigation by Republicans

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

August 1st, 2011 by
 

While the Right Wing in the US held the world hostage over whether it would pay the bills it ran up under Bush, the Obama administration quietly and without a fuss achieved a goal for greenhouse gas reduction long thwarted by the opposition party, and raised US fuel economy standards to 54.5 miles per gallon.

The world despaired when US Republicans effectively ended our last chance at forestalling an actual impending crisis, in filibustering last year’s climate legislation, destroying the US goal of reducing US carbon emissions in line with the Copenhagen Accord. Climate change will truly impact humanity and civilization for the next ten thousand years. But political policy is incremental, and progress sometimes happens when our attention is on other, more high drama events.

Last week, while being pelted with eggs by his own party for negotiating with terrorists in the Republican party over the debt limit, Obama quietly finalized a very progressive deal on climate. Under the agreement, automakers will now further raise fuel economy standards in the US to average 54.5 mpg by 2025.

A twenty point rise in a CAFE requirement in just ten years might seem like an unrealistically high requirement to Americans used to automakers digging their heels in, but the industry has proved capable of meeting much higher efficiency standards for Europe, which has demanded higher fuel economy and lower CO2 emissions  for a decade, since signing the Kyoto Accord on climate change. For example, Ford’s Ka for the EU market already got 56 mpg by 2008. Its Econetic model this year gets 67 mpg.

Still, for the US consumer, used to industry control of policy, it’s a startlingly high number. However, the US auto industry has only recently paid back its government bailout money authorized in the stimulus bill, and perhaps that shifts the balance of power.

The House Oversight Chairman, Republican Darrel Issa is now launching an investigation into the process by which the administration got automakers to agree to such an incredibly good deal for drivers, who stand to save thousands of dollars annually in fuel costs. He has issued subpoenas for all the automakers involved, requiring that they turn over all their documents from February on, related to the deal.

And that is hardly the end of it, pledges Issa’s office. “This is just the first step,” Issa spokesman Jeffrey Solsby told Morning Energy on Monday. “We’re going to see where the information takes us.”

He may be correct in suspecting some pressure. After all, these are the same automakers who lobbied Republicans (and several Democrats) hard and held a CAFE increase to a mere 34 or 35 mpg when Democrats took over the House in 2006 and began pushing for better fuel efficiency standards.

What changed?

Several things. Peak oil is pretty much staring the industry in the face by now. And the Obama administration’s 2009 executive order that requires that federal agencies get greenhouse gas reductions of 28% has started a certain market for a very large number of fuel efficient vehicles, making retooling assembly lines much more cost-effective. How big is this guaranteed initial market? Federal agencies bought 63,794 vehicles in 2010, spending $4.6 billion.

Electric vehicles also got a boost by this administration’s investment in advanced battery technology under the stimulus bill, which will start to pay off in the next five to ten years. Despite a shaky start six months ago during a shaken economy, electric vehicles will almost certainly be a significant percentage of cars being developed by 2025.

But most importantly, he who pays the piper calls the tune. Issa is on to something. Obama bailed out these bums; they owe him.

Republicans like Issa have quite literally pledged to the fossil lobby to pooh pooh climate legislation because of the money to be made by their funders on the last few years of fossil fuel. But thanks to an administration that persists on progressive goals - even after setbacks like last year’s filibustered climate bill – we all took just one more incremental step away from the suicidal cliff edge of the dangerous and expensive new climate that Issa and his party are recklessly driving us over with their reckless disregard for the science of climate change.

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.

Print Friendly

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags:


About the Author

writes at CleanTechnica, CSP-Today, PV-Insider , SmartGridUpdate, and GreenProphet. She has also been published at Ecoseed, NRDC OnEarth, MatterNetwork, Celsius, EnergyNow, and Scientific American. As a former serial entrepreneur in product design, Susan brings an innovator's perspective on inventing a carbon-constrained civilization: If necessity is the mother of invention, solving climate change is the mother of all necessities! As a lover of history and sci-fi, she enjoys chronicling the strange future we are creating in these interesting times.    Follow Susan on Twitter @dotcommodity.



  • Pingback: Vehicle Emissions Standards Create Jobs, Report Finds (+ Top Transportation Stories) | CleanTechnica

  • Electric38

    What a short sighted MPG goal. The investigation should be into how hard the republicans laughed after reading the news. Some of them may have required hospitalization over this gut buster.
    Give our scientists, engineers and solar ink developers a little credit. These MPG goals can be passed with flying colors. Truth is GM, Ford, Nisson, etc… are being allowed to get rid of their shelf stock. Similar to the LED light bulb fiasco (what are these going for, still about $50 a bulb?). Trillions of dollars worth of auto parts that are sitting in warehouses that will be useless once the electric car boom hits.
    Having a solid solar infrastructure on millions of American rooftops will only make the picture darker for these car companies (sorry utility companies, I did say rooftops). Once the FREE energy from the sun is on (and owned by) the average American’s rooftop, the great advertising gimmicks just won’t take hold like they used to.
    Want to buy a used gas guzzler anyone??

    Great cartoon, but the oil company wallet, leading the Tea party tricycle is barely visible.

  • Mac McDougal

    Thanks for the article. I like Cleantechnica’s evolving coverage of the politics of climate change. An additional point: is there any pressure anywhere, of any kind, to modify the two critical regulatory protocols here: 1) the calculation of CAFE standards which, pitiful as they are, still serve as a fig leaf for the carbon lobby; 2) the foundation of it all, the EPA estimated city/highway MPGs for a given vehicle. These statistical artifacts have about as much to do with reality as the US defense budget. Is anybody, anywhere, trying to change them? Would love to know!

  • Pingback: Environmental Politics News of the Week | Planetsave

  • Anonymous

    Love the cartoon.

    Watching the number of car manufacturers who are bringing EVs to market I think it might be obvious to those with inside knowledge that we’re close to longer range, affordable EVs.

    Give people the choice between a $20k ICEV that will cost them between one and two thousand dollars a year to fuel and maintain and a $20k EV that has at least a 200 mile range and will cost them about $400 dollars a year to ‘fuel’ and a very large portion of buyers are going to choose electric.

    And once they realize that there will be no need to stand out in the scorching sun or freezing rain to pump gas, you might have a stampede.

    If you’re a car manufacturer and are fairly certain that 30% of more of your sales are going to burn zero gallons of fuel a year then you can accept high fleet mileage requirements. You can sell a lot of 25MPG big pickups if you want as long as a bunch of Infinite MPG units are also going out the door.

    Oh, and you got Issa’s title wrong. It’s “The House Oversight Chairman, Republican Darrel (Car Thief) Issa”.

    • Nabilehtesham

      oil(except bio-fuel) should be used for the production of electricity,in industry,not in running the car.

      • Anonymous

        We use almost no oil for electricity in the US. The exceptions are Hawaii, which is starting to work hard to install renewables, and remote villages in Alaska.

        Best to leave as much oil in the ground as we can.

        • Susan Kraemer

          yes, and also Maine, oddly. That is why the Vinalhaven test of storing excess wind power in slow heating systems in homes was so interesting an alternative for them with that 100% wind powered island – I must follow up on that and see how that is going.

Back to Top ↑