Auto Executives Back Obama's Emissions Plan

By 2016 the American car fleet must be nearly 40 percent more fuel efficient than it is today

May 29, 2009 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (10)

Back in 1975, the United States was reeling from the aftershocks of the Arab oil embargo, gas prices had skyrocketed, and Congress, for the first time in its history, had ordered automakers to start producing more fuel-efficient cars. At the time, the average vehicle on the road was getting 13 miles per gallon; by 1987, thanks partly to Congress's rules, fuel efficiency had jumped up to 22 mpg.

And yet, as President Obama noted last week when he unveiled aggressive new standards for fuel economy and vehicle emissions, "all too little has been done" since that time. Today, the United States spends hundreds of billions of dollars a year on oil imports, and the average vehicle, according to the EPA, gets only about 21 mpg, slightly less than in 1987.

Calling that unacceptable, Obama proposed what is essentially a single national rule requiring both a rapid increase in the fuel efficiency of cars sold in the country and a dramatic decrease in the greenhouse gases they emit. By 2016, the proposed rule says, the entire American car and light truck fleet must be nearly 40 percent more fuel efficient than it is today. That means standards for cars and light-duty trucks will have to jump from the current laboratory average of 25 mpg to 35.5 mpg. (When cars are driven on the road, the actual miles per gallon drop by about 25 percent.)

Many top auto executives were on hand for the event, so the new proposal has the industry's formal backing. But it didn't come easily or quickly. The agreement, which still has to go through the official rule-making process, is really the product of months of negotiations among White House staff, automakers, state officials, environmentalists, and other groups, largely orchestrated by the administration's climate czar, Carol Browner. And it reflects not just the goals on energy policy but also a number of complicated subplots that have demanded the administration's attention: the decline of Detroit's auto industry, the ongoing need for bailouts, and, of particular importance, the government's legal obligations to respond to a long-simmering request by California to impose stricter emissions limits on vehicles.

Only a few years ago, of course, most automakers would have aggressively opposed calls for government-mandated increases in fuel economy. At the time, they still had significant clout in Washington; they called the shots. But that's changed as the economy has unraveled and their fortunes have declined. "They are simply not as politically potent," says David Gerard, executive director of Carnegie Mellon's Center for the Study and Improvement of Regulation.

On top of that, automakers this year had begun to fear that California's request to impose tougher vehicle emissions standards would finally be approved by the Environmental Protection Agency. "They thought they were going to lose in California, and if they lost in California, they're in big trouble," says Gerard, who noted that more than a dozen other states had endorsed California's proposal, which turned out to be very similar to the national standard Obama announced.

Had those 13 or so states actually adopted tougher standards, automakers probably would have needed to build different cars for different states. Faced with that nasty prospect and grappling with tough economic conditions internally, automakers instead decided to negotiate. "What's so important is that this establishes a national standard that lets us view the nation as one," rather than as a "patchwork of regulations," says Sue Cischke, Ford's vice president of sustainability.

And yet for all the lofty rhetoric and warm smiles, there are still messy questions. How difficult will it be for automakers to fulfill this pledge? And how will consumers respond?Ford, Cischke says, will be looking for efficiency gains "across the whole vehicle line." One focus, she says, is improving the efficiency of the internal combustion engine. The company is hoping to outfit 90 percent of its U.S. vehicles by 2013 with its new EcoBoost engines, which the company says get 20 percent better fuel economy than regular engines.

There's also likely to be an aggressive push to develop hybrids, much to the administration's liking. A new study this week by JP Morgan predicts 20 percent of the vehicles sold in the United States in 2020 will be hybrids.

And as Michael Sivak of the University of Michigan's Transportation Research Institute points out, because vehicles have gotten progressively heavier over the years with all their extra features, one way to boost fuel efficiency is to try to slim them down.

The success of these efforts will ultimately depend upon what consumers are willing to buy. The EPA says the new rule will increase car prices by $600, which the average driver should recoup in about three years from buying less gas. Assuming, that is, that Americans start buying again. This year, analysts are expecting vehicle sales of about 10 million, down from a peak of about 16 million just a few years ago.

Tags:
fuel efficiency,
greenhouse gases,
car manufacturers,
Barack Obama,
pollution,
Obama administration,
cars

Reader Comments Read all comments (10)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

A second Automotive Dark Ages is coming. The first occured in the 1970's. That Dark Ages was caused by the first smog emission standards. From 1971 thru about 1975 the emission standards got tougher each year and each year's new model cars were progressively less powerful, slower and poor running than the previous year's model. Cars hit the nadir in 1975 and remained there until the early 1980s when technology started to catch up with the standards and cars finally began to impove each year. The President's new "greenhouse gas/fuel economy" standards will cause a new automotive Dark Ages. Expect new car performance and utility to diminish rapidly as we move through model years 2012 to 2016 and remain low until technology catches up. Having lived through the first Dark Ages and knowing a second was coming, I purchsed my "retirement car" (a new Ford Mustang GT) six years early as this breed of new car will not be available six years from now. I will be keeping it and will not be purchasing one of the new Obama cars. So please you future owners of 2012 and newer cars, watch your rear view mirrors carefully and please move to the right when you see one of us in an older car coming up behind you.

Richard lefevre of CA 1:15AM June 02, 2009

I cannot believe a writer for a national magazine or for that matter, the Obama Administration would fail to mention E85's or FFV's when talking about making our country cleaner. The first thing that Obama should have done was to mandate that all future vehicles in the U.S. would be FFV's. Then instead of the ridiculous Cash for Clunkers, the administration should have offered coupons for converting older vehicles to E85 specs. Instead of giving hundreds of Billions of Dollars to the Cellulosic Ethanol Flim Flam Researchers, he should repeal the tariff on imported Clean and Green Sugarcane based Ethanol. The Cellulosic Ethanol Researchers have done nothing but open demo plant after demo plant all at taxpayer expense. Cellulosic Ethanol is the new Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac $Trillion Bank Robbery waiting to happen. Instead of going with unsafe Clown Cars that will kill millions of Americans, he should simply realize that a safe E85 SUV is just as clean to the environment as an unsafe Battery operated Clown Car. Instead of making Ethanol from Corn we should be trading Corn to Third World Countries for Sugarcane based Ethanol. They overcome poverty. We get cleaner and greener Ethanol. We get stronger and more able to thump our noses at the Mid East the next time they jack up their prices for some fake crisis. Instead of doing something stupid like taking oil out of the Military Strategic Petroleum Reserves, we could build Civilian Petroleum Reserves in CA and NY. God knows they need the jobs. That would really make our country stronger unlike the Obama lies that we are stronger because we eliminated enhanced interrogation techniques or closed down Gitmo and gave all the Terrorist American civil rights.

Chip Daigle of LA 10:43PM June 01, 2009

The Ford Fusion is close with 41 MPG and most trucks will have to be hybrids. Other car makers have smaller 5 passenger cars with all the safety features that are close to the requirements. There will have to be a lot more small car owners to offset those that need larger cars with lower gas mileage.

Glen Carey of WA 7:27PM June 01, 2009

Subscribe Today

Order the new U.S. News Weekly digital magazine at a special low introductory price!

advertisement

Do you believe that global warming is happening?

View Results

Washington Whispers

5 Surprising Commencement Speaker Choices

Here are five of the odder choices colleges made about who to address the class of 2013.

advertisement