Automakers Rally US Citizens to Oppose Higher Fuel Economy

[Hornhonker 0]

Automakers Rally US Citizens to Oppose Higher Fuel Economy Standards27 May 2007by Jack RosebroBeginning this Memorial Day weekend, members of the auto industry are rolling out a comprehensive campaign to convince Americans to oppose proposed increases in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, and to pressure their elected officials to vote down such proposals.The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (AAM) has launched a website (www.drivecongress.com) that encourages citizens to compose messages of protest against “unrealistic fuel economy increases” to be hand-delivered to elected officials. AAM represents BMW, DaimlerChrysler, General Motors, Mazda, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota and Volkswagen.The website allows users to insert statements provided by the AAM, such as “I value fuel economy, but I also want many other attributes in my automobile like safety, passenger and cargo room, performance, towing, hauling capacity and more” or “Rather than setting a harmful mandates [sic] like the one being proposed, the government should encourage the use of alternative fuels like ethanol, and provide incentives for consumers, like me, to purchase alternative fuel autos.”The Detroit News reports that the campaign will also include at least a million dollars of radio ads in ten states that have a high percentage of truck and SUV owners.The AAM’s efforts are bolstered by parallel campaigns from DaimlerChrysler and General Motors, each of which has brought a dedicated website online to help with the campaign.According to GM’s website (drivingamericasfuture.com), CAFE standards “deter innovation”; “have no near term effect on oil consumption”; “foster competitive disparities that discriminate against US automakers”; and are “a 1970’s solution to a 21st Century problem.”The website cites the steady rise in US oil consumption as an indicator that CAFE standards have failed, but does not calculate the level of consumption that might exist if such standards had not been enacted.DaimlerChrysler’s password-protected website (www.grabdemocracybythehorns.com) is described as a “grassroots advocacy website, a legislative activation tool that provides employees, retirees, dealers and suppliers with a means to conveniently contact elected officials about the issues that concern you, your family and our company.”CAFE standards were enacted in 1975, when Congress ordered automakers to more than double the fuel economy for passenger cars from 13 miles per gallon to 27.5 miles per gallon within a decade, which the industry achieved. Since then, Congress has regularly considered increasing CAFE standards, but has not approved a fuel economy increase for passenger cars. Last year, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) increased fuel economy standards for SUVs by 2 percent per year, rising from 21.6 miles per gallon to 24 miles per gallon by 2012.greencarcongress.com

[Duck 16]

Reading stuff like this makes me think there is simply no hope for the world.-Iain

[plaincorgi 0]

This just smells of the issues that surrounded teh EV1

[Crashbear 0]

Obviously some folks just don't get it. Love the big guzzlers and paying big oil.

[darren 192]

Oil companies want people to drive more, and drive bigger cars that suck more gas.

Auto companies want people to drive more and to buy bigger vehicles that have bigger profit margins.

The average person is driving more than ever, because of increasingly decentralized urban planning, high taxes and property values in urban areas, resulting in longer commutes to work and school, and making it necessary to drive everywhere for simple daily activities like shopping and recreation. Few people are willing to give up freedom and convenience, nor are they willing to pay a hefty price premium, for safer, smaller and more efficient vehicles.

So for the most part, the deck is stacked against the ecologically-minded. The oil companies and car companies can bury the eco lobbyists with their own lobbyist which are likely much better funded.

I'm surprised to see a company like Toyota in this 'coalition of the greedy and shortsighted' but i guess they're worried that they're not going to be able to sell all those ginormous Tundra pickup trucks (and forthcoming Sequoia SUVs) if the CAFE requirements get extremely stringent.

[MikeT 747]

The ginormous Tundra pickups are not just thirsty, they like to break camshafts. 20 have been reported so far....

[spinner 0]

What better way to drive innovation than to set a goal. If they're unwilling to be challenged then they don't deserve our business.

[hodad66 0]

US? Yup... I live here but sometimes I wonder! The dangers inherent in being

completely dependent upon oil should have been obvious after 1979.

Be it for national security, the environment or the pocketbook..... I just can't

see the reason (other than profits) that there is so much resistance to developing

alternative energy.

[bilgladstone 13]

US? Yup... I live here but sometimes I wonder! The dangers inherent in being

completely dependent upon oil should have been obvious after 1979.

Be it for national security, the environment or the pocketbook..... I just can't

see the reason (other than profits) that there is so much resistance to developing

alternative energy.

The parenthetical profits outweigh everything else, of course. I think it really would take just one or two enormously profitable breakaway green technologies to instigate an unbelieveable turnaround in environmental investment.

[hodad66 0]

It simply seems so short sighted. If the large percentage of petroleumis being provided from an area of historic instability... where's the security?I feel that after the whole hostage crisis & gas shortage that America shouldhave entered into a "NASA like" endeavor to develop alternative energy. Thealternative is to fight wars so that "big oil" may reign supreme.They get record profits while the citizenry contribute tax dollars & the bloodof their children! Now we are pushing technology for some answers but imagineif this had been done for the past 30 years.Our little Smarts might all be hydrogen powered, or air powered

[leejor 3]

If the governments in NA were to put massive "carbon Taxes" on fuel, then people would be forcing the auto makers to come up with more fuel efficient vehicles. Look at Europe, you can buy very fuel efficient people movers because of the high cost of fuel. The whole "but I feel safer in my huge SUV" isn't going to cut it when fuel is $2 or $3 a litre. If you are going to make a big vehicle then it better damn well get good fuel economy or it's not going to sell. Automakers are seeing that now.

[ProgFrog 0]

Did anybody listen to the radio ads they put out? Here are the three of them.-pf:croak:

ad_three.mp3

ad_two.mp3

ad_one.mp3

[ValgardForkbeard 2]

Interesting ads. When sales people talk that way, we refer to it as the FUD factor - Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. It plays on the feelings of the audience, without giving real information one way or the other.MG