POPULAR ThisWeek

Auto Efficiency

in

As part of the 2007 Energy Bill, auto efficiency standards were raised for the first time in 30 years> The new requirement? Average fuel economy of 35 mpg by 2020. That's a big first step, but not enough of a cut of tailpipe emissions, which account for about one-third of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Leading Democratic presidential candidates have all called for significantly higher standards. In addition to reducing global warming pollution, increasing fuel efficiency will have two additional benefits:

it will help Detroit automakers return to global competitiveness and profitability, and

reduce U.S. dependence on foreign oil

Before the new standard was adopted, U.S. vehicles ranked dead last among industrialized nations in fuel economy standards. Fuel efficiency requirements in the U.S. for passenger cars had been stuck at 27.5 mpg since 1985. That had put the U.S. behind China, Canada, South Korea, Australia, Japan and the European Union. It meant that 45 percent of the 21 million barrels of oil the U.S. consumed every day, came out of tailpipes. That’s almost 10 million barrels a day, six million of them imported. That will now start to change, though it means that by 2020 the US will have caught up to where the EU is today.

Still, the states want to go farther and the EPA is stopping them, for now. But the momentum for continued change is strong. The key question: how successful will the auto lobby be in watering down the new standards. So far, they've done a pretty god job.

Where the Action Still Is

The states want action. So in the politics of auto efficiency -- like other climate issues -- the state of California is in the lead.

California passed a landmark law to cut tailpipe emissions from new cars and trucks by 30 percent by 2014. Sixteen other states around the country thought it was a great idea, and have also adopted the California standard. Among them are: Vermont, New York, New Jersey,
Massachusetts, Connecticut, Maine, Rhode Island, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Washington, Oregon and Florida.

But things are not so simple. The White House doesn’t like this one bit. So the federal government is supporting automakers who have filed a lawsuit against the state of California to stop the action. Read here about the stealth campaign run out of the Department of Transportation, with White House knowledge and approval, to block California's progress.

At the same time, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which takes its orders from the Oval office, is stonewalling. California
needs the EPA's permission (called a waiver) to make its law stick. The EPA, after refusing to render a decision for two years, finally denied the waiver, the first time the EPA has ever done so. It's reasoning? The new energy bill made a waiver unnecessary. The matter is almost certainly headed to the courts.

Where the Momentum Is

The tide has turned against the automakers, the EPA and the White House.

The Supreme Court recently ruled, in Massachusetts v. EPA, that carbon dioxide qualifies as an air pollutant under the provisions of the Clean Air Act. The EPA can no longer choose to ignore it. The clock is running out on the EPA’s ability to duck its responsibility. It also opens the door to swift executive action under a new administration. With the stroke of a pen, the EPA administrator could issue sweeping regulations. A recent ruling in Vermont has also added to the momentum.