Obama adopts Bush energy plan as his own -size based "1" mpg per year increase in CAFE - why?

[papau]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/08/us/politics/08obama.html?ref=politics

May 8, 2007
Obama Criticizes Automakers on Fuel Economy
By MICHELINE MAYNARD

DETROIT, May 7 — Senator Barack Obama of Illinois delivered a stern message to Detroit auto
companies on Monday, saying they had done little to lessen the nation’s dependence on foreign
oil and needed to improve the fuel efficiency of their vehicles.<snip>


Under Mr. Obama’s plan, which he said would save 2.5 million barrels of oil a day, he proposed
a 4 percent a year increase in fuel economy standards beginning in 2009, or the equivalent of
about one mile per gallon per year.


By 2022, the fuel economy standard for both cars and light trucks would be 40 miles per gallon,
according to the plan. The Bush administration has proposed a similar method to raise the fuel
economy standard over the next few years.<snip>


Mr. Obama also proposed that fuel efficiency standards for cars be rewritten so that mileage
requirements are set according to vehicle size, rather than one sweeping standard for all
sizes of cars.<snip>

==========================================================================================
===========================================================================================
===========================================================================================
============================================================================================
=======

http://www.easternecho.com/cgi-bin/story.cgi?31623

Bush's energy plan needs improvement

By MCT / McClatchy-Tribune
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 12, 2007

The energy proposals President Bush offered last month in his State of the Union message are,
in some cases, modest steps in the right direction. On the whole, however, they generally are
disappointing and don't put enough stress on greater energy conservation.<snip>


Bush wants Congress to give the transportation secretary similar authority to approve new
standards for cars, using a formula that probably would be based on individual models' weight and
size, rather than preserving the simple single-number average for vehicle fleets known as the
corporate average fuel economy standard.


Bush's proposal is more complicated, could prove tougher to regulate and appears less certain to
produce a big savings in fuel consumption than would a robust increase in the traditional
single-number fleet standard. Clarence Ditlow, director of the Center for Auto Safety, labeled
Bush's method a "license for obfuscation."


We have urged that (fleet) CAFE standards be raised by five to 10 mpg over a decade, which
vehicle manufacturers could achieve merely with existing technology.<snip>

[msongs]

1. not what I would call visionary, but it is SAFE .... nt

[pstans]

2. vehicle manufacturers could achieve merely with existing technology

Then why not make it happen in a couple years. Why do we need to wait 15 years?

[papau]

3. A decade wait - plus a bribe on health care costs -small step conservative plus it focus groups well

Unions will feel the idea is helping to keep jobs in Detroit since the 3 Car Manufacturers say they can't compete because of health costs - and the bribe pays "health costs"

Free Market economists will say to get change in direction when loss of sales is not enough, an incentive -bribe - will motivate a focus on gas mileage improvement

and energy/environment folks are happy to hear there is a plan.

It has the right buzz words and gets a maximum number of buzz words into an "energy plan" without getting the corporate and rich upset - indeed this should be easy to make "bi-partisan" since it is Bush's proposal -

Obama is an excellent politician.

[pstans]

5. If the technology exists they why can't we make the changes in a couple years?

:shrug:

[papau]

6. The changes were made in the Clinton/Gore demo car that got 70 mpg - but was killed by

Bush and never put into production by the automakers as it was a small 4 seater - and not as profitable as a truck.

We have stood still since that car in 2000 (the result of $400 million in funding of research and proto-type production), while the rest of the world as moved ahead of us.

[Kolesar]

4. I hate this "requirements by vehicle size nonsense"

Polluting vehicles should have to pay a high surcharge at the time of purchase. I didn't tell the breeders to have a large family. Nobody "has to" pull a gigantic boat or travel trailer. Businesses can deduct the surcharge against their profits for a bit of a tax break.