Automakers Could Escape Higher Efficiency Standards By Demonstrating They'd Be Too Costly - NYT

[hatrack]

EDIT

Senators Carl Levin and Debbie Stabenow, both of Michigan, are drafting a bill that would raise mileage requirements but would be more lenient for light trucks and would give car companies the possibility of an escape hatch by demonstrating that the rules would be too costly to meet. The Senate Democratic leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, hinted at the lunch on Wednesday that he was willing to look for a compromise. Noting that the industry and the United Automobile Workers union were at least willing to support some increase in mileage requirements, Mr. Reid said he was ready to listen. “I haven’t seen all the details yet,” he told reporters, “but I hope that we can work together to make substantial progress.”

Environmental and consumer groups warned Wednesday that Democrats were in danger of diluting the requirements until they had little meaning. “The question is no longer whether Congress will act on fuel economy, but whether what it passes will mean anything,” said Kevin Curtis, vice president of the National Environmental Trust, an advocacy group in Washington.

The House speaker, Representative Nancy Pelosi of California, is on a collision course with Representative John D. Dingell of Michigan, chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee. Mr. Dingell and Representative Rick Boucher, Democrat of Virginia, have drafted a bill that calls for raising the fuel efficiency requirement for passenger cars to an average of 36 miles a gallon and for light trucks to 30 miles a gallon by 2022.

But the bill includes escape hatches from the rules if car companies can demonstrate that the requirements would be too difficult to meet. (Ed. - emphasis added)

EDIT

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/07/business/07energy.html

[krispos42]

1. This is why I want to raise the CAFE

If the FLEET average goes to low, the automakers just stop selling pickups and SUVs until more Cobalts and Malibus and Focuses (Foci?) and Fusions are sold. By limiting truck sales, dealers can get into bidding wars for them, making nice profit margins that allow them to sell the more economical stuff at or below cost.

It will also encourage hybrids and high-efficiency diesels so they could sell more high-profit SUVs.

[kestrel91316]

2. They can play all the games they want. I, for one, am never going

to buy their friggin' GAS HOGS and pieces of s--t.

Both the American cars I owned were total POS.

[louis-t]

3. Losing market share to other countries that make more efficient

cars that last is 'costly' too.

[Nihil]

4. I think they've already demonstrated that it will be too costly ...

... to the bribes they pay to Senators Levin and Stabenow (not to mention
the mere "sweeteners" that they pay to the other "representatives" in
Congress and the Senate). Hence the reaction and the coming "compromise"
from wankers who don't want to rock the boat - the gravy boat that is.

:puke:

[blueworld]

5. Are the Dems pod people from Outer Space?

Thank God we have another solid law crafted for the public welfare with a huge escape hatch for Corporate America. I mean how can we expect them to manufacture safe products, pay a living wage to their workers, manage their businesses with their heads outside of their sphincters AND make huge profits for the CEO's and shareholders?

I mean, WE still have children to send to wars in the Middle East, right? And WE can hold our collective breath as we run from our cars in to the malls so we don't breathe too much pollution, right? We-the-people have options those poor car manufacturers don't have!

Bring back the horse. :sarcasm: