Filed under: MPG, Legislation and Policy, Green Daily
Click and Clack say 35 mpg limit is just right for new CAFE standards - and rip the industry a few new ones
Even if you don't like cars, you can enjoy the NPR show Car Talk. And, even if you're not too familiar with the ins and outs of the upcoming CAFE legislation, you can listen to Car Talk's Click and Clack (Tom and Ray Magliozzi) and understand that they're in favor of more fuel-efficient cars.
But who am I kidding? If you're reading AutoblogGreen, you probably know all about CAFE and cars and Click and Clack. Today, the Tappet Brothers sent a letter to Edward J. Markey (D-Mass.), the Chairman of the U.S. House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, that is in strong support of the 35 mpg CAFE standards, instead of the 32 mpg level (which would take longer). They also make a lot of fun of people in the auto industry who seem to play Henny Penny whenever legislators talk about forcing them to make cleaner cars. Key line: "Every single time they've resisted safety, environmental, of fuel economy regulations, auto industry predictions have turned out, in retrospect, to be fear-mongering bull-feathers." You can read the full letter here (in PDF).
Markey is receptive to the call. He said that, "As any listener knows, Tom and Ray are where common sense begins when it comes to cars, and when they say reaching 35 miles per gallon is feasible and the smart play for the American auto industry, people should listen. Automakers should stop acting like they're playing the Tappet Brothers' game, 'Stump the Chumps,' and start supporting higher fuel economy standards in Congress' energy bill."
[Source: House.gov, thanks to reader JS]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Chris Abraham 9:16PM (10/30/2007)
I wanted to add to this... I have a bunch more stuff about Tom and Ray and Car Talk and the Cafe Standards for you:
http://smnr.us/thespookytruth/cartalk.html
And also a bunch more stuff about what's going on tomorrow about CAFE Standards:
http://smnr.us/thespookytruth/
Reply
Michael Hippenhammer 2:50AM (10/31/2007)
Thanks, Chris Abraham for the Click and Clack letter. I have been talking and writing about everything in their letter for years. I frustrates me to know end to hear car companies, politicians and their supporters "Chicken Little" story about how we americans are going to lose our way of life. You bet we will. We won't be able to afford $6 a gallon for gas into our 15mpg SUV, even if you are geeting 20 mpg. Or better yet 10 years from now we will have very expensive fuel and we will have millions of used GMs burning ethanol and only getting 10 mpg. The yellow cap campaign isn't going to pan out in the future. Just put your blinders on and don't, I repeat, don't plan for the future!
Reply
calebe 8:15AM (10/31/2007)
when i try to open the PDF it says the file is damaged and will not open.
Reply
Bananas 8:49AM (10/31/2007)
Umm, Michael, what about all those Toyota Tundras, Sequoias, LX430s, LX470s, LX530s, Land Cruisers, and FJ Cruisers. Did you forget them? You make it sound like they don't burn up fuel like GM does. And lest you forget, they aren't exactly trying to push the CAFE standards through either, they are against it.
Who's got the double standards now? If you are going to bash, you need to be on one side and state facts, not straddle the line.
Reply
Edslel 12:19PM (10/31/2007)
As a lifelong Republican and a small government advocate, I whole heartedly agree with the Tappet brothers on this issue. I don't want the volatile middle east controlling our economy by manipulating our energy costs. The United States must conserve energy better, and produce energy more efficiently. Let's pass the new CAFE regulations, AND build new nuclear energy plants, AND expand public transportation systems by reducing our public investments in highways. The auto industry should look for new ways to profit by investing in mass transportation technology.
Reply
rt66er 12:22PM (10/31/2007)
I thought it interesting that they list all these current (and near-future) technologies that the auto manufacturers are implementing to dramatically improve vehicle mileage, yet they miss the forest for the trees; all these advances were done without any CAFE increase or government interference. They are happening because the market dictates it. When people start buying higher-mileage vehicles (that, regardless of what the anti-car crowd screeches, are currently available in droves) the car makers will build more... or go out of business. With or without new CAFE standards.
Reply
Benson Leung 12:46PM (10/31/2007)
rt66er... Forgive me if i don't have any faith in what the "market" dictates.
The truth is, if you look at fuel economy versus CAFE in the past 20 years, the regulation is the only thing keeping the fleet wide economy where it is.
Cars on the road today, on average, get the same fuel economy as 20 years ago when CAFE was last increased, maybe a little bit worse. Since 20 years ago, the market was allowed free reign to decide what cars looked like...
The result? Cars today have shown a MASSIVE increase in power... today's minivans and midsize cars have more power than muscle cars of the past... and cars have gotten BIGGER and BIGGER.
The market for automobiles is dumb to externalities like the environment or foreign policy impact of having to import oil. Like it or not, the last time we had a sizable increase in fuel economy was when CAFE was increased.
Click and clack list a lot of technologies that you say currently exist and came about without regulation, but currently, not every vehicle implements all of these new technologies like regenerative braking, start-stop motors, and the like...
The problem isn't invention. The problem is implementation, and the will to apply new technology to every vehicle. Without a CAFE increase, the car companies will do the bare minimum with respect to fuel economy, even if that means leaving technology they've already invented on the shelf.
Reply
FThorn 4:41PM (10/31/2007)
Bananas - amen
Reply
Michael Hippenhammer 1:16AM (11/01/2007)
Bananas, GM is pushing hard on their yellow cap campaign which I am singling out. The whole campaign seems to ignor the fact that their vehicles that can run on ethanol will get even worse fuel mileage and no, I am not forgetting all the other vehicles out there. We are so easily distracted in the US because we, in general, don't know what is happening and worse yet don't care which leads to poor voting choices and more confusion. My goal is to get others to start learning and thinking about their personal choice for vehicles. Leave the trucks to the farmers and ranchers and contractors for whom it was intended for.
Reply
dlm3 12:02PM (11/01/2007)
folks,
You can legislate laws all you like, but physical laws cannot be legislated nor overturned by judicial fiat.
You can demand that every car (or the fleet average) be 35MPG, but physics and the current state of technology say that a F-150 will not get 35MPG, no matter what you do to it, and still perform its function as designed.
And while I'm no fan of pickups, the pickup truck is far more popular and useful than the Toyota Yaris and its ilk.
Facts are difficult things. If you have more pickups than hot hatches and microcars, and the pickups cannot... REPEAT CANNOT... be designed to perform their function (i.e., carrying up to 3/4 ton of material) and achieve anything even close to the manadated mileage, you statistically will never meet your CAFE requirement unless you start legislating pickup trucks off the road.
(which for some is the point - and is unconstitutional so they might as well get over it)
The problem we have is not so much consumption as supply. The US has tremendous oil and natural gas assets that are not being tapped. People worrying about aesthetics of our continental shelf or 'pristine' wasteland areas rather than heating fuel for the northern climes or fuel for the nation's economy.
CAFE has been an unadulterated failure. It has made cars less safe (if a Yaris has an impact with a tractor trailer, who wins ?), and had adverse impact on the auto manufacturer's product lines, forcing them to build cars that people don't want and won't buy in order to meet the whims of the Congress.
The solution is not to increase the CAFE standard. The CAFE standard should be REPEALED as the misbegotten joke it is.
Let people choose their rides freely. They'll pick whatever makes sense for them, and people will decide what is affordable in terms of fuel consumption.
Milton Friedman (Nobel Laureate in economics) was very clear: the markets, given the freedom to operate unfettered will inevitably come to the right solution more quickly and with less economic distress than the diktat of any politician.
CAFE has no business existing in a free country. But some in Congress and elsewhere seem to think that politicians and lawyers are better qualified to run the auto industry and consumer choice than are the auto industry and consumers.
Reply
Dave Schmetterer 4:50PM (11/02/2007)
I've forwarded the PDF of the letter to my congressman, we should all do this. It is a fantastic letter, thanks Tom and Ray.
Dave
Reply
Chris Abraham 4:23PM (11/14/2007)
Thanks for the blog entry and also thanks. I am sorry it has taken me so long to get back here -- I was so excited by the blog post that I forgot to come back. Let me check that PDF file.
Reply