ShimokitaJer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-13-03 12:07 PM
Original message |
Question on fuel efficiency standards |
|
I remember reading recently that there was something in the new energy bill that encouraged a slight increase in fuel efficiency, but actually discouraged it over a certain point. Has anyone seen an article about this? I'm fairly sure I read it online.
|
ShimokitaJer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Nov-13-03 02:08 PM
Response to Original message |
1. Two hours and no response? |
|
Is this just some product of my fevered imagination? I swear I saw it!
Little help?
|
ShimokitaJer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-14-03 09:46 AM
Response to Original message |
2. Still no response -- help |
|
If only to tell me I'm crazy. Has anyone heard of this? Does anyone know it to be false? Does anyone actually care about this aspect of the energy bill?
I promise this is my last self-kick. I'll just let it die and assume ignorance or apathy.
|
spanone
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-14-03 09:50 AM
Response to Original message |
3. I do not think that this administration has encouraged fuel efficiency. |
|
Quite the opposite. That would mean less fuel and that goes counter to the Halliburtons and Dick Cheney will have none of that!
|
ShimokitaJer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-14-03 10:08 AM
Response to Reply #3 |
4. Yes, but this was a specific bill or rider |
|
Which encouraged a slight increase in fuel efficiency, but actually amounted to a penalty for auto companies which increased efficiency above a certain point. I think the automakers pushed for this to keep their gas-guzzlers "competitive."
|
reachout
(236 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-14-03 10:20 AM
Response to Original message |
5. The last measure passed had no real increase |
|
July 29, 2003 by the Associated Press
Senate Rejects Tough New Auto Fuel Economy Measure Approves Auto Industry's Bill by H Joseph Hebert
WASHINGTON - The Senate rejected a proposal to require a sharp increase in automobile fuel economy Tuesday after concerns were raised that it would lead to a loss of auto industry jobs and limit consumer's ability to buy larger cars and SUVs.
By a 65-32 vote, the Senate turned back a proposal offered by Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., that would have required automakers to produce a fleet average of 40 miles per gallon by 2015, a dramatic increase from the current 27.5 mpg now required.
Instead, senators approved by a 66-30 vote an industry-supported measure that turned the issue over to the Transportation Department, which will be required to take into consideration an array of issues - from job losses and highway safety to economic impact on U.S. auto manufacturers - before any rule change can be made.
This would "create unnecessary hurdles to any significant increases" in fuel economy by the transportation agency, argued Sen. Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M., and open any future fuel economy decisions to an increasing number of court challenges.
"We are going backwards," said Bingaman.
The measure, offered by Sens. Kit Bond, R-Mo., and Carl Levin, D-Mich., prescribes no specific, mandated increase in corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE.
|
ShimokitaJer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-14-03 10:35 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
|
It's not quite as I remember it, and it was a more recent article I read, but those seem to be the right points: significant increases are made more rather than less difficult.
Thank you.
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 01:47 PM
Response to Original message |