Although as yet unofficial, an exciting new development is expected when President Obama will soon – probably later today – announces new federal rules for automobile emissions and mileage standards.
When Obama cleared the road for a federal waiver, which would have allowed California (and 13 other states which would have followed suit) to develop more stringent fuel efficiency standards, there were concerns that this will lead to a patchwork of regulations around the country. The new regulations which are about to be announced should redress these fears and bring the whole of the US up to the standards set by the Californian regulations (see fact sheet for California’s regulations, though the two set of rules use difference measurements, so complex conversions are needed to actually compare them). They will also mark the first ever limits on GHG tailpipe emissions in the United States.
Although some of the details are not completely clear, and there seems to be some confusion as to exact numbers, these rules which will take effect in 2012, will create a car and light truck fleet which is about 40% cleaner and more efficient than what we have today, by 2016. This is four years earlier than is required under current federal law, which was passed in 2007 but never enforced, as no regulations were made by the Bush administration.
This development will have wide support as it follows months of discussions with the ailing American auto industry, as well as fit in with the Waxman-Markey ACES bill which calls for a nationwide standard. Car manufacturers welcome the pending announcement in part because this will allow them to better plan for the future market, after finding themselves lagging behind Japanese and European manufacturers.
The expected announcement is naturally also supported by environmental politicians and NGOs. And as Daniel Becker, director of the Safe Climate Campaign said - “This is the single biggest step the American government has ever taken to cut greenhouse gas emissions.”
UPDATE - and now it's official. With executives from 10 automakers by his side, and environmental leaders applauding from the audience, President Obama announced a new national fuel efficiency policy. The policy will cover model years 2012-2016, and by 2016 will require an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 mpg (or 15km/litre. Compare this to the 35 mpg by 2020, which is what the 2007 CAFE law requires. The current average is 25 mpg). Obama mentioned that 1.8 billion barrels of oil will be saved over the lifetime of vehicles sold in the next 5 years (this is the equivalent of shutting down 194 coal plants or taking 58 million cars off the roads for a year).
This policy is a result of an unprecedented collaboration between the Department of Transportation, the Environmental Protection Agency, Amrican auto manufacturers, the United Auto Workers, environmental leaders, the State of California, and other state governments.
UPDATE #2 - more details coming through mention that the EPA will indeed regulate tailpipe emissions, which has never been done before, and that Congress does not need to aprove these standards as they will be implemented through federal rules (which - together with the strong alliance backing it up - means that this is not just a pretty statement, but is a policy able to bring real changes).
Some thoughts - one of the things mentioned again and again by the different people involved, is how much collaboration went into this. It is a unique alliance between groups representing very different interests (auto industry, state governments, environmental NGOs, etc) all "marching forward in the same direction." as California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said at some point. Obama notes this as well, mentioning in his statement that "it represents not only a change in policy in Washington but the harbinger of a change in the way business is done in Washington... No longer will we accept anything less than a common effort, made in good faith, to solve our toughest problems." As the problems facing the US are are indeed tough and deeply rooted, I only hope that this is really true, and not just wishful thinking from a man who sought to 'reach out across the aisle' since his first days in office (and was constantly rebuffed)
UPDATE #3 - questions have been raised about how this will affect the struggling ethanol industry which is currently trying to increase the national standard from a 10% ethanol blend (that is, ethanol constitute 10% of the blend sold at the pump) to a 15% blend. Some analysts say a tougher fuel efficiency standard might harm the industry as ethanol has a lower energy content than gasoline. However when questioned, Carol Browner the president's assistant on energy and climate change, said she did not know the answer to that.
While sorry for the workers in a struggling industry, I can't say that I will be sorry to see the strong ethanol lobby run into some difficulties or the industry forced to change the way it produces biofuels. Heavily subsidized corn based ethanol is not the way to produce carbon neutral fuels, nor is it beneficial to the American economy as a whole.
UPDATE #4 - The new policy resolves the conflict between the federal government and the state of California regarding fuel standards. Which means that the lawsuits connected to said conflict will now be dropped and these resources can be directed elsewhere (maybe sending more environemental lobbyists to Washington??).




Comment on 'Tough tailpipe emissions rules go nationwide'
19/05/2009 19:10 Tom said:
I'm curious to see what the economic impact of this will be - surely it'll just drive up car prices?19/05/2009 19:23 Chris said:
Apparently it'll drive up prices by about $ 1300 on average but while that is significant if you say switched from a very inefficient vehicle and downsized ( not merely kept to the same vehicle with more efficiency) you could bring that down hugely.Consider also that oil prices are widely predicted to race up after this year, so as a cost it would probably not be prohibitive.
- Do you think this is part of Obama's approach to Climate Change achievning successive "moderate" victories on several fronts.
Say the Waxman b ill passes ( big if I know) then Cap and Trade + Fuel efficiency + stimulus renewable funds.
Far more than a singualr policy environmentalists hoped for. Not to mention state level initiatives.
19/05/2009 19:27 Joe said:
More CO2 is emitted by Chinese coal fires than every SUV in the United States. This will accomplish nothing but making a lot of people feel better about themselves.19/05/2009 19:31 apw said:
a global superpower like america should be leading the world in stuff like this. the example they set is just as important as the actual effect this will have19/05/2009 19:40 Niel Bowerman said:
@apw I fully agree. If we are to get an agreement in Copenhagen we're going to need plenty more leadership on this scale. @Joe, "this will accomplish nothing?" You don't think it will be a useful gesture in helping bring the Chinese onboard? The only question is whether this will be enough?19/05/2009 19:42 Niel Bowerman said:
What I really want to know is why the Republicans aren't more actively against this? If it's going to drive the price of cars up by USD1000, isn't that just the kind of thing that they usually protest vehemently? What did Obama give them in exchange?19/05/2009 19:59 Fabian said:
Looking at yesterday's NYT I think it's hard to make the case that this will drive up costs massively. If - as the Obama-administration argues - these rules will only start to 'bite' for cars which are currently in their early design stages (i.e. those that will be sold from 2011 onwards) it seems unlikely that it would drive up costs for cars massively, and hopefully the counterfactual will be impossible because the gas-guzzlers that would have been designed without these rule changes will never be built...19/05/2009 21:14 Ruth Brandt said:
Hi Chris - apparently these rules include various flexibilities that should significantly reduce the cost to the auto companies, and hence price rises to consumers.That's one of the reasons they support this (after all, they have been involved in creating this new policy). This also clears up the various rules and regulations the industry is facing, so rather than 3 different ones, they only have to deal with one federal rule.
19/05/2009 21:20 Ruth Brandt said:
Oh, and according to Obama, the increase in a car's price could be offset in just three years (I guess that depends on the price of fuel at the time as well), and that "over the life of a vehicle, the typical driver would save about $ 2,800 by getting better gas mileage."19/05/2009 21:46 Ruth Brandt said:
and that's supposed to be $ 2,800 over the lifetime of the vehicle.20/05/2009 08:41 merryk said:
That is going to change America's "carscape" quite drastically. On the costs - I wonder who is going to pay: definitely the American car industry that has a whole lot of catching up to do with regards to fuel efficiency. The American car consumer? I guess not necessarily, given that among the 2009 models there are already some cars (and not just hybrids) that are close to these standards (the VW Jetta for example does 34 miles per gallon or 6.9 litres / 100km) - question of course how easy / difficult it is to achieve further efficiency improvements. The US Dept of Energy has a nice vehicle efficiency calculator http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/findacar.htm.20/05/2009 01:22 Kari said:
This is an encouraging start!!20/05/2009 08:50 merryk said:
P.S. check out the Tesla, a whole new generation of electric vehicle. Tesla has just partnered with Mercedes to move the production of battery fueled cars forward: the first battery-fueled Mercedes Benz is expected to be ready by 2010. From 2012 all Daimler Passenger cars will be fitted with Lithium-Ion batteries (according to Reuters).20/05/2009 09:07 Ruth Brandt said:
Merryk - I agree it will change the scene drastically. The example you give though is of a European car which already complies with the target standards for 2016. So American auto-makers have fairly easy work, in terms of the available technologies, to greatly improve their cars. And of course, now that the American industry is going to start producing more efficient cars, this will mean more competition for the European and Japanese companies, and that's never a bad thing for consumers.Niel - you're right to suspect the Republicans for keeping quite over something that might cost money, but I think they may be considering their response carefully (or they should, if they know what's good for them). This policy is backed by a very broad coalition which includes a very popular Republican governor (Schwarzenegger) and the governor of Michigan, home of the car industry (Jennifer Granholm). Not to mention the car industry itself which welcome a coherent nationwide policy (of course, they're also not in much of a position to battle with Washington at the moment, not when they keep asking for bailout money). My point is that it is touted as a saviour for the car industry, and that's not something Republicans can really oppose.
20/05/2009 14:06 Paige Andrews said:
I'm surprised that the U.S. media isn't covering this story more. One day after the announcement and emissions standards are not even a blip on the front of the New York Times or Washington Post. More focus seems to be on credit card and health care reform as well as the plan for closing Guantanamo.Neil - I also don't seem to be hearing strong protests from Republicans on this issue. I think that after last summer's high gas prices, both Republicans and Democrats are strongly aware of the need to have better fuel efficiency (not to mention that gas prices are expected to rise after this holiday weekend). Most consumers are buying used vehicles right now due to the economy. New vehicles are a luxury at this point and, therefore, increased prices may not be as much of a concern to consumers/constituents?
21/05/2009 16:22 Kari said:
I haven't herd much about this either. On the up side there has been talk and change as far as Federal tax incentives on purchases of new hybrid, lean-burn, alternative fuel, and electric vehicles! Making it easier for the little people (If they can afford a new car...) to make a difference too. Of course it would be nice if there was no choice and all cars were green to begin with.24/05/2009 04:37 takashi said:
In terms of auto emission control technology, US automakers have been far behind their counterparts in Japan and EU since they failed to meet the requirements of the so-called Muskie act. It may be necessary for the US Government to create ambitious standards and then for the US automakers to successfully achieve them for thier revival.Add a reply: