US Tailpipe Regulation: You want it? You got it!

Posted by Ruth Brandt on May 19, 2009
Energy, Mitigation, Politics, USA

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??).

Related posts:

  1. Weighing the Evidence on Environmental Regulation Versus Jobs
  2. On the Regulation of F-gases
  3. Patchwork or Progress? What state-led emissions standards could mean for U.S. automakers
  4. G20 Live Blog

Tags: , , , , , ,

Make a Donation

Like what you read? Climatico is a nonprofit organization and relies on donations from readers like you to continue to provide you with quality independent coverage. Help show your support and make a tax-deductible donation today.

Comments


  • And now the DOT and EPA have published their proposed rules for this policy. There will be a 60 day comment period.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/16/business/energy-environment/16cars.html

    September 17 2009
    CommentsLike

    • 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.

      May 28 2009
      CommentsLike

      • 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.

        May 28 2009
        CommentsLike

        • 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?

          May 28 2009
          CommentsLike

          • 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.

            May 28 2009
            CommentsLike

            • 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).

              May 28 2009
              CommentsLike

              • 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.

                May 28 2009
                CommentsLike

                • 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.”

                  May 28 2009
                  CommentsLike

                  • 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.

                    May 28 2009
                    CommentsLike

                    • 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…

                      May 28 2009
                      CommentsLike