It would have been easy to miss this story if you rely on national news sources. Although the Associated Press wrote the story, it has mostly been covered by local news people despite the fact that it will impact the millions of people who will buy light trucks in the next decade. After resisting pressure on the issue for years, the Bush Administration is considering tightening fuel economy requirements on most light trucks.
This might be a politically motivated move designed to placate voters before the 2006 elections, but if so it’s too little far too late; the standards in question won’t begin to phase in until 2008.
Environmentalists, scientists, economists, and people concerned with national security have been pushing for improved CAFE standards for years now, and have yet to make much headway with the Bush Administration. Why the Flip-Flop?
It seems unlikely that there is genuine concern over the fact that record high gas prices are cutting profits at some retailers, inasmuch as the Wal-Mart customer who can’t afford gas to drive to Wal-Mart also can’t afford a new truck. Gas prices are changing the way average Americans do things, but this proposed change won’t make things better for another 5 years, if then.
I predict that — if this change to the CAFE standards ever happens as planned — it will be smoke and mirrors. Please note that the new standard would break “light trucks” into 6 classes based on size and weight. Sure, a 2010 minivan should theoretically get better milage than a 2001 minivan, but it will no longer be compared to pickup trucks or SUVs. This complicated standard opens the door for auto manufacturers to use all sorts of engineering chicanery to manipulate vehicles into different classes of light truck. Don’t forget, each of the articles describing the change include a sentence like this one: “But the largest SUVs, such as the Hummer H2, and cars would not be affected by the plan.” The “light truck” category is already very complicated. It can be difficult to figure out what qualifies and what doesn’t. This should actually be a vital concern inasmuch as “light trucks” in addition to having different fuel economy standards, have different safety standards than passenger cars.
The plans don’t include better fuel economy, just more categories that make it seem like there is better fuel economy.
I propose radically simplifying the system. Let’s classify vehicles based on the number of passengers they are designed to safely transport. Three seats and under would be called “work vehicles.” This would include panel vans and pickup trucks, and have lower fuel efficiency requirements. Yes, this category would also include two-seater sports cars, but that’s alright; not only would this mean these cars could be more powerful, a higher milage sports car could be added to the fleet to improve average fleet economy. Anything with four to seven seats would be called a “passenger car” and be held to the highest fuel efficiency standards and strict safety standards, as this would represent the vast majority of vehicles on the road. Everything from the Hyundai Accent to the Chevy Tahoe would fall into this category. Even more strict safety standards, but lower fuel efficiency standards, would apply to vehicles that seat eight or more people, a category I would like to call “passenger buses.” I feel this label accurately describes the practical uses of such vehicles.
In closing, I have two items of concern. First, Pat Robertson advocates assassinating the democratically elected President of Venezuela, Hugo Chavez. Why? Because “he’s going to make that a launching pad for communist infiltration and Muslim extremism” and anyway, “It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war … and I don’t think any oil shipments will stop.” I don’t know what’s more startling: that Robertson has never heard the phrase “godless communists;” that he thinks he has the authority to call what is in essence a fatwa; that he admits that oil is a huge part of the issue; or that he still claims to follow a God who said stuff like “Thou shalt not kill” and “Love your enemies… and pray for them.” My second item of concern, “The Government” says Look out! Vagrants might really be terraists in disguise. The fact that no single department is claiming to have issued this warning, but rather it is “based on a State Department report” is very interesting. This sounds suspiciously like an excuse that will allow mass roundups of the homeless.