Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Fuel Economy Back on U.S. Agenda
Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Not My Financial Crisis -- I've Got Literally Nothing to Lose
Alexander Zaitchik
Democracy and Elections:
GOP Attacks on ACORN Are Based on the Fear of 1.3 Million New Voters
DrugReporter:
LSD Cured My Headache
Arran Frood
Election 2008:
Maybe Now People Will Take Their Votes More Seriously
Bob Herbert
Environment:
The Meltdown We Really Can't Afford
Kerry Trueman
ForeignPolicy:
Obama Talks Tough About Afghanistan; Here's What He's Really in For
Anand Gopal
Health and Wellness:
McCain's Erratic Health Strategy: Now He's Slashing Medicare
RJ Eskow
Hurricane Katrina:
From the Bayou to Baghdad: Mission Not Accomplished
Amy Goodman
Immigration:
Expanding Flawed E-Verify System Will Hurt Lawful Workers
Michele Waslin
Media and Technology:
Stop Being a Narcissist -- It's Time to Quit Facebook
Carmen Joy King
Movie Mix:
The "Battle in Seattle" and Beyond
Stuart Townsend
Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Our Next President Will Transform the Supreme Court
Ellen Goodman
Rights and Liberties:
From Gitmo to the U.S.: How 17 Uighur Prisoners Could Be Let Into the United States
Andy Worthington
Sex and Relationships:
Why Everyone Loves Hot, Smart Older Women
Vanessa Richmond
War on Iraq:
U.S. Needs to Take in More Iraqi Refugees
Zainab Mineeia
Water:
Can the People Who Live in Coastal Towns Ever Be Safe From Hurricanes?
Lizzy Ratner
Concern about global warming is changing the dynamics of a longstanding debate on Capitol Hill: whether to tighten America's standards for automotive fuel economy.
One bipartisan bill, which cleared a Senate committee last week, seeks to boost average car mileage by about 10 miles per gallon during the 10 years between 2011 and 2020, a so-called "10 in 10" proposal.
Although no one sees it as a one-step fix for the nation's energy challenges, such a move would have major effects -- but only if provisions that give US automakers an out are eliminated, say environmentalists.
The measure, which would be the first legislation in nearly two decades to raise fuel-economy standards, would impose costs on consumers and manufacturers, especially Detroit's Big Three. But greenhouse-gas emissions would fall, as would demand for imported oil, assuming the law succeeded in improving fuel economy by 4 percent a year.
"These really are significant levels of reduction -- but only if we can get them locked into place," says Paul Bledsoe, a spokesman for the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan group of 20 energy experts.
If fuel economy improved 4 percent a year from 2007 to 2030 -- about 1 mile per gallon per year -- America's oil consumption would drop by 5.6 million barrels per day. Currently the US uses about 20 million barrels per day and, without any major efficiency gains, will be using 28 million by 2030.
New mileage rules face sharp debate in Congress, and the measure is expected to undergo many alterations if it is to clear just the full Senate. Lawmakers have been divided over the issue for years.
But in recent months two shifts have occurred: Democrats have regained control of Congress, and bipartisan consensus has grown on the need to take action to curb the carbon emissions that contribute to global warming. Even automobile manufacturers voice support, with caveats, for boosting fuel economy.
"We are looking forward to doing our part to address these issues" of fuel economy, says Wade Newton of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers in Washington. "We really want to be able to support a bill like that [in the Senate], but we do feel that's too ambitious." The alliance includes domestic automakers, as well as others including Toyota and Volkswagen.
Congress has discarded scads of fuel-economy bills over the years. This time could be different, some observers say.
"I would argue this is the best chance we've had for a real impact on fuel economy in 30 years," says David Friedman of the Union of Concerned Scientists.
"I'm very optimistic," adds David Doniger, policy director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's climate center. "The move in the Senate is a step in the right direction. The likelihood of something finally happening has gone up."
See more stories tagged with: global warming, fuel efficiency, cafe
Mark Clayton is a staff writer for the Christian Science Monitor.
Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »