Congress sends bill raising fuel efficiency standards to Bush

What the future holds (besides inflated food prices with the new ethanol mandates):

http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleId=122972

 

The ethanol part of that bill is scary stupid.

We won't be able to buy groceries as a result. How can any group of people be that dumb?

Harry

 

35 MPG is the gasoline gallon right? Does the ethanol count? If not, then that is a HUGE loophole.

How will they measure MPG for E10? E20? E85?

 

I'd like to know if the EPA is still in charge of emissions and air quality. I read that Bush is trying to block California's stricter emissions law by taking oversight away from the EPA and giving it to the Department of Transportation. That way the deal California worked out with the Feds would be voided. I also read that if this wasn't part of the Energy Bill, Bush was going to veto it. (maybe I read it here on Priuschat?)

 

I thought he effectively did that when he helped place the last few heads (William Wehrum, Jeffrey Holmstead) of the EPA Air Division. Men that spent most of their time working for a particular law firm (Latham & Watkins) that protected pollution violators.

 

California has some sort of deal with the EPA. I think they're in litigation right now to be allowed to go forward with their stricter standards. Taking emissions out of the hands of the EPA and giving it to Dept of Transportation would do an end run around all of the legal stuff.

 

Is it this case?

Quotes from the NRDC website:

"In his 57-page decision, Judge Anthony W. Ishii of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California wrote that “both EPA and California... are equally empowered to promulgate regulations that limit the emissions of greenhouse gasses, principally carbon dioxide, from motor vehicles.â€

The ruling means that the last remaining hurdle for the state to implement the clean cars rules is for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to grant California routine permission to enforce them. EPA has granted the state permission to enforce its air pollution rules for cars more than 50 times in the past, but it has sat on California’s latest request for nearly two years, prompting the state to sue EPA in a separate lawsuit.

“Today’s ruling affirms California’s legal right to clean its air and protect the health of its citizens,†said Fran Pavley, a senior climate advisor with the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and former assemblywoman who wrote the 2002 landmark clean cars law, AB 1493. “The EPA should stop dragging its feet and give California the routine permission it needs to start enforcing the law.â€

Under federal law, California is the only state allowed to set its own vehicle emission standards. Other states have a choice between the federal rules or California’s stricter measures. Sixteen others states – Arizona, Connecticut, Colorado, Florida, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Utah, and Washington – are adopting California’s rules. Together with California, they account for 45 percent of the nation’s new vehicle sales."

http://www.nrdc.org/media/2007/071212.asp

 

Yep. That's the one.

 

I fully agree with minimising CO2 emissions from cars, now what are they doing with power generation and industry?

 

A provision requiring 15% of electricity to come from renewable sources was dropped from the House version of the Bill in order to avoid a Republican fillibuster in the Senate. I think Congress will try again to push that through after next year's presidential election.

 

2013 ... wow! so big auto industry only has 5 years to get their lobbyists to reverse the law. Gee, thanks for all the hard work, congress.

 

Agreed entirely. That's why CAFE stinks now. This bill could be just another sham that calculates CAFE gasoline MPG based on a theoretical heavy ethanol offset, like E85. If that's true, the whole effort is pointless. Next thing we know, one auto maker or another will offer an engine that runs on 100% ethanol and gets "infinite" CAFE gasoline MPG.

I hope I'm wrong, but I tend to be very cynical when politicians are heavily involved.

 

The Fuel Economy Agreement also:
• Maintains a distinction between passenger and non-passenger vehicles.
• Exempts work trucks from the 35 mile-per-gallon standard
• Provides minimum standards requested by the UAW to maintain small car production in
the United States.
• Extends and phases out the flex-fuel vehicle loophole.
• Provides incentives and loan guarantees for automobile manufacturers to make higher
fuel economy vehicles.
• Does not affect state or EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases.

http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/fuel_economy/2007-energy-bill-resource-center.html

 

I am glad someone understood my point....

Hey, want to double gasoline MPG? Easy, just run it on E50 (50% gas and 50% ethanol).

Does anyone know if there is a loop hole like that? I am too lazy to go over the whole 1000+ page doc.

 

So was Congress.