The Obama administration, out to “bankrupt the coal industry” and make energy prices “necessarily skyrocket” has set a new goal for Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency standards. An average of 54.5 MPG by 2025… if man is still alive.
WASHINGTON, DC – The Obama Administration today finalized groundbreaking standards that will increase fuel economy to the equivalent of 54.5 mpg for cars and light-duty trucks by Model Year 2025. When combined with previous standards set by this Administration, this move will nearly double the fuel efficiency of those vehicles compared to new vehicles currently on our roads. In total, the Administration’s national program to improve fuel economy and reduce greenhouse gas emissions will save consumers more than $1.7 trillion at the gas pump and reduce U.S. oil consumption by 12 billion barrels.
“These fuel standards represent the single most important step we’ve ever taken to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” said President Obama. “This historic agreement builds on the progress we’ve already made to save families money at the pump and cut our oil consumption. By the middle of the next decade our cars will get nearly 55 miles per gallon, almost double what they get today. It’ll strengthen our nation’s energy security, it’s good for middle class families and it will help create an economy built to last.”
This is a failure on so many levels it’s staggering. Politicians often hype future success, like the jobs that will be “saved or created” by nonsensical stimulus, or by saying they have a projected 10 bazillion in savings, so they’ll spend that money now, today. This is the same. The “savings” is mandatory.
They may as well say “we’ll make everyone thin by 2025… by starving you”. It’s the same effect. In the last few decades, cars have had some increases in fuel efficiency, but notably, there are older cars (like VW diesels) that get very good mileage, that aren’t around today. Most of this is due to safety equipment that’s become mandatory, that adds weight to cars, reduces fuel efficiency and adds price; or because environmentalists hate diesel. And there’s a limit to what the market can bear.
The administration called the new rules “historic,” and estimated that Americans would reduce their oil consumption by 12 billion barrels over the course of the program. “These fuel standards represent the single most important step we’ve ever taken to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” Mr. Obama said in a statement.
But the Romney campaign has criticized the new rules as “extreme” and said the standards would limit the choices when consumers shop for a new car. “The president tells voters that his regulations will save them thousands of dollars at the pump, but always forgets to mention that the savings will be wiped out by having to pay thousands of dollars more upfront for unproven technology that they may not even want,” said Andrea Saul, a spokeswoman for the Romney campaign.
The transportation secretary, Ray LaHood, said the standards would save Americans $1.7 trillion in fuel costs, resulting in an average savings of more than $8,000 a vehicle by 2025.
The fuel savings, he said, would easily exceed the estimated $2,000 to $3,000 that the more efficient vehicles would cost consumers to buy.
“You put better technology in the car and the price is going to go up,” Mr. LaHood said in a conference call with reporters. “But it goes up a fraction of what you save on gas.”
The administration also said the rules would cut greenhouse gas emissions in half by 2025, eliminating six billion tons over the course of the program.
Proponents of the rules contend that they could also generate hundreds of thousands of jobs by increasing the demand for new technologies.
“Our nation will be more secure, our environment will be cleaner, and consumers will have more money in their pockets as a result of the new rule,” said Phyllis Cuttino, director of the Pew Clean Energy Program, an environmental organization based in Washington.
1. Historic is meaningless. The president takes pride in how historically historic he is. We saw this when national hero Neil Armstrong passed away a few days ago… and Obama posted pictures of himself, though it gave Iowahawk something to work with.
2. It is extreme. People who can’t afford new cars (i.e., poor working schlubs the Democrats claim to represent), don’t have the money to drop $30K on a new car, let alone $50K on the new car Obama declares they should drive. This kills the poor, and drives them to mass transit and control by the state. Give up your transportation, give up your freedom. Leftist types view this as “advancement”, when really it’s control – it’s advancement for their power base.
3. Ray LaHood is an idiot. The standards will cost Americans piles of money up front, and will cost the individual more money in the long run from accidents and lack of safety from driving in tiny commuter vehicles. Furthermore, people who want tiny commuter vehicles (not a bad idea when free of government influence), won’t save a damn thing. They’ll just have their choices reduced.
4. Ray LaHood is an idiot. The fuel savings will be offset by the increased cost and reduced safety; also, the reduced utility.
5. Ray LaHood is an idiot. See above.
6. Oh noes!
Manbearpig isn’t real. We already know this. Saving “global warming emissions” is feelgood nonsense. It’s also not internally consistent, even if you do pray to Gaia every night to save you from Manbearpig. Each new vehicle takes hundreds, if not thousands, of gallons of fuel to produce, and the equivalent “carbon emissions” from the manufacture of a new car destroy any potential carbon emission savings.
7. You can always create jobs by making more regulations. It’s just make-work that creates nothing. Every business in operation today (except for criminal enterprises) has to have entire compliance divisions to deal with tax law, the EPA, workmans comp, etc. It’s all a hindrance to doing actual business and furthering the interests of the individual by bringing products and services to market that would increase the quality of life of the purchasing individual. It’s layers of bureaucracy, whether it be in paperwork or technical compliance with idiot regulations.
8. The nation will not be more secure. We will, as individuals, be in more danger as vehicles shrink. As a nation, we have the greatest energy resources on the planet. The Bakken formation has barely been tapped, and our oil sands, oil shale, and offshore reserves are astronomical. Regulations that keep us from drilling and exploiting our own resources are what keeps us unsecure.
The objective here is the same as with mandating nonexistent fuels.
WASHINGTON — When the companies that supply motor fuel close the books on 2011, they will pay about $6.8 million in penalties to the Treasury because they failed to mix a special type of biofuel into their gasoline and diesel as required by law.
But there was none to be had. Outside a handful of laboratories and workshops, the ingredient, cellulosic biofuel, does not exist.
In 2012, the oil companies expect to pay even higher penalties for failing to blend in the fuel, which is made from wood chips or the inedible parts of plants like corncobs. Refiners were required to blend 6.6 million gallons into gasoline and diesel in 2011 and face a quota of 8.65 million gallons this year.
“It belies logic,” Charles T. Drevna, the president of the National Petrochemicals and Refiners Association, said of the 2011 quota. And raising the quota for 2012 when there is no production makes even less sense, he said.
The objective is to make laws that destroy industry. The objective is to destroy industry through watermelon environmental regulations. Green on the outside, red on the inside. Eco-daleks. Control the people, destroy their way of life, dictate what’s best for them, ultimately destroy and liquidate those who resist.
Once in a while, I almost think it’s hyperbole… but fines for non-existent fuels, and a candidate who says his objective is to destroy industries… well, I’ll take them on their word.