Get News & Views Updates
Progressive Community
The press releases posted here have been submitted by
America's Progressive Community
For further information or to comment on this press release, please contact the organization directly.
Most Popular This Week
Today's Top News
|
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE |
CONTACT: Center for Biological Diversity Vera Pardee, (858) 717-1448 |
Gas-mileage Rules Small Step Forward; Fall Short of What’s Needed
WASHINGTON - November 16 - The Obama administration proposed new vehicle fuel-emission standards today that fall far short of what is needed to make significant reductions in greenhouse gas pollution — and also short of what is achievable. The standards announced today, for tailpipe emissions and gas mileage for passenger vehicles and light trucks in 2025, are below the European Union’s proposed standards for 2020. Gas mileage would reach a maximum of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025; the Center for Biological Diversity advocated for standards exceeding 60 miles per gallon.
“While we applaud progress, these weak standards simply don’t reflect the urgency of the climate crisis,” said Vera Pardee, an attorney at the Center’s Climate Law Institute. “The United States has long had some of the weakest fuel-economy standards in the industrialized world, and today’s announcement does little to change that.”
Earlier this month, a sobering report from the highly respected International Energy Agency warned that the door is closing on our ability to avert the worst impacts of climate change. The IEA concluded that “[t]here are few signs that the urgently needed change in direction in global energy trends is underway.” Today’s announcement does little to improve the status quo.
Current laws require the government to set fuel-efficiency standards at the “maximum feasible” level and are designed to spur technological innovation by requiring that standards be set beyond what is achievable today. Despite these requirements, the administration’s rulemaking, driven by negotiations with the industry being regulated, would lock the nation into an inadequate pace of progress for the next 14 years.
The transportation sector accounts for about a third of total U.S. greenhouse emissions — and passenger vehicles account for about two-thirds of transportation emissions, spewing nearly 1.2 billion metric tons of “carbon dioxide equivalent” emissions each year. Technologies are available today to make significant reductions, including more efficient and less-polluting engines and transmissions, strong but lightweight materials, improved aerodynamics, and hybrid and electric vehicles.
“Setting fuel-economy standards for 14 years from now that are lower than what we can achieve with technology on the road today is not the kind of progress we urgently need,” said Pardee.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

3 Comments so far
Show AllPut away your Rush Limbaugh talking points. Nobody is demanding that you give up your precious V-8 pickup truck. We're just asking for a higher AVERAGE fuel-efficiency standard among the 300-million-plus private vehicles in this country, the great bulk of which simply ferry people to and from the office, school, and midnight runs to the Mini-Mart for another bag of Cheez Doodles.
Even Tea Partiers agree that the United States needs to become more energy-independent. In a world of diminishing cheap petroleum, "drill baby drill" is not a viable, long-term energy policy (no matter how much wishful thinking goes into that mindless chant). In contrast, improved fuel-efficiency is something that will actually make the U.S. more energy independent ... and will do so year after year after year into the indefinite future ... and will keep more dollars here in U.S. pockets rather than send them overseas to support our dear "friends" in Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Venezuela, Nigeria, Indonesia, and other countries that would just as soon see us whither and die. An alternative that even Rush would support.
Yeah, yeah, I know: practical, sensible solutions to actual problems like our dependence on foreign energy imports are a real bitch, aren't they?