We Love It When This Happens!

Bush administration's fuel-economy regs for bigger vehicles smacked down

Posted at 5:50 PM on 15 Nov 2007

A federal appeals court has rejected the Bush administration's fuel-economy regulations for 2008-2011 model light trucks and SUVs. In the scathing tone that the Bushies are becoming quite familiar with, the judges declared that the regulations did not consider the economic impact of vehicle emissions' contribution to climate change, and ordered the Transportation Department to come up with new, tougher standards. The court also asked for an explanation of why the agency considers light trucks and SUVs in a separate category from passenger cars, saying the distinction "overlooks the fact that many light trucks today are manufactured primarily for transporting passengers." Enviros had petitioned the appeals court less than a month after the regulations were announced in March 2006; subsequently, 11 states joined the lawsuit. While we always love to see climatic injustice smacked down, this specific issue may become moot if Congress passes -- and Bush OKs -- an energy bill with tougher fuel-economy regulations.

sources: The New York Times, Associated Press, San Francisco Chronicle, Sacramento Bee

ADVERTISING POLICY

Comments: (4 comments)

You are not logged in. Thus, you cannot post a comment. If you have a Gristmill account, log in below. If you don't have a Gristmill account, well, by all means go make one! Meet you back here in five.

smackdown

Excellent news, I live in suburbia so believe me- all these trucks and suv's aren't full of pig feed or fodder, they're full of soccer moms instead.

by mrLee at 7:50 AM on 16 Nov 2007

Here is the thing...

..if you want an SUV, you maybe want a big vehicle that has the strength and mass to ensure that you and your family survive an accident AND enables you to tackle adverse road conditions. Neither have to be related to a lousy gas mileage.

You can tackle most adverse road conditions with a front-wheel drive car and excellent tires. I have passed 4-wheel drive cars uphill on snow packed roads with a Civic. The more horse power you have, the more difficult it gets to control the power and prevent slipping or spinning of wheels. The fact that SUVs have lousy gas mileage can be blamed on the size and power of the engines. A less powerful engine would be better for off-road or adverse road conditions for most normal drivers. Smoothness is the secret to managing difficult roads and is not easily possible with huge powerful engines. So, a smaller engine would use less gas and work better in adverse conditions.
Same with size: A large or heavy vehicle does not have to have a lot of power. It only has to have a lot of power if you want to drive it like a sports car or even like a regular car. The old VW bus had maybe 50 horse power and was used to transport many people and stuff. Old Land Rovers did not have much hp either. It is not necessary.

SUV and light truck are POSSIBLE if, and only if, the folks who drive them start seeking their adrenaline rush somewhere else and begin driving reasonably for this size of vehicle.

The problem is not the SHAPE of the vehicle, the problem is the performance that the folks who drive them expect right now. For some people the acceleration from 0-60 mph is still important. Will they ever grow up?

Maybe it would be better to drop the S from the SUV.

Karsten
http://www.polluteless.com

by PolluteLessDotCom at 11:48 AM on 16 Nov 2007

I Disagree

In contrast, I believe the Bush administration standards where quite aggressive.

On average, the Bush standards would require medium duty full-size trucks and SUVs to be about 24% more efficient by 2011 then they currently are.

(Full-size truck 16.1 MPG * .24 = 21.8 MPG)
(Small SUV) 21.28 MPG * .24 = 28.4 MPG)

24% is a meaningful goal. But the way MPG is measured and averaged, it actually distorted the number down from what would actually be saved in fuel.

See:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005 ...

and

http://www.mercurynews.com/politics/ci_7479269?nclick_che ...

by nycowboy at 1:53 PM on 16 Nov 2007

Another judge legislating from the bench

This is just another judge legislating from the bench. Fuel economy standards for SUVs should be tougher, but the remedy lies in the ballot box. It's simple... elect people who do what you want them to do. But first check they haven't already been bought by special interests like unions, companies, foreigners, lobbies and enviros. :-)

by Jeremiah at 7:57 AM on 20 Nov 2007

The comments of Grist users reflect the opinions of those individuals only, and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoints of Grist, its staff, its board members, their psychotherapists, or their aestheticians. Got it?