The implications of my earlier comment is that the auto companies have been permitted by NHTSA to avoid paying billions of dollars in civil penalities by facilitating and enabling the overreporting of their fleet performances.  

Can we trust anything coming out of Washington?  This is just utterly corrupt!  No doubt that the NHTSA is an agent of the auto companies!

Hope I made your day.  

David, if as you predict, the package will include an increase in the Renewable Fuels Standard but will NOT reverse subsidies to oil and gas, what's there to like? A 35-mph CAFE standard by 2020 will do nothing to spur technology: the industry elsewhere is already achieving that kind of gas mileage. And while it is welcome that "the odious nuclear loan guarantees" are gone from the bill, they would not exist in any case if there were no bill.

So, no, I'm not cheering.

Well, the "g" and "h" are next to each other on the keyboard.

Dingell won't be here that much longer, so he tries to lock in the best deal he can now.

whatever

in my view, the flip side is probably more important.  not regulating cars.  Instead, build subways and light rail etc.  Build a new "normal" pattern of getting around

tough.  no established lobby for it.  need to build one

"marking an historic advancement in our efforts in the Congress to address our energy security and laying strong groundwork for climate legislation next year.  We are confident that this final product will win the support of the environmental, labor and manufacturing communities." Pelosi's web statement

Pathetic!  

I'm more worried about the renewables than I am the CAFE standards.  People will pretty much force the industry to drive the CAFE standards up on their own as fuel prices increase.

But if the renewables standards pass at 15%, it could be a big boost.

Now if we can just get this past Bush (or get enough votes to override a veto).

I think that if I was not drained of indignation on this issue, I'd be saying much the same things Justlou is above.

But it's not exactly news that we have no guts, as a nation, on this.  If there was ever a case of wanting your cake and eating it too!

On renewables ... I'm not sure ... not sure if I should view that with the same resigned cynicism that I feel this morning toward CAFE, or if there is actually a chance in the "ethanol backlash" etc.

With all due respect to Pelosi, we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that $100/bbl oil makes it much harder for pols to oppose CAFE increases.  Scuttlebutt that I've been hearing is that this played a big role - the impressive lift here, should it succeed will be keeping the RES in, which - notwithstanding the fact that our fossil fuel use has alot more to do with electric generation than passenger cars - doesn't have the same external political support right now.

That will push gas prices to 10 bucks per gallon.  Sure a million more people (all terrorist harboring heathens, big deal)may die, but isn't it worth it to get that 35 mpg by 2020?  maybe it will even be boosted to 40 mpg by 2030!  Naw, too much to hope for.  Invade Saudi Arabia too and it might be possible.

It's a great way to make energy policy. Surely  lobbyists won't reverse that 35 mpg standard in 2010 when the legislative branch turns republican.  Nope, it's set in stone!

Yes, thank you Mr Bush, you have shown the way on energy policy.  Dingle surely is an eco-hero too.

Who are the bigger saviours of the environment  here?  The wise "contribution" loving legislators who sell these policies to the public, or those who tout them as actual progress.  I guess it's a toss up, but the legislators generally make more money than the commentators.  They get to become lobbyists and consultants.  

The commentators only get think tank jobs, if they seem influential enough.  Think tankery is lower on the jetset status graph than lobbyist/consultant.  But keep doing what you can to get that first class air travel you all.  That's the main thing.  You can't go back to coach now.

Trucks?  Well of course trucks are immune to CAFE standards.  SUVs too, right?  

http://amazngdrx.blogharbor.com/blog

....Keeping in the RES for now is a much bigger deal in the long run than CAFE.  

Renewable energy needs a bigger foothold -- 20 states have recognized this, and if we can align all the different state mandates with a federal requirement, it should spur that much more investment.

Is efficiency part of the RES definition in the bill?  Sean, do you know?

Anyway, CAFE is important, but high oil prices are bringing up consumer demand for better mpg and the industry can't keep its head in the sand forever, right?  [Toyota...GM...anyone...I want my hybrid minivan!]

With the Renewable (electric) Portfolio Standard comes a five-fold increase in the Renewable Fuels (i.e., ethanol and biodiesel) Standard, and meanwhile the tax breaks for the oil and gas industry remain untouched. Sounds like a Faustian bargain to me!

But it the renewable fuels standards goes into effect (not that I would want it to), and RES standards also go into effect (and thus, we rely more on wind, solar, etc. than on oil and coal fired energy plants), then wouldn't they lose a great deal of money, even with the tax breaks?

Also, I thought the bill required an increase in royalty payments?

Anyway, even if that doesn't make much of a dent, I think Bush would be far less likely to sign it if it had revoked the tax breaks.  And, as much as I would love to have an even stronger bill than this, there wouldn't be much point if it didn't get signed (or have enough votes to override a veto).

Unfortunately, there's not much of a point in havin' a perfect bill if it isn't passable.  I think this is a good compromise for now.  We'll just haveta hit 'em up on the weaker issues at a later date.

From an e-mail the Union of Concerned Scientists is sending out:

"Thanks to almost a year of your emails and calls in support of an Energy Bill that promotes fuel economy and renewable electricity, we are on the cusp of passing a strong, comprehensive energy package that protects consumers and reduces the threat of global warming.

Last night the Speaker of the House announced that they will vote this week on an Energy Bill that includes strong standards on fuel economy and renewable electricity. This historic bill will raise fuel economy standards for the first time in 32 years, require electric utilities to obtain more power from clean, renewable sources--such as the wind and sun, and will help reduce America's global warming pollution.

Please urge your representative today to support the energy bill. This is your last chance to contact your representatives about this bill!"

Huh, that NRDC article linked by josullivan58 states that the bill includes lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions thresholds for renewable fuels.

Maybe the Renwewable Fuels Standards won't be a complete concession after all.

I don't like the RFS either, but I doubt many of the Republicans (especially those from the farm states) would support the bill without it.

Maybe this  lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions thresholds for renewable fuels requirement will help a little.

Anyone have some more detailed info. on that please?  I wish to know if it'll actually do somethin', or if it's basically a greenwash?

I've argued with them, on their blog, about the stupidity of their CAFE support.

The fact is that our real fleet economy has always exceeded the CAFE requirement.  We've never passed a law that "forced" us to do more than we were already doing.

I'm sure this will be the same.  The new CAFE is mild enough that we'll be doing it anyway, for reasons of gasoline price and economy.

All the UCS ended up convincing me of was that scientists are not always as smart as they think they are.  Imagine thinking this is a "a strong, comprehensive energy package!"

Or, maybe it is the nature of the lobbying apparatus, that after a bill everyone must congratulate themselves, pretend success, and begin again ... look forward to another UCS membership appeal!

"The fact is that our real fleet economy has always exceeded the CAFE requirement."

Odo, the real fact is that our fleet averages about 5 mpg below what CAFE reports for any given year.  

But, I agree, oil and gas prices are driving improvements more than any government standard is doing.  But, if there was a real standard in force with real civil penalties imposed that might be a different story.  

There is fleet, fleet car, and fleet truck.

The CAFE standard is most strongly associated with cars, but fleet car mileage has always been higher than the requirement. (except perhaps for a moment around 1985).

If the standard were "forcing" people we'd expect compliance to that level and no further.

(I don't think the graph at that link is in error, it just addresses the "domain" that CAFE regulates.)

The real world fleet average for cars and light trucks (which includes a shitload of SUVs) is about 5 mpg below the average fleet mileage for cars and light trucks reported by CAFE.

This is what I have been ranting about.  The NHTSA numbers in their reports are bogus!  And the auto companies are rewarded for the permitted lieing.  The standard is a big lie!