Dingell calls Senate CAFE plan "delusionary"
Unafraid to bring up the unpopular carbon tax idea (mostly to make a point), Rep. John Dingell (D-MI) is speaking out all over the place on the nation's mileage debates. On C-SPAN Friday, Dingell says the Senate's CAFE plan is "delusionary," and that he will work to raise CAFE standards without a loss of jobs, industry or opportunity in America.
I'm not quite sure who he's talking about or how he figures this out, but Dingell says in the clip that for one domestic automaker, the Senate bill as written doesn't mandate a 35 mpg standard but, because of this company's fleet make-up, actually comes to a 54 mpg standard. Huh? Anyone have any insight into this?
He then continues in the Levin vein, saying that such regulations would put the company out of business and 60,000 people out of work. Dingell won't mention which company he's talking about, but Ford's got 300,000 employees, GM has 335,000 and DaimlerChrysler has/had 382,000, with about 80,000 of them working for Chrysler.
[Source: C-SPAN, thanks to Linton/Hugg]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Tim 10:20AM (7/09/2007)
His TRUE masters speak... and it's NOT "we the people."
Reply
dthiel 12:01PM (7/09/2007)
My guess regarding the 54 mpg standard is this:
Obviously he is referring to Chrysler since their product mix is currently 70% trucks, SUV's, and minivans. If they would maintain close to the same product mix, the car portion of the line-up would have to obtain a much higher (54?) rating to offset the lower ratings of the truck/SUV/minivan and still achieve the overall fleet average of 54 mpg.
Reply
dthiel 12:04PM (7/09/2007)
Oops...
The last line should read:
...and still achieve the overall fleet average of 35 mpg.
Reply
Sebastian Blanco 2:07PM (7/09/2007)
dthiel-
I assumed he was talking about Chrysler, too. That's why I ended the post the way I did. But I find his language just a little too deceptive. The whole point of the cAfe ("a" emphasized on purpose) standards is that they're the average ratings. He can't go saying that the average for Chrysler would be 54, because it won't be. They'll have to make some 54 mpg car to offset their low-mileage vehicles. The average will still be 35 (or whatever). Sneaky.
Reply
rserafin 3:30PM (7/09/2007)
The formula for attaining CAFE compliance is not as simple as arithmetical advertising. They use something called harmonic averaging. This I got from an EPA web site:
Corporate average fuel economy and compliance with the CAFE standard is determined as the harmonic average of the fuel economy of automobiles produced by each manufacturer. Harmonic average fuel economy is more difficult to achieve than would be simple averaging. For example, to achieve a CAFE standard of 27.5 mpg, two 35 mpg vehicles must be sold for every 20 mpg vehicle sold.
Reply
GoodCheer 5:16PM (7/09/2007)
In case anyone missed the math there, rserafin's post reveals a sensible system. The three cars will burn a total of 3 gallons (1 gallon apiece) to go 27.5 miles each... so they average 27.5 mpg.
35mpg car: 27.5/35 = .786 gal
35mpg car: 27.5/35 = .786 gal
20mpg car: 27.5/20 = 1.375 gal
-----------
3 gal
cheers
Reply
mikeinBuilding7 8:04PM (7/09/2007)
Dingle is out of touch with reality.
Wired(?) or was it msnbc, has just done a story about Chrysler pumping out more 4 cyl engines, in premium cars, because of Buyer Demand.
This is just another veiled attempt to keep the oil industry profitable.
Reply
BGJ 10:56AM (7/10/2007)
#1, #7 -
Would it also be fair to assume Dingell is concerned with the thousands of people in his state that could be out of work if Chysler folds due to regulations??
Hopefully this is his main concern over campaign contributions that may/may not come from Big Auto/Big Oil.
Reply
mikeinBuilding7 10:00PM (7/10/2007)
No. 8.
No, it would not be safe to assume that's Dingle's motive.
The U.S. automakers are losing Market Share TODAY.
People are moving to smaller cars, and cars with smaller engines.
The Auto Industry is Fighting Buyer Demand.
The U.S. Auto Industry has the idea that they will tell us what we want,
not supply us the product we want.
The solutions are currently in Europe.
Diesel, Hybrid, Hybrid-Diesel.
Reply
motorman 2:58PM (7/15/2007)
what is wrong with keeping the oil companies and auto companies profitable as their stock contributes to my and a lot of other peoples pension funds ??? i hope your pension fund is not in either one or both if the govt drives them out of business. there are lot of unintended consequences to this CAFE deal which is being done just to get votes in the next election.
Reply
P.Fezziwig 9:32AM (7/25/2007)
Stocks didn't tank because the big 3 laid off 10's of thousands of it's employees, i assume you are not an employee or living in the states where the layoffs occured. Do you seriously think their economic strategy is working? Massive layoffs and decreasing market share! I hope your pension has invested in Toyota and Honda.
-------------
P.Fezziwig www.GreenCarsNow.com
Reply