Video: Pelosi explains why she shut down debate on CAFE
As we reported, the energy bill goes up for debate Friday but there won't be any debate on CAFE. Pelosi had a little talk with Markey and he withdrew his amendment to the CAFE standard. The Hill-Terry amendment has been withdrawn as well. In this short clip from the Newshour, Pelosi explains why she did it. She says she was NOT afraid of Dingell (Yeah, right). She just thought the CAFE standard that was already in the bill was good enough.
Ever since CAFE came up in the Energy Bill I have been transfixed by the developments. Let me recap the horse race for you. First, GM's CEO Rick Wagoner said CAFE was stupid. Senator Dianne Feinstein won anyway. This is the CAFE standard Pelosi says she supports. It was a nice but boring fight... then Dingell came along.
Go below the fold for more.
[Source: Newshour]
Markey had plans for a tougher standard and for a while, Markey looked like the clear winner. Hill-Terry, the opposing amendment to Markey, had it's supporters like GM. Markey had supporters too like Toyota and more importantly he had more votes. Dingell gave his support of Hill-Terry and it was all down hill from there for Markey. Why? Dingell has a little experience in government. He is the second longest serving representative... ever. In 2009, he becomes the longest serving according to Wikipedia. When he called the plan "delusionary" and said it would destroy a mystery car company, people noticed.
Suddenly, the energy bill, heck, the entire Democratic party was at stake. I went to a GM event recently and they seemed like they were threatening to kill the Volt. The pressure was palpable. So Pelosi for the good of everyone caved on CAFE and sent it to conference which is like purgatory. So this Friday, debates restart. Without any major arguments we might have an energy bill passed before the August recess. Markey says it's not over but if he brings it up, I am sure Dingell will use his magic powers to stop it again. The guy is like Darth Sidious or something!
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
ug 7:28PM (8/03/2007)
Damn it, they are holding the Volt hostage! GM deserves to die.
Reply
miike-1-2-7 5:47PM (8/03/2007)
I think the problem with GM is Marketing.
How GM perceives U.S. Auto Market Segmentation.
In GM's view there are two market segments:
40% - people too cheap to buy a big V8
60% - people who want a bigger V8
But, if you look at how they sell SUV's and V8's is you Can't Get the High End product, unless you buy the biggest engine they sell.
- This either means, GM sees things:
A: cheap people would buy the V8, but skip the luxury options.
OR,
B: people would buy the Luxury options and SKIP the V8.
----
I think the market segmentations is more like:
30% people who can't afford the Big V8 or the Luxury options.
60% people, who 200hp is Damn Good Enough, in their SUV's and would want better Fuel Economy
10% people who want Insane Power they can't use 99.9999% of the time,
and the Luxury options.
---
And, if you look at their stock ownership( 42% oil industry money ),
then, you can see, they build cars for the Oil Industry, to Burn GAS, and Force people to buy Big V8's.
---
But, that's just me.
---
Reply
MikeW 9:47PM (8/03/2007)
How about people who know the crossplane crank V8 (LRLLRLRR) is the lowest performance engine configuration.
so small engine + big transmission = have cake and eat it. (driving satisfaction + decent mileage)
GM has a transverse 3.6, so how about a 2.8 (discounting the fact there is a turbo version for saab/opel) in the Impala.
If the 6t40 can handle ~200ft-lbs, then we have a winner. Maybe use the 3.6HO spec (for more hp at slightly reduced torque-GM lamdas) in the 2.8 (fit dual rear mufflers) It should make more than the 211 certified hp in the 3.5 V6. Target 215hp, that is enough power for a top speed in the 125-150mph region.
More fun than fitting the 2.4 to the impala. Fine for commuters in the Malibu.
Reply
miike-1-2-7 12:40PM (8/04/2007)
MikeW,
so you saying the auto industry should be using flat-plane crank design for v8's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crossplane
Crossplane V8s tend to be of large capacity, such as 5 liters and above, because the complex crankshaft and its many balance weights make the engine relatively slow-responding (like a heavy flywheel).
Interesting,
how these companies are run,
an auto industry that seems to hate to hire and use engineering talent.
This explains why those big SUV's with Huge V8 are still so slow and ponderous.
Reply
MikeW 10:22PM (8/04/2007)
The crossplane crank was marketed as a 'maverick' idea from the small american company, cadillac. They were solving a problem, that was solved 15 years prior. First V12-1908.
Way back ~100 years ago the metallurgy was such that inline6 engines suffered from torsional oscillation problems. (front I3 fires, then rear I3 fires)
One solution was to take drive from the middle of the crankshaft (effectively halving the length and double the problem frequency(s) past the maximum engine speed), another was to double up the inline6 to make a V12 (to have a positive net torque output), another was to make it liveable via damping of peak resonant frequencies, accepting the rest (hoping for advancements in time via materials science engineering development)
Inline4 cylinder engines had/have a second order imbalance (hence the pejorative '4 banger'), but if you put two on a common crankshaft (90 degree V), you get a shorter crankshaft than an inline6, net positive torque, and partial cancelation of the up and down imbalance-the rest now being lateral. Seems like a good solution for ~1910.
F1 wouldn't use a crossplane crank V8, even if they put the exhaust through the center of the Vee, and grouped the cylinders so each exhaust manifold was even firing.
The crossplane crank was an improvement over the utterly terrible inline8 engines, so americans were 'sold' on this design, thinking noise=power. All the while the rest of the world was ahead.
Reply
Owen 7:34AM (8/06/2007)
HAHAHAHA!!!! Where are your blessed democrats now!!! Finally you can all see, it doesn't matter who is in control of the house and senate. They are all controlled by big business and who has the most lobby money!!!
Reply