Automakers, legislators to meet concerning EPA emissions waivers

 

All three U.S. carmakers have several irons in the fire, but the President wants a clear plan before further help is offered

All three U.S. carmakers have several irons in the fire, but the President wants a clear plan before further help is offered

Enlarge Photo
President Barack Obama this week kept a campaign promise that could potentially allow California and other states to set their own fuel economy and vehicle emissions standards by signing a memorandum to the Environmental Protection Agency requiring it to reconsider California's application for a waiver of federal law on the issue. Now a meeting between mid-level auto industry officials, California legislators and environmental policymakers is believed to be planned for later this week in an attempt to work out a compromise solution.

If the EPA grants that waiver from federal standards, as it is expected to do, it could create a situation where carmakers will have to tailor vehicles to meet the standards of each individual state, or meet standards so high that only small cars could be legally sold, reports The New York Times.

Such an outcome would necessitate legal action against the EPA waivers by the car companies, and therefore the compromise is being sought. The key for the industry is a coherent solution, even if that solution is tougher than current CAFE standards, according to Alliance of Automotive Manufacturers spokeswoman Gloria Bergquist. The carmakers are seeking a unified standard that “can bridge what the automakers, the federal government and the states all want,” Bergquist said.

Both American and foreign carmakers have waged a lengthy legal battle against the California Air Resources Board (CARB), which until now has been blocked from setting its own rules by the former Bush administration. President Obama sees the decision in national security terms, however, saying, "It will be the policy of my administration to reverse our dependence on foreign oil." He recognized the potential strain a piecemeal approach to emissions and efficiency regulation could put on the industry, however. "Let me be clear: Our goal is not to further burden an already struggling industry; it is to help America's automakers prepare for the future," said President Obama.

The cost to the industry of meeting the current CAFE standards has been estimated by the government at about $30.5 billion from 2011 to 2015; meeting CARB's standards on a nationwide basis would cost significantly more. That's why President Obama has suggested that if the car industry works toward meeting that goal, the government will help to cover the expense. The new administration's plan is to enact only the 2011 fuel efficiency standards by March 31, leaving the ensuing years and interim targets to be developed with input from all sides.

CARB chairwoman Mary Nichols expects more litigation, not conciliation, however. “Without a change in attitude or direction on their part, we expect the carmakers to sue,” said Nichols. Nevertheless, she also recognized CARB's willingness to allow a federal law to control, provided it meets similarly stringent standards to the California law.

While the U.S. government has thus far implemented its own fleet-wide fuel efficiency standard of 35mpg by 2020 for carmakers (plus an interim mandate of 31.6mpg by 2015), California is planning to implement its own target of 36.8mpg by 2016. The issue has been a major headache for carmakers as California represents the single biggest market for new vehicles in the whole of North America. To make matters worse, 13 other states plan to copy the stricter mandate.

The new memorandum signed by President Obama will order the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reconsider the Bush administration’s past rejection of the CARB application. While it stops short of directly ordering the Bush decision reversed, the agency’s regulators are now widely expected to do so after completing a formal review process.

The decision to direct the EPA to reconsider the issue of fuel efficiency regulation is part of an overarching goal of improving energy efficiency throughout the economy. President Obama, while cognizant of the challenges surround the issue, cast the nation's energy policy as being at a pivotal point, and presented these steps as just the first on a journey toward greater independence.



 
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • Notify me when there are more comments
Comments (8)
  1. The Prez is trying to grant all things to all people and that just won't work. If there was a one world emissions and crash safety guidelines, think how much easier it would be for car companies to produce cars. They wouldn't have to produce two seperate types of cars. If they wanted to export them to the US or US Car companies overseas, there wouldn't need to be seperate development and testing for two different versions and the time from concept to actual product would be shorter.

    Creating even more standards for different states will make this issue worse. Development costs would go up, price of cars would go up and start pricing the cars out of the reach of customers. Sales would dwindel and the car companies would be hurt even more. The Obama administration wants to save the US auto industry but this is not a way to do it. It should be one set of standards for all of the States but better yet, start to broker a deal with Europe to create a set of World Automotive Standards.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  2. I completely agree with mlevere1992. It was loopholes in flawed CAFE regulations that propped up this country's obsession with super-large SUVs, creating an arms race on the roads to see who can secure the tallest driving position.
    I understand California's intention, but the answer is for them to tax gas at a higher rate. That will create a market for fuel efficient vehicles whilst simultaneously preventing the state from going bankrupt. Plus, if they made the tax act as a flexible buffer, keeping the price pretty steady, it would actually protect the economy against the volatility of the current market for fuel.
    In short, less madness for manufacturers, more fuel efficient cars, more money to fix the state and less volatility in the economy.
    I guess 600 million Europeans aren't wrong after all.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  3. Can we make cars even more difficult to engineer, build and sell? Yes we can!

    Can we kowtow to the idiocy of California and the other States in the Union of Socialist American Republics? Yes we can!

    Look, I wanted to give the President the benefit of the doubt but this decision is idiotic any way you look at it. It stifles the car industry in a moment when domestic auto makes are teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. The billions this folly will cost will be passed to the consumers and much like the Kyoto Protocols return nothing for that money.

    The dictatorship of the minority is alive and well.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  4. why don't you just lower the speed limit again?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  5. J-Kwon says

    why don't you just lower the speed limit again?

    Heck yeah! Let's make it 55 mph again! Or better yet, 45mph!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  6. I don't dislike Obama, he's very charismatic and I too am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt, but this seems to be lunacy! There should be ONE standard across the board, even if it's higher, but this madness can only lead to disaster. Back before the Civil War each state printed its own money, and we know how that turned out.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  7. "it could create a situation where carmakers will have to tailor vehicles to meet the standards of each individual state"

    The United States is possibly the only region in the world where carmakers have one set of rules for 300 million people. Even in the European Union, every country has diffferent taxes by fuel consumption.

    I agree that there should be worldwide standards regarding cars. But let me remind you that it's United States who follows completely different standards than the rest of the world. The 2004 European Car of the Year (Fiat Panda) can't be exported to the United States because of that.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  8. "it could create a situation where carmakers will have to tailor vehicles to meet the standards of each individual state"

    The United States is possibly the only region in the world where carmakers have one set of rules for 300 million people. Even in the European Union, every country has diffferent taxes by fuel consumption.

    I agree that there should be worldwide standards regarding cars. But let me remind you that it's United States who follows completely different standards than the rest of the world. The 2004 European Car of the Year (Fiat Panda) can't be exported to the United States because of that.

    Actually, those different rules in the EU countries only apply to taxes on drivers. The cars themselves can be sold everywhere.

    The California law would prevent the SALE of some cars that don't meet the rules, or fine the automakers for them.

    And the EU is actually discussing instituting a new mandatory rule much like the California rule, but for the whole EU. The current EU arrangement is just voluntary.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

Connect with Facebook

Motor Authority. Now with your friends.

Discover stories your friends read.
Share stories more easily.
You control what you share.
Learn more

Research New Cars

Go!


 
© 2011 MotorAuthority. All Rights Reserved. MotorAuthority is published by High Gear Media. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC. Send us feedback.