Congress, for several months now, is engulfed by a number of fuel proposals in an effort to increase fleet fuel economy. But date for a vote is not fixed yet.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has not decided whether to include an increase in the fuel economy of the nation's cars and trucks in a package of energy bills before the chamber next week, her office said Tuesday, reported the Detroit News.
Pelosi, D-Calif., has intimated to U.S. Rep. John Dingell, D-Dearborn, that she favors a course of waiting until after the August recess to consider "the more controversial and difficult issues" on climate change and global warming, including new rules on fuel efficiency, Dingell said. The package before the August body includes bills to raise energy efficiency, including light bulbs and buildings. "She hasn't ruled anything in or out," said Pelosi spokesman Nadeam Elshami.
Meanwhile, a study that shows economic benefits to higher fuel economy and a poll showing public support was made by environmentalists and fuel economy advocates. This is an effort to tout more stringent mileage proposal.
The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute issued a report last Tuesday that suggested the domestic automakers could earn $14.4 billion by 2017 by hiking efficiency to 35 miles per gallon by 2017, as mandated by a bill that passed the Senate. The report added they stand to make more profit gains because they will be making improvements that have higher market value and higher profit margins.
Automakers and the Bush Administration said that the new rules will cost them tens of billions of dollars. On the contrary, advocates contend they would not affect consumer choice and will, in the process, benefit carmakers. David Friedman, the research director of clean vehicle research for the Union of Concerned Scientists, has argued that raising fuel economy to 35 miles per gallon would increase employment in the United States by 241,000 jobs by 2020. The study even suggests Michigan would gain 11,000 jobs, an irony to automakers who worry about their survival under a dramatically higher standard.
Automakers said that the study is ideologically biased and flawed. They point to a Standard & Poors report in May that said higher fuel rules "pose a real risk to global automakers' financial performance."
On Monday, a poll by Pew Campaign for Fuel Efficiency suggested consumers were nearly unanimous in favor of higher fuel economy, said The News. The poll, conversely, did divulge the higher vehicle price tag that goes along with improved fuel economy.
The approved Senate bill, which Pelosi supports, increases corporate average fuel economy by 40 percent to a combined 35 miles per gallon by 2020 for light trucks and passenger cars. Pelosi has said that she supports the Senate bill. In a related matter, Dingell appeared at a press event Tuesday in which supporters of the "Hill Terry" fuel economy bill said that they had 102 House cosponsors.
It would hike fuel economy for passenger cars to 35 miles per gallon by 2022 and to at least 32 miles per gallon for light trucks. Dingell said the bill would result in an enormous savings of energy" that will also "protect jobs."
A more stringent bill by Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., the head of the House select global warming committee, would require automakers to hit 35 miles per gallon by 2018. The National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA), meanwhile, said that the Markey bill could threaten consumer choice by forcing automakers to sell smaller vehicles. "The current product mix would be in jeopardy," said David Regan, NADA vice president for legislative affairs. If this bill will be approved, , engines, filters, and other parts would require some enhancements.
