Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mephisto who wrote (2048)	1/16/2002 3:48:59 PM
From: Mephisto	Respond to of 15516

AUTO FUEL EFFICIENCY: Bush passing up chance for immediate gains Published: Tuesday, January 15, 2002 As the SUVs and pickups dominate the freeways, the observant rush-hour driver will see an occasional hybrid car, the vehicles two Japanese manufacturers sell to Americans, keeping up with the flow while getting more than 60 miles to the gallon. Last week the Bush administration, with more bait-and-switch than the stereotypical used car salesman, walked away from the federal government's commitment to help U.S. automakers develop high-mileage vehicles. Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham and executives of the Big Three automakers last week announced with much fanfare that they were dropping the program begun under the Clinton administration. The goal set at the outset of that voluntary program in 1993 was to triple automobile fuel efficiency in American cars. That hasn't happened, as anyone who pumps a tankful amid wildly fluctuating prices knows. But the replacement, called Freedom CAR, drops any pretense of improving fuel efficiency in the crucial next 10 years and touts development of hydrogen-powered vehicles. Abraham, a former U.S. senator from Michigan, waxed effusive about the promise of more energy security and nonpolluting cars and trucks. To that, we say, super. However, the abrupt dismissal of high-mileage vehicle research for the near term has all the markings of a political stall. It does nothing in the here and now to reduce air pollution, mitigate global warming, reduce dependence on foreign oil or help the American consumer save money at the gas pump. The National Academy of Scientists said last year that the most effective step to limit global warming and reduce dependence on foreign oil is to require SUVs and other light trucks to go farther on a gallon of gas. This here-and-now strategy makes much more economic and scientific sense than the Freedom CAR's defer-and-delay premise. A combination of strategies -- including hybrid cars, leaner SUVs and pickups -- will get the U.S. economy more bang for its transportation buck much sooner than waiting for hydrogen-powered cars. If Congress and the Clinton administration had insisted on increasing the average fuel efficiency of U.S. vehicles and included the burgeoning fleets of light trucks, including SUVs, in that passenger vehicle average, the country that consumes 25 percent of the world's energy could be weaning itself instead of instituting another research program that might pay off a dozen years from now. As the percentage of total passenger vehicles that are SUVs and trucks has increased, the overall fuel efficiency of American rolling stock has fallen to its lowest level in more than 21 years. There should be room for reasonable compromise about energy in the new security climate. It would be a good time for the Bush administration, which feels the heat of association with the discredited Enron gang, to make concessions on environmental concerns. Agreeing to support a phased-in fuel efficiency mandate, as proposed by Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Olympia Snowe, to 27.5 miles per gallon over six years, would demonstrate a welcome appreciation for the real problems of fossil fuel dependence. The politics of deferral feeds only the pocketbooks of a status quo that the United States cannot afford. pioneerplanet.com

To: Mephisto who wrote (2048)	1/22/2002 1:09:44 PM
From: Mephisto	Respond to of 15516

Dream Car Made Real The New York Times January 20, 2002 To the Editor: You criticize the Energy Department's move toward hydrogen fuel cells for future cars, and you say I "belittled" the Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles, the current fuel-efficiency program ("Spencer Abraham's Dream Car," editorial, Jan. 14). The Transportation Department is charged with considering changes in corporate average fuel economy, or CAFE, standards. That review is taking place. What I can do as energy secretary is promote research into energy efficiency. With respect to fuel-efficient vehicles I had three choices: first, continue with P.N.G.V., a $1.5 billion program universally recognized as nowhere near producing a car that anyone would want to buy. Second, pull back all research money in this area; or third, propose a program to create a new car engine that uses no petroleum and emits no pollution. We chose the third course: hydrogen fuel cells suitable for all vehicles that can move us beyond fossil fuels and free us from dependence on imported oil. Such a vehicle can be a reality and would indeed be my dream car. SPENCER ABRAHAM Secretary of Energy Washington, Jan. 15, 2002 nytimes.com