Truckers And Other Unsung Heroes That Keep America Moving
Gaining 55 miles to a gallon won’t be a pipe dream anymore if the White House has its way.
Light-duty truck manufacturers will be subject to new regulations that aim to double fuel economy by 2025, under new rules presented by the White House this week.
The Obama administration claims that this move will be comparable to reducing gasoline prices by a dollar per gallon.
“These fuel standards represent the single most important step we’ve ever taken to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” President Barack Obama said in a statement on Tuesday. “By the middle of the next decade our cars will get nearly 55 miles per gallon, almost double what they get today. It’ll strengthen our nation’s energy security, it’s good for middle-class families and it will help create an economy built to last.”
The United Auto Workers (UAW) expressed their support for this measure last year, stating that the initiative should be reviewed for effectiveness in five years. “We all want to get more fuel-efficient autos on our roads, and a single, national program with a strong midterm review helps us get closer to that shared goal,” the UAW said in a press release.
Some environmentalists are touting the regulation as the largest initiative toward carbon dioxide reduction that any country has ever taken.
EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson noted, “Innovation and economic growth are already reinvigorating the auto industry and the thousands of businesses that supply automakers as they create and produce the efficient vehicles of tomorrow.”
However not everyone is a fan of the regulations. Some critics argue that the move will make the cost of new fuel-efficient vehicles virtually unaffordable.
Bill Underriner, chairman of the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) said that the increase would shut almost 7 million people out of the new-car market and prevent “millions more from being able to afford new vehicles that meet their needs.” In addition, he noted that the rule would suppress vehicle sales, which would delay the United States’ greenhouse gas and energy security goals.
Presidential hopeful Mitt Romney has cited with the NADA on the issue, noting that savings from increased fuel economy would be canceled out by exorbitant vehicle costs.
A full copy of the final rule can be downloaded from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration website.
What do you think? Is the ruling good for the environment and bad for some businesses? Or do the ends justify the costs?