Quote:
Originally Posted by JSH
That was more a comment on your comment the economic factors have a great impact than CAFE standards. The fact is that the average fuel economy of cars sold in the USA almost perfectly track the CAFE requirements.
The NHTSA aggressively increased mpg standards from 1978 - 1987, held them steady from 1998 to 2004, and then increased them aggressively from 2005 to 2027. Look at the graph.
 |
We're talking past each other a bit here. I'm in total agreement that CAFE regulations have had a direct impact on improving vehicle fuel economy. My point is that overall fuel consumption, which is the top level problem being addressed, has more to do with economics than anything else. When the economy is good, a lot of fuel is consumed. When it's bad, less is consumed.
My proposal is that if reducing fossil fuels is the goal, then artificially manipulating the economics of it (taxation) is the most effective way. We might end up with vehicles as efficient as ones that exist under CAFE requirements without the overhead (waste) of running such a program, and without the incentive for officials to exchange favors for political/financial gain. Perhaps we wouldn't end up with more efficient vehicles, but instead people would just drive less. The point is, dictating the minute details of a solution to an undefined problem is not efficient.
Does CAFE even outline a target maximum fuel consumption for the state? If not, they aren't even interested in solving the problem they ostensibly exist to address. You cannot achieve a goal that is not defined.