Obama Heralds New Fuel, Emission Standards

President Announces National 35.5 MPG Efficiency Standard, Pollution Reduction Plan; Vehicles Will Cost $1,300 More

(CBS/ AP)  Stating that "the status quo is no longer acceptable," President Barack Obama on Tuesday announced a new fuel and emission standard that he says will, at last, put the United States on the road to a cleaner environment and better fuel efficiency.

The plan creates the first-ever national emissions limits for vehicles and sets the overall or industry average fuel efficiency standard at 35.5 miles per gallon, an increase of more than 8 miles per gallon per vehicle. It is aimed at saving billions of barrels of oil, although it also is expected to cost consumers an additional $1,300 per vehicle by 2016.

"We will save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold in the next five years," the president said. "Just to give you a sense of magnitude, that's more oil than we imported last year from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libya, and Nigeria combined."

Mr. Obama argued that "everyone wins" with the plan, which has been heralded both by automakers and environmentalists, despite the increase cost per vehicle. He said consumers benefit because "the cost of driving these vehicles will go down as drivers save money at the pump."

"In fact, over the life of a vehicle, the typical driver would save about $2,800 by getting better gas mileage," he said.

The plan also would effectively end a feud between automakers and statehouses over emission standards - with the states coming out on top but the automakers getting the single national standard they've been seeking and more time to make the changes.

"This is truly historic," Carol Browner, Mr. Obama's top aide on energy and climate matters, told CBS' The Early Show Tuesday.

Obama's proposed change in rules would for the first time combine pollution reduction from vehicle tailpipes with increased efficiency on the road. It would be the equivalent of "taking 58 million cars off the road for an entire year," the president said.

New vehicles would be 30 percent cleaner and more fuel-efficient by the end of the program.

The plan, to be proposed in the Federal Register of pending rules and regulations, must still clear procedural hurdles at the Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department. Automakers expressed their support for the plan. "We're all agreeing to work together on a national program," said Dave McCurdy, president and CEO of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

Administration officials said consumers were going to pay an extra $700, anyway, for mileage standards that had already been approved. The Obama plan adds another $600 to the price of a vehicle, a senior administration official said, bringing the total cost to $1,300 by 2016.

Under the changes, the overall fleet average would have to be 35.5 mpg by 2016, with passenger cars reaching 39 mpg and light trucks hitting 30 mpg under a system that develops standards for each vehicle class size. Manufacturers would also be required to hit individual mileage targets.

Browner, who headed the EPA during the Clinton administration, said the industry told the administration "they wanted to make cleaner cars and what they needed was the government to give them predictability and certainty so that they could make the investments toward cleaner cars."

In a battle over emission standards, California, 13 other states and the District of Columbia have urged the federal government to let them enact more stringent standards than the federal government's requirements. The states' regulations would cut greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent in new cars and trucks by 2016 - the benchmark Obama planned to unveil for vehicles built in model years 2012 and beyond.

The Obama plan gives the states essentially what they sought and more, although the buildup is slower than the states sought. In exchange, though, cash-strapped states such as California would not have to develop their own standards and enforcement plan. Instead, they can rely on federal tax dollars to monitor the environment.

The auto industry will be required to ramp up production of more fuel-efficient vehicles on a much tighter timeline than originally envisioned. It will be costly; the Transportation Department last year estimated that requiring the industry to meet 31.6 mpg by 2015 would cost nearly $47 billion.

But industry officials - many of whom are running companies on emergency taxpayer dollars - said Obama's plan would help them because they would not face multiple emissions requirements and would have more certainty as they develop their vehicles for the next decade.

Auto executives, including General Motors Corp. CEO Fritz Henderson, and executives from Ford Motor Co., Toyota Motor Corp., Honda Motor Co., Daimler AG and others planned to attend the White House event along with United Auto Workers President Ron Gettelfinger, Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.

"Ending our dependence on oil, indeed, ending our dependence on fossil fuels, represents perhaps the most difficult challenge that we have ever faced, not as a party, not as a set of separate interests, but as a people," the president said in announcing the plan.

[weedapoopl]

As I already posted, if you want to see a lame president, just do a google search on "jimmy carter video."

Watch his energy speech from 1977, or his crisis of confidence speech of 1979.

Imagine having a loser like that in the Oval Office.

The sickening thing is - he really WAS the president.

Hearing him talk still makes me sick to my stomach.

Hearing Dubya talk is like fingernails on a blackboard.

But it doesn't make my physically ill like Carter does.

[weedapoopl]

Obama is the worst president in 100 years.

He is just the lapdog for the ultra wealthy power elite. Now he's working with them to move GM to China and ship ever more jobs out of the country.

Our first black president is forcing us all into slavery.

[the74blaster]

And NO, Bush was not the lamest president ever...in fact he had a growing economy in 2006 supported by the republican congress and unemployment was at 4.8%...those are facts.

Once again? What happened after the commies got control of congress in 2007?

Seems to me like businesses started sluffing jobs in 2007 and haven't stopped yet. Then Bernanke and Geithner of the federal reserve presented a HOAX banking crisis very conveniently in an election year. Come to find out the banks didn't need their money!

You got a clue, Blaster?
Posted by Rowdy2009 at 9:38 AM : May 20, 2009

Absolutely! Do you care to discuss who offered the first bailouts to the investment bankers without any conditions? Answer Bush.

Do you care to discuss the amount of payments on the debt that we made under Bushs great leadership?

Do you care to discuss the return on investment that we as a country realized for the 3 Trillion we will spend on Iraq?

You fail to address the filabuster and to address the presidential veto in your posts. Why is that? I suppose its a conservative thing to regrgitate Rush Limbaugh and consider it factual.

Considering your inabilitity to address those checks and balances in our government with your posts, I would say its the far right extreamists that are active members of flat earth society who do not have a clue.

[sem042004]

Dude, why not mandate 100 mpg or 1000 mpg? If you can just make a law and it becomes true, regardless of the technical or business implications, why not go for the gold???

Kiss your jobs goodbye GM, Chrysler and Ford. Ford makes money on trucks and SUV's. They lose money on cars used to reach the 27.5 mpg CAFE standards.

YOU WILL ALL PAY FOR THIS THROUGH GOVERNMENT SUBSIDIZATION OF THE AUTOMAKERS. YOU WILL PAY AGAIN THROUGH FUEL TAXATION AND ARTIFICIALLY HIGH PRICES AT THE PUMP.

Whatever "savings" you think that you will get will be farcical. The true costs will be hidden by the government. I predict a calamity. You don't have to be a prophet to see this coming.

[texasbeta]

Rowdy...you never cease to amaze. You are by far the most extreme right wing idealogue, spouting absolutely anything regardless of its substance or validity...on a daily basis. For you...the moon really is made of cheese. Wow. Just wow.

[the74blaster]

NOT ONLY THAT THE COUNTRY HAD BEEN IN RECESSION TWO YEARS ALREADY AFTER ALL HIS BUBBLES BURST! AND THE FACT IS THAT IN 2006 THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE WAS 4.8% AND THE ECONOMY SLOWLY GROWING....

WHAT HAPPENED AFTER THE COMMIES GOT CONTROL IN 2007?

ANYBODY GOT A CLUE???
Posted by Rowdy2009 at 8:34 AM : May 20, 2009

Well Well Well. I guess this means that you agree that bush was the lamest of all ducks and a totally incompentent president since he could not work with congress. Its too bad they did not impeach him since Bush apparently forgot that he could use his veto pen on every bill a democratically controlled house wrote.

Also do you care to tell me how many GOP senators there were after 2006? I seem to remember the numbers were very even.

How about the fillabuster Rowdy? If Bush was such a great president and the GOP had even numbers in the senate for the last 2 years of Bushs terms, why did he not get more favorable results?

I suppose you far right extreamists would blame extinction of the dinosaurs on the democrats if you could get away with it.

[chitown639]

Well, after Nixon was ran out of office, Ford ruined our foreign relations and drove the economy into the ground and handed over that mess to Carter.
Posted by chitown639 at 8:29 AM : May 20, 2009

Sorry, but that's a flat out lie.
Posted by Rowdy2009

Oh, sure it is....check out Fords watch, you'll see that during his watch the economy was in the worst condition to date since the great depression.....

[the74blaster]

Do a google search on "jimmy carter video" for "crisis of conficence" from 1979, or "address to the nation on energy" from 1977.

Man! I can't believe we EVER had such a loser for president....

Literally, he turns my stomach.
Posted by weedapoopl at 8:25 AM : May 20, 2009,

Carter has his issues, no question.

However, did he

1. Use false pretenses to sart an optional war in Iraq.
2. Refer to the constitution as a #$@dammed piece of paper.
3. Double the public debt during his term in office (increased from 5.7 Trillion to 11.0 Trillion or a differance of 5.3 trillion)..
4. Leave office with a severe recession (in fact he did not recognize it as such until the very end when the banks were going under)?

A far as getting nauseated, try listening to Bushs speeches.

[chitown639]

CLINTON DID NOT HAVE A SURPLUS! WHEN HE WALKED OUT OF THE WHITE HOUSE HE LEFT NOTHING BUT A $5.7 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT!

Posted by Rowdy2009

Rowdy, there was a nearly $200 billion surplus in Clinton left office.....that's a fact!!!

The $5.7 trillion dollar debt you're talking about is the obligaions from the Social Security Trust Funds, it's not included in the public debt......

[weedapoopl]

Ford ruined our foreign relations and drove the economy into the ground and handed over that mess to Carter.
Posted by chitown639 at 8:29 AM : May 20, 2009

HA HA HA! Notice how the Democrats ALWAYS say that!

It wasn't me, it was that way when I got here.

It happened on his watch....

[weedapoopl]

Do the word Iran Contra have any meaning?
Posted by the74blaster

It was the same as the NYC "photo-op" flight.

The president knew nothing about it. It was done by someone working from an office in the White House basement. The president didn't even know the guy.

The president had no knowledge of it, and he did not approve of it.

Some fall guy will have to take the blame.

[chitown639]

You call a honking oil crisis where people had to wait in line to get gasoline, pretty good foreign relations?

I'll swun!
Posted by Rowdy2009

Well, after Nixon was ran out of office, Ford ruined our foreign relations and drove the economy into the ground and handed over that mess to Carter.

[chitown639]

Do the word Iran Contra have any meaning?
Posted by the74blaster

Careful, Reagan said, "I don't remember" dozens of times when he was questioned about the Iran Contra...if weedapoopl is a true conservative he could utter those exact same words as Reagan......LMAO!!!!

[weedapoopl]

How can you even compare Carters presidency to this total failure?
Posted by the74blaster at 8:16 AM : May 20, 2009

See if you can find some online video of Carter giving a televised speech.

Nothing gives you that sick-to-your-stomach lack of confidence in your president like that does.

OMG! I just found some.

It STILL makes me sick to my stomach listening to him.

Imagine having this loser in the Oval Office.

Did he really say "I feel your pain????"

Do a google search on "jimmy carter video" for "crisis of conficence" from 1979, or "address to the nation on energy" from 1977.

Man! I can't believe we EVER had such a loser for president....

Literally, he turns my stomach.

[the74blaster]

Also, I recall that the Reagen made a deal with the Iranian terrorists to delay releasing the American hostages so he could deprive Carter of a foriegn policy victory before the election.
Posted by the74blaster at 7:58 AM : May 20, 2009

BWAHAHAHA!

Now that's the funniest conspiracy theory I've heard in a long time.

ROTFLMHO!
Posted by weedapoopl at 8:15 AM : May 20, 2009

Do the word Iran Contra have any meaning?

[the74blaster]

You have me how? Show me your proof that there wasn't a $5.7 TRILLION DOLLAR DEBT when Clinton walked out of the White House.
Posted by Rowdy2009 at 8:05 AM : May 20, 2009

Yeah, in that context you are correct. The federal debt was at 5.7 trillion when Clinton left the whitehouse. However, you forget to mention that under Clinton the government made 340 billion in payment on the debt (check out CNN 9/29/00 article).

Do you care to tell us where the federal debt was when Bush left office? Well let me help you out. It is around 11.0 trillion. That only an increase of 5.3 trillion during the 8 years Bush was in office.

The fact is Bush was handed an annual surplus that he squandered away by cutting taxes for the wealthy, cutting taxes on business and by starting an optional war in Iraq.

To add insult to injury he left us with deep recession to boot.

How can you even compare Carters presidency to this total failure?

[weedapoopl]

Also, I recall that the Reagen made a deal with the Iranian terrorists to delay releasing the American hostages so he could deprive Carter of a foriegn policy victory before the election.
Posted by the74blaster at 7:58 AM : May 20, 2009

BWAHAHAHA!

Now that's the funniest conspiracy theory I've heard in a long time.

ROTFLMHO!

[chitown639]

There was NO surplus, ever...there was only a $5.7 TRILLION dollar debt when Clinton left the White House...

Once again, FACTS, just don't support this commie spew!
Posted by Rowdy2009

That's a lie....there was a surplus!!!! Nearly, a $200 billion surplus Bush was handed over. And Bush quickly turned that surplus into a $1.5 trillion debt.

The $5.7 trillion debt Neo-Cons like to drag out when the subject of the Clinton surplus is mentioned is the debt from the social security trust funds.

[weedapoopl]

Bush has stirred resenytment in Americans that Carter never could.
Posted by stuart2561 at 7:48 AM : May 20, 2009

Only among Democrats, who tend to be more volatile, judgemental, and self-righteous in general.

Republicans felt as badly about Carter, they just didn't go around ranting and raving and spray painting swastikas on Democrat yard signs and saying "Carter is Hitler!"

Only Democrats do that.

You can't judge a person based on the childish outbursts of his opposition. Because one side tends to be far more childish and prone to outbursts, so it's not a balanced comparison.

[weedapoopl]

Jimmy Carter was a terrible president. A very nice man, and very smart, but totally incapable of leading. Ronald Reagan really did make us better off than Carter.

George W. Bush was a terrible president. A total jerk, and probably the stupidest president we've ever had. Clinton threw our nation into economic chaos, but Bush failed to fix the problem in 8 years. If anything, he allowed things to deteriorate even further.

Now we have Obama the nerd. Smarter than Carter, although probably not quite as friendly.

Based on his actions, he appears to be combining the worst of both Carter and Dubya.

He is already far worse than Carter, and he is rapidly catching up to Bush.

By the time he's finished, he will easily be the worst in 100 years.

He still has a long way to go to catch up with Buchanan, who is by far the worst president evern. He hasn't even been impeached yet, while Andrew Johnson was impeached twice.

But then, neither Carter or Bush were impeached even once, so that doesn't count in Obama's favor in comparison.

I say there will be massive violence and blood in the streets this year. As the ranks of the unemployed continue to swell, there will be growing hatred against immigrants, and there will be violence against the illegal workers.

Obama continues to do absolutely nothing to improve the economy. He hasn't even taken the simple step of declaring a moratorium on H1b visas, which is the quickest and most obvious step to relieve joblessness.

He will only allow conditions to worsen until violence breaks out.

Obama will be remembered as a terrible, awful president who fiddled with car fuel efficiency standards while the streets turned into rivers of blood.

Carter and Bush will look good compared to Obama.