Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

download Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

of 27

Transcript of Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    1/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 1 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Abolish CAFE ~ NegStrat Notes .........................................................................................................................3Intro Quotes: .....................................................................................................................4

    Decreasing consumption is key to buy time to solve energy problems .....................................................................4Vehicles are the primary source of emissions and oil consumption ..........................................................................4CAFE = Eeepicly amazing .......................................................................................................................................4CAFE is incentives. ...............................................................................................................................................4

    Inherency ..........................................................................................................................CAFE standards haven't been raised since 1985 ......................................................................................................5

    Efficiency Links ................................................................................................................ Link: CAFE slows the growth of energy demand through efficiency ......................................................................6 Lack of improved fuel efficiency drastically increases US consumption of oil ........................................................6Tiny increases in fuel efficiency standards would immediately eliminate our need for foreign oil ...........................6 Fuel efficiency standards will decrease drilling .......................................................................................................7CAFE standards key to solve dependence and emissions .......................................................................................7 Efficiency is not a choice it is necessary to solve the energy crisis .......................................................................7Oil consumption by U.S. automobiles is at the root of the global oil crisis. ...........................................................8The plan is the only effective means to significantly reduce our foreign oil dependence........................................................8 Europe proves that much stronger efficiency measures are possible and desireable............................................................8

    Competitiveness Links: .....................................................................................................9CAFE standards are key to ensure future US auto industry competitiveness / economic viability ...........................9 Autoworkers perceive fuel efficiency standards as a way to generate jobs ...............................................................9 Finally, the technology existed in 2000 for automakers to cheaply and easily comply with the plan; absent the plamakers will continue to damage the economy. .......................................................................................................9 Failure to provide CAFE has ruined the auto industry economically much stronger standards that are still profittechnologically feasible and necessary. ..................................................................................................................9

    Oil Dependency ...............................................................................................................10 Incorporating more strict CAF program would significantly decrease US reliance on foreign oil .......................10US oil production is limited, and lack of auto efficiency locks the US into foreign oil dependence .........................10 Fuel efficiency would insulate consumers from gas price shocks ............................................................................10

    Efficiency / Peak Oil DA ..................................................................................................11 Brink: Current estimates of oil supply are very wrong .............................................................................................11 Impact: Oil shortages = global economic depression ...............................................................................................11 Failure to adapt to the coming EV auto transformation will screw the US auto industry .........................................11 Fuel efficiency will boost the economy by providing jobs and consumer savings ....................................................12 Asian Automakers are surpassing US automakers because of efficiency .................................................................12

    Oil Spills ...........................................................................................................................13 Raising CAF standards is key to stopping oil spills ...............................................................................................13 Impact: Oil Spills are super destructive ...................................................................................................................13

    Terrorism / Middle East Impacts ......................................................................................14Oil dependence jacks Middle East stability and makes peace impossible .................................................................14

    ANWR Specific Links / Impacts ......................................................................................15 Fuel efficiency increase would decrease use of oil and the need for oil from places like ANWR ............................15 Increasing fuel efficiency would save us more than 15 times the likely yield from ANWR .....................................15 Increased CAF standards are the quick and most efficient way to avoid drilling in ANWR ..................................15 Drilling displaces tons of species .............................................................................................................................16 Drilling in the ANWR will wipe out tribal cultures............................................................................................................16 Fuel efficiency saves ANWR ..................................................................................................................................16

    Pollution DA ..................................................................................................................... Plan is key to significantly reduce refinement of gasoline, which is responsible for tens of thousands of deaths eac pollution. .........................................................................................................................................................17Motor vehicles cause more air pollution than any other single human activity: ........................................................17 Pollution Threatens millions of People ..................................................................................................................17

    Increase CAFE CP Uniqueness: Current CAFE Standards aren't so hot .........................The 2008 increase in CAFE standards will have no functional effect - far more radical steps are necessary..........................18

  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    2/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 2 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    The current standard will not actually force the industry to increase conservation only the plan achieves both oilconservation and economic and technical feasibility. .............................................................................................18Current increases in CAFE standards doesnt require changes until 2020. .............................................................19The current rules are based on such massively flawed data and assumptions that they are not even legally viable plan corrects this. ..................................................................................................................................................19

    Increase CAFE CP: Solvency ...........................................................................................20 An increase in CAFE standards would match Europe and save 2 million barrels of oil per day over current proposincreases. ...............................................................................................................................................................20 Plan is key to save the auto industry from total collapse consumer demand proves............................................................20

    Absence of fuel economy standards has been primarily responsible for massive auto sales losses only the plan cindustry from inevitable collapse. ..........................................................................................................................20AT: Safety .........................................................................................................................21

    Fuel efficiency would reduce fatalities on the road ..................................................................................................21Safety will increase with less SUVs on the road and tech exists to make small cars more safe ................................21Technology exists to build safe and efficient cars. ..................................................................................................21 For each death that a truck prevents, it causes four additional fatalities to the occupants of lighter vehicle ..............21 Light trucks involved in wrecks increase the risk of fatality on the part of a motorcyclist by 125% ........................22SUVs and light trucks cause 4 times as many lives as they save ..............................................................................22 Explanation of reasons why SUVs and Trucks increase fatality numbers ................................................................22The influx of larger vehicles is deadly .....................................................................................................................22Sending any kind of signal that large vehicles are safe is extremely dangerous ........................................................23 Larger Vehicles are less stable and have a greater tendency to roll ..........................................................................23CAF standards are necessary to improve fuel economy and will benefit the plastic industry .................................24

    AT: Drive More .................................................................................................................25The majority of driving is done by commuters who only drive to work once a day .................................................25Cars die at the same mileage no matter what consumers cant drive more miles after the plan .............................25

    Miscellaneous: How CAFE works ...................................................................................26 Heres a bunch of implementation information about the program ..........................................................................26credits mean those manufacturers can keep making them if they have to ................................................................27

    NHTSA Administrator is legally designated to do everything with regards to CAFE ..............................................27

  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    3/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 3 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Strat Notes

    Some thoughts on CAFE. They:

    ~ Increase Fuel Efficiency~ Decreases Dependence on Foreign Oil ~ Decreases the amount of money we send to OPEC / Middle East ~ Revitalize the American car market which is taking major hits as foreign companies make more fucars that are outselling American gas guzzlers~ Decreases Gas pollution~ Prevents us from having to drill in ANWR~ Prevents immense environmental damage from oil spills~ All around rock hardcore

    The aff team plans to abolish these epically amazing CAFE standards. This should make you mad. Gaff team during prep time and then make them sorry they ever tried to mess with your best friend CA

    On a more serious note, as a neg team there are way more arguments you can run in defense of CAF you'll ever be able to fit into speech time. Deciding what you run should revolve solely around offenarguments with impacts that dwarf theirs. For once at least, its very possible to do so. When we hit thwhat made all the difference was our weighing. With proper weighing, it should take a very very goowin with Abolish CAFE. (Also just fyi, there are some solid impacts cards in the Blue Book Advanc Dependency. Look for the cards that talk about price shocks)

    This is one case where I would run a direct turn of the Aff case and present a CP of increase CAFE s IMO this would only sharpen the differences between the Aff and Neg worlds, while at the same timthe neg some extra major offense from more fuel efficient cars. As Neg you're going to be defendinganyway, so why not go all the way and run it to the hilt. (Not to mention being able to rob them of thoffense by solving some of their harms)

    Abolish CAFE standards throws the door open for soooo much neg offense it's awesome! Have fun ragainst CAFE! :~)

  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    4/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 4 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Intro Quotes:Decreasing consumption is key to buy time to solve energy problems David Goodstein , Physicist and Vice Provost at California Institute of Technology,2004 , Out of Gas, pg. 122If the problem were widely understood and acknowledged, we could go a long way toward easing ththe crisis will cause.We Americans are profligate users of energy. There are many ways in which we could reduce our consumption of fuel without abandoning our comfortable way of life.

    Vehicles are the primary source of emissions and oil consumptionOliver A. Pollard is a senior attorney and leader of the Land and Community Project at the Southern Environmental Law Center in Charlottesville, Virginia., Fordham Urban Law Journal, April,2002

    Excessive motor vehicle use has also led to unsustainable levels of petroleum consumption.Americans accounfor a quarter of world petroleum consumption, two-thirds of which is used for transportation. n51 Ovthe petroleum consumed in the[*1538] United States is imported. n52 Petroleum is the largest componeour trade deficit and the dependence on imported oil is a clear threat to national security.

    CAFE = Eeepicly amazing Noam Mohr and Joseph Shapiro , U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund,[U.S. PIRG Edu Fund is a non-profit, non-partisan public interest advocacy organization] PUMPING UP THE PRIC HIDDEN COSTS OF OUTDATED FUEL EFFICIENCY STANDARDS, US Public Interest Group Education Fund, October 5,2000 , http://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdf

    Outdated standards take a heavy environmental toll as well. Low miles-per-gallon standards increascausing more air pollution and millions of gallons in oil spills. With transportation responsible for athe countrys greenhouse gas emissions, outdated standards also mean the average new car will emiof excess global warming pollution.Scientists have reached a virtual consensus thatthese emissions have already causedsignificant changes to the global climate, and warn of increases in extreme weather events, the spreainfectious disease, widespread ecological damage, and coastal flooding. Since global warming pollution remains in the atmospfor up to centuries, the costs of todays emissions will be felt for generations to come. New car buyers therefore pay a far greater price for inefficient v

    be calculated in spending at the pump.Improving miles-per-gallon standards would save consumers thousands of doeffect large cuts in air and global warming pollution, while reducing our nations dependence on fo

    CAFE is incentives.Mark N.Cooper, Ph. D., Director of Research, Consumer Federation of America, Comments on NatHighway Traffic Safety Administration Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/nhtsa_comments.pdf,7/1/08

    There are two implications for NHTSAs analysis. First,CAFE standards correct market failures and therefore can resulteconomically beneficial outcomes (increases in sales).Second, CAFE standards address important supply-side market imperfections. They coutendency to want to produce low cost, energy inefficient vehicles that generate higher rates of profit.CAFE standards also give automakersincentive to advertise and market more fuel-efficient vehicles.NHTSAs framework needs to fully reflect this alternative, morrealistic view of the auto market.

    http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=149fb6a5f0c788060b1c76f3ec7bb381&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=4&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAb&_md5=1a3dcebfeaed908db2104a29732bd572#8517-1538http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=149fb6a5f0c788060b1c76f3ec7bb381&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=4&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAb&_md5=1a3dcebfeaed908db2104a29732bd572#8517-1538http://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdfhttp://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdfhttp://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdfhttp://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=149fb6a5f0c788060b1c76f3ec7bb381&_fmtstr=FULL&docnum=4&_startdoc=1&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAb&_md5=1a3dcebfeaed908db2104a29732bd572#8517-1538
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    5/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 5 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    InherencyCAFE standards haven't been raised since 1985Oliver A. Pollard is a senior attorney and leader of the Land and Community Project at the Southern Environmental Law Center in Charlottesville, Virginia., Fordham Urban Law Journal, April,2002

    Although vehicular fuel efficiency has improve d substantially o ver the past few decades, th e FederaAverage Fuel Economy ("CAFE") standar ds for passenger cars hav e not increased since 198 5, and the fficiency for 2001 model year vehicles was the lowest since 1980 .

  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    6/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 6 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Efficiency Links

    Link: CAFE slows the growth of energy demand through efficiency Paul Roberts, [A journalist since 1983, Paul Roberts writes and lectures frequently on the complex inteconomics, technology, and the natural world. "The End of Oil" is his first book. Roberts has also wrThe Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, and The (UK) Guardian and has appeared in Slate, UThe New Republic, Newsweek, The Christian Science Monitor, Rolling Stone, Seed, and Outside ma

    Roberts was a finalist for the National Magazine Award (1999) and for the New York Public Library Bernstein Book Award for Excellence in Journalism in 2005]2004 , The End of Oil, pg. 331

    Conversely, the costs of inaction are significant. Each yea r that we fail to commit to serious energy redevelopment or fail to begin slowing the growth of energy demand through fuel efficiency, each year that we allow themarkets to continue treating carbon as cost-free, is an other year in which our already unstable energy economy moves scloser to the point of no return. Every delay means that our various energy gaps, when we finally getaddressing them, will be wider and costlier to fill. By then, it will be too late for low-cost solutions a portfolios and smooth, incremental transitions.

    Lack of improved fuel efficiency drastically increases US consumption of oil

    Paul Roberts, [A journalist since 1983, Paul Roberts writes and lectures frequently on the complex inteconomics, technology, and the natural world. "The End of Oil" is his first book. Roberts has also wrThe Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, and The (UK) Guardian and has appeared in Slate, UThe New Republic, Newsweek, The Christian Science Monitor, Rolling Stone, Seed, and Outside ma Roberts was a finalist for the National Magazine Award (1999) and for the New York Public Library Bernstein Book Award for Excellence in Journalism in 2005]2004 , The End of Oil, pg. 154-5

    More generally, the trend toward larger cars and trucks, coupled with the expected growth in numbevehicles and in miles traveled, helps us understand how oil consumption has increased in the Unitedseventeen million barrels per day in 1990 to twenty million today, and may rise as high as thirty-two2020.Yet what is most disturbing about our desire for ever-larger cars and houses, more gadgets, and ever-greater demand is that it issee where it all ends. Where are the natural limits? Barring some massive disruption in energy supply, it is hard to see why consumers would willingly use less energy or for that matter, why any political leader would suggest that they use less energy, or even that theygrowth in their energy demand. For all our astonishing improvements in technology and energy efficiency, an expanding economy is stseparably linked to constant increases in energy use. And the rest of the world, especially the developing world, has noticed.

    Tiny increases in fuel efficiency standards would immediately eliminate our need for foreign oil Newsweek , November 17,2003 Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Slams The Bush Administration's Environmenta Policies'http://www.newsweek.com/id/60381 Isn't Bush trying to wean America off its dependence on oil by pledging to spend $1 billion on produhydrogen-powered car. If you really wanted to wean our dependence from oil, the obvious and mosinstantaneous solution is corporate average fuel-efficiency standards , which impose fuel efficiency oautomobile industry . If we raise the fuel efficiency in our automobiles by one mile per gallon, we sav

    than would be in two Arctic National Wildlife Refuges. If we raise it by 2.6 miles per gallon, we savthan we get from Iraq and Kuwait combined. If we raise it seven miles per gallon, we eliminate all thany imports from the Persian Gulf.

    http://www.newsweek.com/id/60381http://www.newsweek.com/id/60381http://www.newsweek.com/id/60381
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    7/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 7 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Fuel efficiency standards will decrease drilling David Friedman is a senior transportation analyst in the UCS Clean Vehicles Program., Union of ConScientists, 12.06.2002 , http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/nucleus.cfm?publicationID=317

    The vehicles that will reach future fuel economy standards will not be much different from those we drive today. We willsacrifice performance and comfort, but will be able to buy higher fuel economy versions of the same safe and reliable vedrive.Following this path to higher fuel economy will enable us to turn back the clock on our car and oil use while significantly reducing the environmental footprint we leave behin d ; all the while leavin

    money in our pockets. Along the way, we will find that drilling for oil in environmentally sensitive a becomes a notion of the past as we use our existing resources more efficiently.

    CAFE standards key to solve dependence and emissions Paul Roberts, [A journalist since 1983, Paul Roberts writes and lectures frequently on the complex inteconomics, technology, and the natural world. "The End of Oil" is his first book. Roberts has also wrThe Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, and The (UK) Guardian and has appeared in Slate, UThe New Republic, Newsweek, The Christian Science Monitor, Rolling Stone, Seed, and Outside ma Roberts was a finalist for the National Magazine Award (1999) and for the New York Public Library Bernstein Book Award for Excellence in Journalism in 2005]2004 , The End of Oil,pg. 295-6By any reasonable standard, the most important step the U nited S tates could take to simultaneously

    energy security, cut CO2 emission, boost ur ban air quality, and deprive Middle Eastern terrorists of fwould be to raise fuel efficiency requirements. American cars and trucks burn two of every three barused in the U nited S tates and o ne of every seven barre ls used worldwide a figure that is hardly surprising, given that econostandards have been frozen since 1988. Today, American cars need to achieve an average fuel economy of just 27.5 miles per gallon, while light trucks popular category that includes pickups and SUVs, need achieve only 20.5 miles per gallon. Even a modest improve ment in fuel-econom ystandards sa y, thirty-two miles per gallon for cars and twenty-four mil es per gallon for light truck by 2010 be sav ing 2.7 million barrels per day or nearly twice as much as could be pumped every the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge .

    Efficiency is not a choice it is necessary to solve the energy crisis Paul Roberts, [A journalist since 1983, Paul Roberts writes and lectures frequently on the complex inteconomics, technology, and the natural world. "The End of Oil" is his first book. Roberts has also wrThe Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, and The (UK) Guardian and has appeared in Slate, UThe New Republic, Newsweek, The Christian Science Monitor, Rolling Stone, Seed, and Outside ma Roberts was a finalist for the National Magazine Award (1999) and for the New York Public Library Bernstein Book Award for Excellence in Journalism in 2005]2004 , The End of Oil, pg. 215-6

    In fact, according to efficiency optimists like Lovins, the amount of oil, electricity, and other energy be saved through better ef ficiency in the U nited States alone the so-called efficiency resource actually larger than our physical reserves of oil and gas. In other words, it is now possible to save mowe could possibly find in the ground, and to do so at a per-barrel cost well below the average markeoil. In this context, aggressively improving energy efficiency would certainly seem as important as, say, researching hydrogen fuel cells, or building Ltrains and perhaps even more so. Becausewhile we are accustomed to thinking of energy efficiency as optional something wcan choose, on the basis of the cost of fuel or our personal politics it will soon become an absolute necessity. Our rapidly gro population and economies will soon exceed our ability to supply that population with low- and no-caenergy. This means we can expect a gap between the energy we need and what we can safely genera permanently damaging our climate(or sowing more geopolitical discord or economy-wrenching price volatility). Optimistic forecasts showthis gap being filled by new energy technologies biofuels, solar power, clean coal, or hydrogen. On closer inspection, however, it becomes clear that forecasters are counting on a huge con tribution from conservation both lower energy use and morenergy use. The reason: not only are the new energy technologies emerging more slowly than optimihoped, but many of the new fuels and tech nologies lack high power densityand simply will not be able to deliver the same en punch as the hydrocarbons they replace. To put it another way, within the next two decades, extensive and sustained improvements in en efficiency will be not simply a sign of moral virtue, but an absolutely essential component of the futueconomy.

    http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/nucleus.cfm?publicationID=317http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/nucleus.cfm?publicationID=317
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    8/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 8 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Oil consumption by U.S. automobiles is at the root of the global oil crisis. Nelson D. Schwartz , Asleep at the Spigot, The New York Times,7/6/ 08, p. 1 Nearly70 percent of the 21 million barrels of oil the United States consumes every day goes for transpowith the bulk of that burned by individual drivers,according to the National Commission on Energy Policy, a bipartisan research grouthat advises Congress. SO despite the fierce debate over what's behind the recent spike in prices,no one differs on what's really responsiblefor all that underlyingdemandhere for black gold:the automobile, fueled not only by gasoline but also by Americans' famous propensity for voracconsumption. To be sure, the American appetite for crude oil is only one reason for the recent price surge. Butthe country's dependence onimported oil has only kept growingin recent years,undermining the trade balance and putting an added strain global supplies.

    The plan is the only effective means to significantly reduce our foreign oil dependence. NoamMohr and JosephShapiro, U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund, PUMPING UPRICE: THE HIDDEN COSTS OF OUTDATED FUEL EFFICIENCY STANDARDS, US Public Group Research Education Fund, October 5,2000, http://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000America imported 52% of its oil from abroad in 1998, the highest percent in history.This figure could grow to 69% in2020.28 To ensure a steady supply of foreign oil, the U.S. must finance long-distance transportation of oil,it must constantly negotiwith OPEC and foreign governments to maintain price stability,andit must pay military costs to maintain stability in petroleum-regions.Americas increasing dependence on foreign oil leaves it vulnerable to worldwide price spikes and supply shortages. The summer 2000 OPhikes in gas prices, exceeding $2 a gallon in parts of the country, make this danger only all too clear.29 Every minute, the U.S. sends $180,000 oveforeign oil.30 With six countries supplying two-thirds of U.S. petroleum imports, 31 American consumers are easily subject to worldwide supply fluctuTransportation accounts for 67% of all U.S. oil consumption.32 By updating standards to 45 mpg, the U.S.would save approximately 1.3 billion barrels of oil a year , or more than 40% of our annual imports of crude.34Compared to the 900 million barrels imported annually from the Persian Gulf, or 250 to 800 millionyear economically recoverable from the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, improving CAFE standardconstitutes an enormous step forward in reducing national oil dependence.

    Europe proves that much stronger efficiency measures are possible and desireable. Nelson D. Schwartz , Asleep at the Spigot, The New York Times,7/6/ 08, p. 1

    Oil industry insiders say they remained on the sidelines during Congressional debates over CAFE staalthough legislators from oil states tended to vote against more rigorous rules. In 2007, with oil at $8nearing $3, Congress finally approved the first big increase in fuel-efficiency standards in 32 years, rthe fleet average to reach 35 m.p.g. by 2020. That will save one million barrels a day by 2020, but oCAFE opponents like Mr. Castle now say they wish that Congress had acted sooner. Since the 1980sefficiency has flatlined at 24 m.p.g., while vehicle weight has jumped more than 25 percent and horsnearly doubled. In Europe, on the other hand, fuel efficiency currently stands at 44 m.p.g. and is slatm.p.g. by 2012.

  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    9/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 9 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Competitiveness Links:CAFE standards are key to ensure future US auto industry competitiveness / economic viability John Adams , president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, July 1, 1996 , Insight on the News,While political leadership falters in the United States, th ere is considerable momentum abroad to gaiefficient cars. German auto manufacturers voluntarily have committed to reduce the fuel consumptio produced and sold in Germany to 25 percent below their 19 90 levels by 2005 . The European Union has been consideringstandards of 5 liters per 100 kilometers (47 mpg) for standard cars and 4.5 liters per 100 kilometers (52 mpg) for diesel cars. Japan has a number of far-reaching strategies f or reducing its dependence on imported oil by developing cleaner cars . Clearimproved CAFE will be necessary to keep th e U nited S tates co mpetitive as other countries move ahIntheir rush to block gains in fuel economy here at home, U.S. auto manufacturers may find themselves lagging in the globalto develop the vehicles of the 21st century.

    Autoworkers perceive fuel efficiency standards as a way to generate jobs Jack Doyle , founder & director of Corporate Sources and its principal investigator 2000 , Taken for a Ride, p268Even in Michigan, some of those on the front lines of economic develop ment were more open to howstandards might mean improved economic conditions.I ts seen as a competitiveness issue, sa id JaniceKarcher , program man ager of the Genesee Economic Area Revitalization project. More fuel efficie better cars and could mean more jobs. Some Michigan autoworkers as well, like Dave Yettaw, presUAWlocal 599 in Flint, supported Clintons position.Stricter mileage standards will produce a whole new industry formeth ods, new equipment, new techniques, and new technologies, he said. Too often, we think about theimmediate problems and not the long term... . [T]hats what got us in our predicament in the auto indI thinkClinton is right on this. He sayswe can have higher mileage cars and more jobs.

    Finally, the technology existed in 2000 for automakers to cheaply and easily comply with the plan; athe plan, auto makers will continue to damage the economy.

    Noam Mohr and Joseph Shapiro , U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund, PUMPING UP PRICE: THE HIDDEN COSTS OF OUTDATED FUEL EFFICIENCY STANDARDS, US Public Group Research Education Fund, October 5,2000 , http://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice200

    American vehicles dont have to be gas guzzlers.Using existing technology, manufacturers can achieve sharp increasesfuel efficiency at little cost,3 particularly for the largest and most inefficient SUVs on the road.4Passenger vehicles should begetting 45 miles to the gallon,5yet with fuel efficiency standards stagnant for nearly a decade, the autoindustry has little incentive to translate new technology into consumer savings at the gas pump.Today, theaverage vehicle gets just 23.8 miles to the gallon, and this number continues to fall.6 Drivers are paying the price.

    Failure to provide CAFE has ruined the auto industry economically much stronger standards that still profitable are technologically feasible and necessary.

    Palm Beach Post , Opinion: Produce Conservation to Cut Oil Dependency,7/9/ 08, p. 10A

    In 2001, a report from the National Academy of Sciences concluded tha t, by exploiting technology, could build efficient cars that didn't need SUV weight to be safe. Vice President Dick Cheney, however, dismissed conservation a"personal virtue." Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., who for decades opposed conservation on the grounds that it would hurt Detroit automakers and union audidn't givein until2007, whenCongress passed a weak update of the CAFE standards. Cars make up nearly half of tcountry's oil consumption.Andwhere has this resistance to energy conservation left us? General Motors talk of bankruptcy. Ford lost $12.6 billion last year. Both are retooling to make the sort of cars they sresisting. That nearly 20-year stall on conservation cost the country dearly. More stalling would be m

    http://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdfhttp://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdf
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    10/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 10 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Oil Dependency

    Incorporating more strict CAF program would significantly decrease US reliance on foreign oilColstonWarne (founding Chair of the Board of Consumers Union) December 222002 Journal of Consumer AffairsA primary example is the problem of carbon emissions from fuels, particularly auto transportation, wcontributes greatly to problems with air quality and global warming. Average miles per gallon for pe

    vehicles is the lowest it's been since 1980--even as dependence on foreign oil is a growing concern. practical step is to urge consumers to drive more economical vehicles, and to require that manufactu produce vehicles with better fuel efficiency. Consumers Union believes that s port-utility vehicles, vasmall-pickups should be required to meet the same miles-per-gallon standard that cars do . And we suincreasing the combined fuel economy for cars and light trucks to at least 35 miles per gallon by 201single change were implemented, by 2020 it would save 2.53 million barrels of oil per day -- more ocurrently import from the Persian Gulf.

    US oil production is limited, and lack of auto efficiency locks the US into foreign oil dependence Paul Roberts, [A journalist since 1983, Paul Roberts writes and lectures frequently on the complex inteconomics, technology, and the natural world. "The End of Oil" is his first book. Roberts has also wrThe Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, and The (UK) Guardian and has appeared in Slate, UThe New Republic, Newsweek, The Christian Science Monitor, Rolling Stone, Seed, and Outside ma Roberts was a finalist for the National Magazine Award (1999) and for the New York Public Library Bernstein Book Award for Excellence in Journalism in 2005]2004 , The End of Oil, pg.3-4

    As is well known by now, SUVs and pickup trucks (known collectively, and somewhat deceptively, trucks) consume a great deal of gasoline: the house-sized Ford Excursion I test-drove gets somethinmiles per gallon in the city, and even the more sensible models rarely do better than 18. The cumulatof so much unnecessary internal com bustion is staggering : since the SUV craze began in 1990, the twold trend in the United States toward improving automotive fuel efficienc y not only has halted but issliding backward, dramatically increasing U.S. demand for oil . And here is the rub: the U nited S tatehave enough of its own oil to meet that surging SUV-driven demand. After a century of full-bore dricompanies are finding precious little new oil in the Lower Forty-eight, and production the numbe pumped per day is falling steadily each year. What this means is that the United States , despite bethird-largest oil-producing nation in the world, now must import even more oil from the much-malig foreign producers including many, like Iran and Saudi Arabia , whose popula tions regard the Unas an enemy.

    Fuel efficiency would insulate consumers from gas price shocksUnion of Concerned Scientists, 04.19.2004, http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/cars_and_suvs/page. pageID=1395 The 2004 gasoline price spikes are not new to consumers. Gasoline prices have been spiking for the years, with no relief in sight. The most effective way to insulate consumers from these price spikes iincrease fuel economy standards, but government has not learned a 30-year lesson: high energy costwith low efficiency hurt the economy.The last four major price shocks (1973-74, the late 1970s/early 19and early 1990's) were all followed by recessions. While todays gasoline prices may not hit consumas peaks during the late 1980s (due to inflation), current record prices are placing a significant draeconomya drain that could be avoided if consumers had cars and trucks with better fuel economy.

    http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/cars_and_suvs/page.cfm?pageID=1395http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/cars_and_suvs/page.cfm?pageID=1395http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/cars_and_suvs/page.cfm?pageID=1395http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/cars_and_suvs/page.cfm?pageID=1395http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_vehicles/cars_and_suvs/page.cfm?pageID=1395
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    11/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 11 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Efficiency / Peak Oil DA

    Brink: Current estimates of oil supply are very wrong David Goodstein (Physicist and Vice Provost at California Institute of Technology)2004 , Out of Gas, pg. 45-As we saw earlier, many experts think there is enough oil in the ground to last for decades and enoughundreds of years, at the present rate of consumption. Among other fallacies, that view rests on the uassumption that the oil crisis will occur when the last drop of oil is pumped and likewise for coal and

    fossil fuels. The more sophisticated Hubbert analysis tells us that we get into trouble when we reach point. Thats when the rate at which we can extract oil or other fuels starts to decline . But that isnt tfallacy in that rosy picture. The present rate of consumption is the biggest myth of all. For one thing,Americans consume fuel at five times the average per capita rate of the rest of the world,and the rest of theworld wants in.For another there is a powerful inverse correlation between per capita energy consumption and female fertility. The richer the natithe rate of fuel consumption and the fewer the number of children born. If the whole world is brought up to first-world status as quickly as possible, thenin the century there might be ten billion people on Earth living in relative comfort and burning lots of fuel. If, instead, the third world remains in povertya hundred billion people on Earth living in misery, and consuming the same total amount of energy. Either way,all the fossil fuel will run out a lofaster than predicted by the present rate of consumption.

    Impact: Oil shortages = global economic depression

    Paul Roberts, [A journalist since 1983, Paul Roberts writes and lectures frequently on the complex inteconomics, technology, and the natural world. "The End of Oil" is his first book. Roberts has also wrThe Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, and The (UK) Guardian and has appeared in Slate, UThe New Republic, Newsweek, The Christian Science Monitor, Rolling Stone, Seed, and Outside ma Roberts was a finalist for the National Magazine Award (1999) and for the New York Public Library Bernstein Book Award for Excellence in Journalism in 2005]2004 , The End of Oil, pg.12-13

    Given that oil cannot be produced withou t first being discovered, it is inevitable that , at some point,oil production must peak and begin declining as well less than ideal circumstances for a global ecdepends on cheap oil for about 40 percent of its energy needs ( not to mention 90 percent of its transpfuel) and is nowhere even close to having alternative energy sources. The last three times oil producdropped off a cliff the Arab oil embargo of 1974, the Iranian revolution in 1979, and the 1991 Persian Gulf War the resulting price spikes pushed the world into recessio n . And these disruptions were temporary . Presumably, the effects of a permanent disruption would be far more gruesome .As prices rose, consumers would quickly shift to other fuels, such as natural gas o but soon enough, those supplies would also tighten and their prices would rise.An inflationary ripple effect would set in. As energy became more expensive, so would such energy-dependent activities as manufacturing and transportaCommercial activity would slow, and segments of the global economy especially dependent on rapidwhich is to say, pretty much everything these days would tip into recession . The cost of goods anwould rise , ultimately depressing economic demand and throwing the entire economy into an enduridepressionthat would make 1929 look like a dress rehearsal and could touch off a desperate and probably violent contest for whatever oil supplies r

    Failure to adapt to the coming EV auto transformation will screw the US auto industry Jack Doyle (founder and director of Corporate Sources and its principal investigator)2000 , Taken for a Ride p. 446 There's a competitive threat coming, significant ly , but not exclusively driven by environmental realiMichigan leaders, both inside and outside the auto industry, are loathe to acknowledge ," says Lana Pformer Michigan state senator who now heads up the Michigan Environmental Council. "Foreign maand domestic startups pioneering the new technologies could take a huge market share before the slomoving traditional auto industry has had the opportunity to adapt and recover."Pollack is now working with labor and otherinterests in Michigan to persuade the automakers to heed the warning signs. "We lost market share that we never fully regained," she says, referring to twe face a similar threat. . . . Not being first out of the box could have a tremendous, more or less permanent depeffect on the domestic auto industry. This isn't a matter of environment over economics. Either they mtogether, or we're going to inflict trem endous damage on ourselves."

  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    12/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 12 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Fuel efficiency will boost the economy by providing jobs and consumer savingsUnion of Concerned Scientists, 11.06.2002, http://www.ucsusa.org/news/press_release.cfm?newsID=22For more than three decades automakers have claimed that installing safety, fuel economy and pollutimprovements in their products would be a "business catastrophe." Not only has history proved thema new economic analysis released today shows that increasing fuel economy standards to 40 miles p2012 would create a net gain of over 182,000 jobs throughout the economy by 2015 -- with more thanew jobs created in the motor vehicles industry alone. "Putting technology to work means jobs, whethe computer industry or the auto industry," said David Friedman, author of the new study and Seniowith the Union of Concerned Scientists. "Building safe SUVs, better cars, and powerful trucks that ga gallon of gas will have a positive ripple effect throughout the economy." Moving to a 40 mpg avereconomy standard will provide consumers a net savings of more than $29 billion by 2015 because sa pump far outweigh any added vehicle costs. The money saved would be spent throughout the econogenerating 73,900 new jobs in the service industry; 31,900 jobs in the finance, insurance, and real-esindustries; 29,900 jobs in the manufacturing industry; and 22,500 jobs in the retail trade industry. Thautomotive industry and their suppliers will see 41,100 additional jobs from consumer re-spending ainvestments in producing better cars and trucks. Thousands of other jobs would be created in agriculconstruction, transportation, utilities, and government. Oil and associated industries would see their forecasts drop by 48,000 jobs, though these jobs would be shifted to other sectors of the economy, yincrease of 182,700 new jobs. "Fuel economy will be an engine for economic growth," said Friedmafor the auto industry to stop crying wolf." The Union of Concerned Scientists used a macroeconomicincludes industry-specific data derived from a government designed analysis tool to analyze 528 diffindustrial sectors and evaluate the potential job impacts. Overall, states that use more gasoline and thmore industry will gain the most jobs. California will add 23,600 jobs, Michigan 11,500 jobs, New Y jobs, Florida 9,700 jobs, and Ohio 9,200 jobs.

    Asian Automakers are surpassing US automakers because of efficiency Derrick Z. Jackson (columnist with the Boston Globe) June 13 2008 Foresight lacking, The Record,http://news.therecord.com/Opinions/article/366219 As Asian automakers focused on smaller, fuel-efficient cars, Detroit kept feeding American delusionunbridled power and limitless privilege.In 2002, GM vice-chairman Bob Lutz extolled the Hummer as "luxury in the sense of acquiring mcapability than you will likely ever need."The automakers have bitterly fought U.S. federal and state efforts toward sstandards for fuel efficiency and emissions. They keep trying to fit the round peg of fuel efficiency inhole of "smaller" Hummers and hybrid Tahoes and Yukons.Two years ago, GM offered to reimburse some new car buyers for anygasoline they purchased over $1.99 a gallon. In 2005, Lutz boasted that he and Wagoner were putting their resources "where we've got positive momen basically ... Cadillac, Hummer, and GMC." Later that same year, Lutz voiced confidence that the slumping SUV market would rebound because, "I'm bgoing to see regular under $2 a gallon again." This winter, Lutz went so far as to call global warming, of which SUVs have become America's symbol ocrock of (expletive deleted)."The lack of American vision was made complete last month as Asian automakers Detroit for the first time in history, with the top four cars being the Honda Civic and Accord and the Corolla and Camry.

    http://news.therecord.com/Opinions/article/366219http://news.therecord.com/Opinions/article/366219http://news.therecord.com/Opinions/article/366219
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    13/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 13 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Oil SpillsRaising CAF standards is key to stopping oil spills Noam Mohr and Joseph Shapiro , (Researchers at the U.S Public Interest Research Group Education FuPUMPING UP THE PRICE: THE HIDDEN COSTS OF OUTDATED FUEL EFFICIENCY STANUS Public Interest Group Research Education Fund, October 5,2000 ,http://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdf

    Transporting the excess oil needed to accommodate low mileage vehicles contributes to the danger oIn 1989, when the Exxon Valdez spilled almost 11 million gallons of oil into Alaskas Prince William Sound, Americans saw how environmentally devaspills can be.38 Yet while the Exxon Valdez received widespread media coverage,oil spills are hardly unusual events. Every year, th ealone expe riences thousands of spill s , amounting to millions of gallons of oil. Oil spills kill wildlife vapors which cause cancer and respiratory disease. B y reducing the amount of petroleum that must band transported, updating CAF E standards would prevent more than 808 oil spil ls on average each yU nited S tates, amounting to more than 3.2 million gallons of oil spillage annually . This is the equiva preventing an Exxon Valdez disaster about every three years.As the U.S. imports half the oil it uses , the nuof oil spills worldwide resulting directly from outdated fuel efficiency standards is likely far higher .

    Impact: Oil Spills are super destructive Paul Stephen Dempsey (Professor of Transportation law and Director of the Transportation Law PrograUniversity of Denver College of Law) Summer 1984 Oil Pollution of the Marine Environment by OceanVessels, Northwestern Journal of International Law & Business

    Although large amounts of oil remain on the surface, much of it is mixed into the water column , eithwave action or the use of dispersants applied to oil slicks . Unfortunately, as the spill breaks up, theenvironmental hazard does not disappear; it increases. Dissolved oil and oil globules fall through thecolumn, growing more toxicas they approach bottom. Concentrations of dissolved oil from 0.2 to 1 part per billion, a harmful level already focoastal waters near many cities, can skyrocket to as high as 250 parts per billion. 26 [*467]High levels of dissolved oil increase theconcentration of toxic chemicals in commercial fish and severely disrupt the marine food chain. Oil reduces the ocean's phyto plankton in coastal areas, where most of the world's commercial fish and o produced. Sea beds, an essential source of food for bottom dwelling commercial fish, become contamsterile. The ramifications of introducing such high concentrations of petroleum pollution into the ocesevere. Oil pollution disrupts phytoplankton, the microscopic plant life in the ocean that forms algaean important function in the ecosystem.First, oil interferes with phytoplankton photosynthesis. Such interference may eventually reduce toutput and the carbon dioxide uptake of ocean. Moreover, increased carbon dioxide in the atmosphere may cause a "greenhouse effect," such that heat wallowed to radiate into space, causing an increase in global temperatures. As a long term effect, the ice caps could eventually melt, causing the sea levelto 200 feet, submerging most coastal cities. 27The second function of phytoplankton that is disrupted by oil pollution its contribution to the food chain. Oil slicks poison and smother the smaller organisms at the base of chain, such as p hyto plankton an d zooplankton . Those organisms that survive absorb oil componentswith sea water. In this way, oil components are introduced into the food chain. These components cacancer and mutations in living organisms. A study by Massachusetts Institute of Technology found 1 pounds of known carcinogens in every 10,000 tons of oil spilled. 28 Through the process of bio-accthe situation becomes more dangerous to life forms higher on the food chain, including home sapien

    http://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdfhttp://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdf
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    14/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 14 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Terrorism / Middle East ImpactsOil dependence jacks Middle East stability and makes peace impossible(Allan Teal, , Associated Content, Mar 24, 2008 Why Oil Affects Middle East Conflicthttp://www.associatedcontent.com/article/672777/why_oil_affects_middle_east_policy.html?cat=75 )

    Oil gives Middle East nations huge influence in world affairs. Countries can restrict the amount of oil that theywill buy if a nation makes them angry . We see this when theUnited Statesand her allies placed an embargo

    Iranian oil. However, this has not made a reduction in demand for Iranian oil. It just changed the cusstanding in line. When world stock markets sniff the possibility that oil may not flow as freely as the worldwants and needs, it sends them into a nosedive. This keeps prices high and Middle East coffers full. glut of cash, these nations are positioned to finance political actions at home and abroad . They can help chacash to candidates who they believe will help further their causes. Even with restrictions for foreigncontributions, United Statespresidential candidates manage to get money funneled through to their cashreserves. This buys influence on foreign policy decisions. You can often see this in action when polileaders seem to waffle on whether to support our allies in the region or push an agenda of appeasemeMiddle Eastoil suppliers . Many times the effort is to get nations to push Israel into concessions of lan power. These concessions help the enemies of Israel while straining relations between Israel and hercash from these hugeoil sales is used to arm Middle East nations with state-of-the-art arsenals of ships

    artillery. Spending a few billion here or there seems like small change to theseoil rich lands. They are also abto help arm various terrorists organizations that serve their political purposes. These can either underor work to weaken her allies. In some cases, they simply wear down the resolve of these nations to stof trying to build stability in the region.

    http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/672777/why_oil_affects_middle_east_policy.html?cat=75http://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1442/buy.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1442/buy.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/678/united_states.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1349/home.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1349/home.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1349/home.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/678/united_states.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/678/united_states.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1358/money.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1358/money.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1358/money.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1427/how_to_love_work.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1427/how_to_love_work.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/article/672777/why_oil_affects_middle_east_policy.html?cat=75http://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1442/buy.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/678/united_states.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1349/home.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/678/united_states.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1358/money.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1641/oil.htmlhttp://www.associatedcontent.com/theme/1427/how_to_love_work.html
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    15/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 15 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    ANWR Specific Links / ImpactsFuel efficiency increase would decrease use of oil and the need for oil from places like ANWR David Friedman is a senior transportation analyst in the UCS Clean Vehicles Program., Union of ConScientists, 12.06.2002 , http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/nucleus.cfm?publicationID=317

    Fuel economy improvements would dwarf oil supplies from proposed expansion into environmentaareas such as the A rctic N ational W ildlife R eserve. By 2020, fuel savings would amount to more thatimes the oil economically recoverable from the Arctic. In addition, if Americans spend less money buying fuel, they'll have more toelsewhere. The 9.8 billion dollars consumers could be saving by 2010 and the 28 billion by 2020 would be returned to the nation's economy. In the auto investments to improve fuel economy and the money saved by consumers, could create 40,000 jobs by 2010 and 100,000 by 2020. Furthermore, the env benefits in decreased emissions would be significant. By 2010, carbon dioxide and other greenhouse-gas emissions from driving and providing fuel for trucks could be reduced by 273 million tons, diminishing transportation's contribution to global warming. At the same time, nearly 150 million pounds oemissions and 320 million pounds of smog-forming pollutants would never find their way from refineries to our lungs. By 2020, emissions reductions wgreater: 888 million fewer tons of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, 481 million fewer pounds of toxics, and 1,039 million fewer pounds of sm pollutants.

    Increasing fuel efficiency would save us more than 15 times the likely yield from ANWR Sacramento Business Journal , June 29,2001 Bush energy plan ignores fifth-largest economy (bracketadded for clarification) (TC)http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2001/07/02/editorial

    The United States cannot drill its way to energy security. While America has only 2.6 percent of the reserves, OPEC -- the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries -- holds 80 percent. Increasedwill not reduce our dependence on foreign oil and it threatens the viability of our environment. As ttechnological giants of the world, we are capable of developing new and innovative sources of renewenergy. Increasing fuel efficiency for automobiles to 39 miles per gallon over the next decade would billion barrels of oil over the next 50 years -- more than 15 times the likely yield. from [ANWR] the Refuge.

    Increased CAF standards are the quick and most efficient way to avoid drilling in ANWR Christopher Clements (commissioned as a Combat Engineer in the United States Army in 1997 and is duty Captain preparing to enter the Judge Advocate Corps., J.D. candidate attending the College of Wand Mary School of Law. He received a B.A. in Economics and Philosophy from the College of WillMary in 1997) Fall 2003 William and Mary Environmental Law and Policy Review,

    Pe rhaps the quickest and single-most effective alternative to oil exploration in the ANWR is raising Corporate Average Fuel Economy (" CAFE") standards . Raising these standards would make automofuel efficient and save millions of barrels of oil per day. 243 Senators Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and Gordon Smith (R-OR) attemptedunsuccessfully to pass legislation in May 2001 that would increase mandatory miles per gallon ("mpg") for light trucks, SUVs, and mini-vans to 27.5 m 244Similar legislation was introduced in early 2002 that would have increased CAFE standards to 36 mpg by 2015 for SUVs and mini- vans. 245 Despite these efforts,Congress has consistently killed these attempts and any other legislation that would attempt to curb gasoline usage by Americans. 246 The administration hasrepeatedly held that the American standard of living should not be sacrificed for higher gas mileage. 247Critics of gas [*123] mileage standards point to vehicleamong other arguments for not accepting higher standards. 248 If Americans would accept higher standards for automobiles, however, the United States would be much less dependent on oil. Furthermore, auto manufacturers c

    gas mileage using existing technologies. 249 A National Academy of Science study found that new techn some of it already in use, could improve gas mileage by twenty-five to fifty percent. 250It seems disingenuous for our government to ask American service members to make sacrifices in the Persian Gulf, and then refuse to raise gas mileages on SUVs here at home.Legislatingnew CAFE standards could save more oil than we could ever hope to extract from the 1002 Area of

    http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/nucleus.cfm?publicationID=317http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2001/07/02/editorial5.htmlhttp://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2001/07/02/editorial5.htmlhttp://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n243http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n243http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n243http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n244http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n244http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n245http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n245http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n245http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n246http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n246http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n246http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n247http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n247http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n248http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n248http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n248http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n249http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n249http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n249http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n250http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n250http://www.ucsusa.org/publications/nucleus.cfm?publicationID=317http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacramento/stories/2001/07/02/editorial5.htmlhttp://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n243http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n244http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n245http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n246http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n247http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n248http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n249http://www.lexis.com/research/retrieve?_m=49d68bb28e645b1bf1987f385563fd19&docnum=343&_fmtstr=FULL&_startdoc=326&wchp=dGLbVzb-zSkAA&_md5=9dc6c80c1342df2d62862c5f3ae91bf5&focBudTerms=cafe%20w/#n250
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    16/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 16 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Drilling displaces tons of speciesUnion of Concerned Scientists 2001 Backgrounder The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge: Is loss of a priwilderness worth the oil that might be gained?http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/biodiversity/page.cfm?pageID=780#eco

    Taken altogether, ANWR is truly a pristine wilderness, one of the most unique and undisturbed ecosearth. Yet the potential for disturbance in this wilderness is high. In 1987, during the Reagan Adminreport to Congress from the Department of the Interior (the Legislative Environmental Impact Statement, LEIS)concludedthat oil development in the 1002 area would have major impacts on the caribou and muskoxen ."Major" was defineas "widespread, long-term change in habitat availability or quality that would likely modify natural abundance or distribution of specieModerate impacts on wolves, wolverine, polar bears, snow geese, seabirds and shorebirds, arctic gracoastal fish were also predicted. More recently, in a letter to President Bush signed by 506 scientists,scientists expressed concern about drilling impacts not only on Porcupine caribou but also on other wANWR, most particularly polar bears, muskoxen, ad snow geese.The Scientists' Sign-On Letter outlines these concerns: "Althomany polar bears den on the pack ice, the refuge's coastal plain is the most important land denning area for Beaufort Sea bears in Alaska.Muskoxen are yearound residents of the coastal plain, and disturbance from industrial development, particularly in winthe potential to increase energetic costs and result in decreased calf production. Also, snow geese midisplaced from important feeding and staging habitats prior to autumn migration, increasing energy eand reducing their ability to accumulate the fat needed for migration."

    Drilling in the ANWR will wipe out tribal cultures.The Spokesman-Review (Spokane, WA) March 18,2001

    Biologists working for the oil companies say exploration and drilling can be performed with almost on the environment. The Gwich'in, however, are skeptical. They fear the disruption of a herd that alllive a satisfying balance between Western and European-American traditions. Without a dependablecaribou -- about 5,000 are harvested every year -- the Gwich'in would be forced to make major chanlifestyle, and many would be forced to leave their ancestral home. Among environmentalists, the coaof the ANWR, with its rumbling Porcupine herd, is often called America's Serengetti. But a more apcomparison is to the Great Plains of 200 years ago, when the bison herds sustained thousands of Nat

    Americans. The annihilation of those herds wiped out the tribal cultures; the Gwich'in fear drilling inANWR will do the same. "The caribou is not just what we eat, but who we are," said Sarah James, aleader. "It is in our dances, stories, songs and the whole way we see the world . Caribou is how we geyear to the other."

    Fuel efficiency saves ANWR Jack Doyle , founder & director of Corporate Sources and its principal investigator 2000 , Taken for a Ride, p264-5They held that each policyprotecting wilderness and promoting conservationwas vital in its own right, and that in fact,tougher fuel economystandards would help make it unnecessary to exploit ANWR in the first place . For example, in a Feb

    report, Looking for Oil in All the Wrong Places, Robert Watson of NRDC con cluded, Americas unexploited oil and natural gas reserves lie not in envi ronmentally sensitive coastal or Alaskan fieldinefficient buildings, appliances and transportation system . Indeed, using various projections of fuethrough the years 2000 and 2010, Watson found that potential s avings in the automobile sector aloneexceed by a factor of five the total economic energy resources in both ANWR and the unleased offshresource base.An earlier study completed by Brooks Yeager, then with the Sierra Club, found that merely restoring the 27.5 MPG standard on new1993 would yield a greater contribution to national energy needs (4.6 billion BELs) than would ANWRs expected production (3.2 billion BBLs).56

    http://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/biodiversity/page.cfm?pageID=780#ecohttp://www.ucsusa.org/global_environment/biodiversity/page.cfm?pageID=780#eco
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    17/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 17 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Pollution DA

    Plan is key to significantly reduce refinement of gasoline, which is responsible for tens of thousandsdeaths each year from pollution.

    Noam Mohr and Joseph Shapiro , U.S. Public Interest Research Group Education Fund, PUMPING UP PRICE: THE HIDDEN COSTS OF OUTDATED FUEL EFFICIENCY STANDARDS, US Public Group Research Education Fund, October 5,2000 , http://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice200

    Refining the billions of gallons of additional oil required to run inefficient vehicles produces large qair and water pollutants. Emissions into the atmosphere fro m petroleum refinin g facilities typically incvolatile organic compounds (VOCs), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur oxides (SOX), nitrogen oxides particulates, ammonia (NH3), hydrogen sulfide (H2S), and numerous toxic organic compounds. 37 pollutants create smog, soot, and acid rain, and cause respiratory disease and cancer, each year sendinhundreds of thousands of Americans to emergency rooms and causing tens of thousands of prematuWhile refineries are not the only source of these pollutants, petroleum refining is a pollution-intensi producing more than three times the average number of rele ases per facility compared to other indu

    Motor vehicles cause more air pollution than any other single human activity:Leslie HarrisonReed(Navy Office of General Counsel)1997 Boston College Environmental Affairs LawReview; Lexis)Motor vehicles, considered as a whole, cause more air pollution than any other single human activity National estimates attribute approximately fifty percent of the total air pollutants in the country's urbvehicular sources. n2 In California, mobile sources cause nearly sixty percent of the pollutants--hydr(HC) and oxides of nitrogen (NO[x])--that react with the sun to form harmful ozone, and ninety perccarbon monoxide (CO) emissions. n3 This huge share of total emissions occurs, despite more than twof increasingly stringent controls in California and the rest of the nation, in part due to the ever-increnumbers of motor vehicles and the [*696] miles they are driven. n4 Thus, short of drastically changliving and commuting choices of a majority of Americans, n5 some of the regulatory options for signcontrolling and reducing these emissions further include: requiring retrofitting of older in-use motor with emission control equipment; imposing stringent transportation control measures to reduce vehictraveled (VMT) such as no-drive days or fees for VMT; squeezing more emission reductions from ngasoline-powered motor vehicles; or developing an advanced transportation industry around either loemission, alternative-fueled vehicles or zero-emission vehicles, or both.

    Pollution Threatens millions of People Roberts , Earth Policy Insitute, September 17, 2002 http://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update17.htm

    The W orld H ealth O rganization re ports that 3 million people now die each year from the effects of aThis is three times the 1 million who die each year in automobile accidents. A study published in Th2000 concluded that air pollution in France, Austria, and Switzerland is responsible for more than 40annually in those three countries. About half of these deaths can be traced to air pollution from vehicemissions. In the U nited S tates, traffic fatalities total just over 40,000 per year, while air pollution cllives annually. U.S. air pollution deaths are equal to deaths from breast cancer and prostate cancer coThis scourge of cities in industrial and developing countries alike threatens the health of billions of p

    http://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdfhttp://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update17.htmhttp://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update17.htmhttp://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update17.htmhttp://static.uspirg.org/reports/pumpinguptheprice2000.pdfhttp://www.earth-policy.org/Updates/Update17.htm
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    18/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 18 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Increase CAFE CP Uniqueness: Current CAFE Standards aren't so hot

    The 2008 increase in CAFE standards will have no functional effect - far more radical steps arenecessary.

    Peter Fairley , ABC News, The New CAFE Standards: Fuel standards will likely be achievable but wencourage innovation, January 15,2008 , http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/Story?id=4136951&page=1 .

    The 40 percent increase in the U.S. fuel-economy standard to 35 miles per gallon by 2020, which Congress passed lastmonth,could bea significantstep toward trimming U.S. drivers' increasing greenhouse-gas emissions and dependence on imported oil.But energyexperts say that the new technologies required to meet the new standards are minimal.Instead, they say that lesser-known provisions in the Energy Independence and Security Act could have a far greater impact on spurring the development of new technologies, such as plugvehicles. The new law tightens Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards that regulate the average fuel economy in the vehicles produced byautomaker. The current CAFE standard for cars, set in 1984, requires manufacturers to achieve an average of 27.5 miles per gallon, while a second CAFrequires an average of 22.2 miles per gallon for light trucks such as minivans, sport utility vehicles, and pickups. The new rules require that these standasuch that, by 2020, the new cars and light trucks sold each year deliver a combined fleet average of 35 miles per gallon.Raising fuel economy by 10miles per gallon nationwide will deliver real benefits. The Union of Concerned Scientists, for example, estimates that it will save 1.1 barrels of oil per day in 2020--about half of what the United States imports from the Persian Gulf. That should deliver a reduction in greenhouse gases etaking 28 million of today's cars and trucks off the road. Nevertheless,Jim Kliesch, a senior engineer with the Union of Concerned Scientists, in WashinDC, projects thatthese savings will belargelynegated in 2020 by increased driving."Fuel-economy policy in this country had beenstagnating for decades, andgetting a minimum of 35 mpg by 2020 is a critical first step, but if we want to achiesustainable transportation system, it's going to take much more,"says Kliesch. Analysts like Kliesch do expect automakers to prmore advanced diesel vehicles and hybrids in the coming decade, both in response to tightening fuel-economy rules and for strategic and marketing reas by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences, think tanks, and activists show that a combination of existing efficiency options, such as continuously variabtransmissions and better tires, can cheaply and easily deliver a 35-miles-per-gallon fleet. Indeed,Europecurrently requires 40 miles per gallon average fueleconomy andwill soon push up to 49 miles per gallon, whileJapan is expected to reach 47 miles per gallonin its 2015standard. Greenhouse-gas regulations developed by California (and adopted by many other states) may soon eclipse CAFE in the United States. Last moEnvironmental Protection Agency rejected California's petition to impose its own standards, arguing that the state rules delivered the equivalent of just 3gallon, butCaliforniaofficials shot back with their own analysis early this month. They estimated that the state standardwould yield 35 miles per gallon from new cars by about 2016--four years ahead of CAFE.

    The current standard will not actually force the industry to increase conservation only the planachieves both oil conservation and economic and technical feasibility.

    Mark N.Cooper , Ph. D., Director of Research, Consumer Federation of America, Comments on Nati Highway Traffic Safety Administration Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,7/1/ 08,http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/nhtsa_comments.pdf In our view, much higher levels of fuel economy standards would pass the societal welfare test (one of the primary constraints in the proposed rule) if N balances the economic and energy conservation concerns. We believe the same is true for the conceptualization of the supply-side constraint.The proposedstandard is at a level where only one or two of the automakers would fail to meet the standard. While NHTSA doesnot have to push the standard to a level that would cause a higher percentage of the automakers to fall short, it is important to recognize that even if thcase; this would not disqualify the standard. In other words,if a higher percentage of automakers were likely to fall short, thwould not mean that the standard iseconomicallyimpracticable. As we have noted, the 50/50 level providesan exampleof this. According to NHTSAs analysis,over 50 percent of the auto manufacturers would be able to meet the stand because of the phase in process.38Those who failto meet the standardwould either have to speed adoption, develop new

    technologies that were not considered by NHTSA, or paysome

    finesuntil they do. These predictions on the possibility that a

    significant percentage of automakers might fail to meet the standard carry us to the part of the model that is the least well documented and transparent.in the comments, the projections of the limitation of the ability to adopt new technologies is based on a very thin body of knowledge about the veracity,and predictive value of auto manufacturer product plans, recent changes in fuel economy and the practices of automakers in adopting fuel economy tecThere is also a question regarding assumptions about compliance strategies of auto manufacturers. NHTSA has set out toessentiallyensure thatautomakers pay few fines, under the argument that when automakers miss the goal and pay fines, society does not get the benefit of increasedgasoline savings. NHTSAs standard does not push the industry. This is evident in Exhibit A-4. NHTSA has set the rule at alevel where only 11 percent of automakers and 17 percent of truck markets are not likely to meet thstandard. Were NHTSA to refuse to move the standard to a level where half the industry can meet tstandard, it lets the laggards drag the standard down and allows the definition of economic practicabdominate the need for conservation.

    http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/Story?id=4136951&page=1http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/Story?id=4136951&page=1http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/Story?id=4136951&page=1http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/nhtsa_comments.pdfhttp://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/nhtsa_comments.pdfhttp://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/Story?id=4136951&page=1http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/GlobalWarming/Story?id=4136951&page=1http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/nhtsa_comments.pdf
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    19/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 19 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Current increases in CAFE standards doesnt require changes until 2020.JohnNeff , NHTSA announces new CAFE standards through 2015, Autoblog, April 22,2008,http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/22/nhtsa-announces-new-cafe-standards-through-2015/.

    Last December, President Bush signed a new energy bill into law that requires automakers to achievCorporateAverageFuelEconomy standard of 35 mpg by 2020. Thishistoricstiffening of CAFE standardsset a loftygoal, butleft plenty of time to get there and new standards of any kind won't begin until the 2011 modelToday,which happens to be Earth Day, U.S. Transportation Secretary Mary E. Peters laid out the first set of new CAFE rules that will be implemented for passand light trucks from 2011 through 2015.

    The current rules are based on such massively flawed data and assumptions that they are not even legviable only the plan corrects this.

    Mark N.Cooper , Ph. D., Director of Research, Consumer Federation of America, Comments on Nati Highway Traffic Safety Administration Notice of Proposed Rulemaking,http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/nhtsa_comments.pdf , 7/1/2008We reach this conclusion not based on a difference of opinion about what the agency should or could do, but on the fact th NHTSAs analysis is fundamentally flawed, so deeply flawed that it rises to the level of arbitrary andcapricious. NHTSA has systematicallyand repeatedlyundervalued the benefits of increased fuel economy anreduced fuel consumption.In spite of massive uncertainties and gaps in its knowledge, it has rushed to write rules for as long as allowed by th

    the public interest and the intent of Congress would be far better served by writing rules for the shor possible. Shortening the period covered by the propose rule would have allowed the agency to eduabout the many important features of the fuel economy landscape about which the agency admits it informed. Raising the standard for the first two years to the 50-50 level will balance the statutory properly and bring NHTSA into compliance with the law.

    http://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/22/nhtsa-announces-new-cafe-standards-through-2015/http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/nhtsa_comments.pdfhttp://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/nhtsa_comments.pdfhttp://www.autoblog.com/2008/04/22/nhtsa-announces-new-cafe-standards-through-2015/http://www.consumerfed.org/pdfs/nhtsa_comments.pdf
  • 8/9/2019 Abolish Cafe ~ Neg#

    20/27

    Abolish CAFE NEG| 20 / 27Caiello/Schirm

    Increase CAFE CP: Solvency

    An increase in CAFE standards would match Europe and save 2 million barrels of oil per day overcurrent proposed increases.

    Mortimer Zuckerman is the editor-in-chief of U.S.News & World Report, Stop the Energy Insanity, News and World Report, p. 118, July 21,2008

    Consumption. The first fuel economy standard law, known as Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, was passedin 1975--a mandate thatdoubledthe fuel efficiency of the typical car sold in theU nitedStates between 1974 and 1985from 13.8 mpg to 27.5 mpg (even thoughthese measurements took place in favorable controlled conditions rather than on actual highways).It has flattened out since then, in contrastEurope, which now demands 44 mpg. An effortherein 1990 to lift the fuel standard to 40 mpg for carsaroused furiouopposition led by Democrats from automaking states, like Michigan's Sen. Carl Levin and Rep. John Dingell. Had that bill been passed, wewould be using 3million fewer barrels a day. Only in 2007, with gasoline nearing $3 a gallon,did Congress approve the first major increin fuel efficiency in 32 years,requiring the fleet average to reach 35 mpg by 2020--a measure that would savmillion barrels a dayby then. Attempts to raise taxes on gasoline to reduce consumption have essentially failed, except for a small tax increase o per gallon in 1993.

    Plan is key to save the auto industry from total collapse consumer demand proves. Lea Radick , Medill News Service, Catching up on CAFE standards,7/3/08 ,http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11504.html .The federation thinks NHTSA should recommend higher standards for model years 2011 and 2012and wait to set standards fo2013 through 2015 when better data is available.By setting initial fuel economy standards higher than what was proposeCoopesaidCAFE standards could reach 33 mpg or 34 mpg as soon as 2016. Motorists are ready, willing an pay more for fuel efficient cars, based on public opinion pollscommissioned by the consumer group, Cooper said. Consumerstoday have a good sense of gas and how much they are willing to pay for vehicles with fuel economysense than NHTSA. The auto industry isnt pleased with the proposed fuel economy standards but for different reasons. We believe some oassumptions made by NHTSA in setting standards through model year 2015 are overly aggressive, said Charles Territo, spokesman for the Alliance ofManufacturers. We understand, probably more than any other industry, concerns consumer have about the high price of gasoline and are working hardfuel efficient technology to market, Territo said. But the fact that consumers value fuel economy more than ever before doesnt make the time necessa

    amount of money necessary to research and develop new technologies any faster or any less expensive. Cooper, however,thinks the auto industrywould be committing suicide by refusing to improve the fuel economy.The National Highway Traffic Safety Administratiohad no immediate reaction to criticism from the Consumer Federation of America and other groups. The period for public comment on the proposed staTuesday.

    Absence of fuel economy standards has been primarily responsible for massive auto sales losses oplan can save the industry from inevitable collapse.

    Mark N.Cooper , Ph. D., Director of Research, Consumer Federation of America, Comm