Fuel economy figures tell half-truths
Manufacturers, environmentalists fudge facts for CAFE standards
The Economist calls it “post-truth” politics, “a reliance on assertions that ‘feel true,’ but have no actual basis in fact.” Of course, prevaricating politicians are nothing new, but what is different about the modern art of the lie, says the world’s foremost news magazine, is not that truth is falsified, but that it is “of secondary importance.”
The lies, it says, are not intended to convince non-believers of a false view of the world, “but to reinforce prejudices” and, most especially, validate “common sense” truths that, again, “feel true.” In other words, just tell us what we want to hear so we don’t have to think.
It should come as no surprise that Donald Trump is cited as the leading practitioner of the “posttruth” lie, but then Hillary Clinton is hardly a stranger to fantabulous fabrication. Now, judging from the hearings surrounding the midterm evaluation of U.S. Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, both automobile manufacturers and environmental lobbyists are following in their footsteps. And just like The Donald, both sides of the argument are using a kernel of truth — that CAFE standards call for U.S. automakers to achieve a fleet average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025 — to tell their whoppers.
The automakers, represented by the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers and backed by Republican lawmakers, are implying they can’t meet the standards because consumers are buying more trucks and SUVs that — no surprise — can’t get anywhere near 54.5 mpg. Environmental groups, meanwhile, counter that automakers signed on for the regs and should damned well have their feet held to the fire to meet them. Both are lying.
The worst — or, if you’re a cynical journalist, the funniest — thing about this deception is that they’re both telling the same lie.
Indeed, while climate-change deniers and eco-weenies may be perpetuating radically different agendas, in a perfect example of the duplicitous nature of politicians, the tall tales they’re telling are based on the very same falsehood. Which is that no one — despite all the numbers quoted, despite the massive headlines back when president Obama signed the latest CAFE standards into law — actually ever promised 54.5 mpg.
he agreement that in 2011 was heralded as a breakthrough for emissions reduction across North America — because Canada basically followed suit — never once, despite the claims you’re reading elsewhere, promised 54.5 mpg. Here’s what they did promise: CAFE regulations only stipulate model-by-model fuel-economy improvement or, more accurately, segment-by-segment increases in fuel economy.
Essentially, the government divided all cars into segments determined by size and “footprint” and mandated fuel economy improvements for each segment. Thus, all economy cars were lumped together, as were all mid-size sedans, SUVs and pickups. And each group was expected to increase its average fuel economy by a specific amount — five per cent for passenger cars, 3.5 per cent for pickups and SUVs — every year until 2025.
Here’s where that magical 54.5 mpg figure came from: Based on the sales at the time — passenger cars versus trucks and SUVs — when you averaged out the fuel economy of all vehicles being sold, those mandated improvements would have eventually led to the 54.5 mpg number. Note that this 54.5 mpg was not mandated; it was simply the target. Only the individual segment-by-segment “footprint” fuel economy improvement is law; the average is not.
Of course, no one could envisage the cheap gas we currently enjoy. Or the fact that consumers would use this unexpected economy to buy more trucks and bigger cars. So, while individual models are in fact increasing their fuel economy as per the regulations, the North American fleet will not — if current sales trends hold — hit that 54.5 miles per gallon figure in 2025. The original goal was based on just 33 per cent of vehicles sold in 2025 being trucks. If, as estimates now suggest, that percentage is closer to 52 per cent, the projected fuel economy drops to 50 mpg.
Maybe now you can see the fibs from both sides. Environmentalists who see the 54.5 mpg figure as sacrosanct, are saying automakers are failing to meet their obligations and trying to force automakers to sell small cars and EVs that the public clearly doesn’t want. What they really want is for the government to up the mpg requirements of individual cars (already a law) so the fleet still meets that magical 54.5 mpg average.
Of course, the automakers (and their GOP friends) are hardly innocents. Some are using the public’s desire for increasingly larger cars and trucks to claim consumers are unconcerned if the fleet average doesn’t hit the 54.5 mpg target; they just want to buy trucks and bigger cars. That may well be true, but the fact remains that current legislation does not in any way hinder them from selling the trucks and SUVs the public so craves. Ford could sell nothing but pickups but, if it managed to increase the F-150’s year-over-year fuel economy by the proscribed amount, it would still be in compliance.
(Automakers are also complaining that these targets are too expensive to meet, even though Consumers Union — the policy and action division of Consumer Reports magazine — pointedly notes that, so far, technology costs associated with fuel economy improvements are running below predictions.)
In other words, both sides are fibbing and, as I said, using the very same misrepresentation to peddle their falsehoods. Oh, what a tangled web government bureaucrats weave when they try to force change that the market — namely you and I — doesn’t want.