Search Climate Insights Directory

GreenLatinos condemns the Trump administration's repeal of Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for cars, SUVs, and heavy-duty trucks, stating that the move targets clean energy and low-income minorities. The organization highlights that low-income households spend approximately 30% of after-tax income on transportation, and that Latino families are particularly vulnerable due to longer commutes and a higher proportion of income spent on fuel.

The 2018 Automaker Rankings by the Union of Concerned Scientists finds that while average emissions from new vehicles have reached record lows, the pace of reduction is slowing due to a market shift toward SUVs and inconsistent investment in efficiency technologies. Honda is the top-performing full-line manufacturer, while Tesla leads overall with an all-electric fleet. The 'Detroit Three' (Ford, GM, and Fiat Chrysler) consistently underperform compared to the industry average. The report details the deployment of fuel-saving technologies—such as gasoline direct injection, cylinder deactivation, and electrification—and argues that strong federal standards are essential to prevent manufacturers from prioritizing performance over emissions reductions.

The briefing discusses the challenge of meeting 2025 fuel efficiency standards due to low gas prices and the popularity of SUVs and trucks. It proposes the adoption of high-octane, low-carbon fuels, such as E25, as a cost-effective compliance method that supports the increasing production of direct-injection, turbocharged engines while reducing greenhouse gas and toxic emissions.

The document details the evolution of U.S. vehicle efficiency standards, starting with the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. It highlights the collaboration between the EPA, NHTSA, and auto manufacturers to implement standards for light-duty vehicles and two phases of standards for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. The standards aim to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, lower oil consumption, and save consumers and vehicle owners billions of dollars by 2027.

The document details the EPA's trajectory in regulating greenhouse gases (GHGs) following the 2007 Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA. It outlines key milestones including the 2009 Endangerment Finding, the development of fuel economy standards for light- and heavy-duty vehicles, and the introduction of the Clean Power Plan to reduce carbon pollution from power plants. The timeline also tracks critical judicial decisions that have both affirmed and limited the EPA's authority under the Clean Air Act.

The report argues that instead of risky whole-vehicle redesigns, the automotive industry should adopt carbon fiber composites starting with specific high-value parts and subassemblies. It identifies promising candidates such as door inners, engine cradles, and seats, noting that while these parts cost significantly more than steel counterparts, the value from weight reduction and fuel savings can make them cost-competitive. The document outlines technical gaps in material characterization, predictive modeling, and fiber cost, and recommends the creation of a 'Parts Campaign' and an 'Innovation Hub' to coordinate efforts between industry, government, and academia.

The policy brief proposes a 'feebate' system—where inefficient vehicles are surcharged and efficient ones are rebated—to overcome consumer discounting of long-term fuel savings. It outlines design recommendations from an RMI-hosted expert forum, including size-neutrality and manufacturer-level implementation. The brief cites France's 'bonus-malus' program as a successful example that significantly reduced new vehicle CO2 emissions, while noting that a U.S. version should prioritize technological innovation across all vehicle sizes rather than just shifting buyers to smaller cars.

The clean car standards, initiated by California's AB 1493 and adopted by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), comprise regulations for air quality, global warming, and zero-emission vehicles. These standards aim for a 30% reduction in global warming pollution from new vehicles by 2016 and are more stringent than federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, targeting a fleet average fuel economy equivalent of 39.2 mpg by 2020 compared to the federal 35 mpg. As of January 2009, 13 states and the District of Columbia had adopted these standards, which are projected to reduce cumulative global warming emissions by 451 million metric tons of CO2E by 2020 across those 15 jurisdictions.

The Union of Concerned Scientists' 2007 report ranks eight major automakers on their environmental impact, focusing on smog and global warming pollutants. Honda is named the 'Greenest Automaker' for the fourth consecutive time, though Toyota has closed the gap significantly due to hybrid technology and consistent performance across all vehicle classes. The report highlights a stark contrast between the top performers and the 'Big Three' (Ford, GM, and DaimlerChrysler), with DaimlerChrysler ranking as the dirtiest. Key findings indicate that while smog emissions have improved due to tighter regulations, progress on global warming emissions has been minimal since 1998. The analysis also critiques the use of flexible-fuel vehicles (FFVs) as a regulatory loophole that increases overall emissions and notes that diesel vehicles reduce global warming pollution but significantly increase smog.

Amory B. Lovins, CEO of RMI, submits comments to NHTSA challenging the technical basis of its proposed rulemaking on automobile fuel economy standards. He argues that NHTSA incorrectly relies on retrospective correlations between vehicle weight and safety, which fail to account for modern materials like advanced polymer composites and high-strength steels. Lovins asserts that these materials can create vehicles that are simultaneously large, lightweight, and safe, thereby eliminating the perceived tradeoff between fuel economy and crashworthiness. He recommends that CAFE standards be performance-based, technology-forcing, and based on size metrics rather than mass to avoid incentivizing a 'mass arms race' and to maintain the global competitiveness of U.S. automakers.

The authors contend that energy efficiency is a far more cost-effective and reliable method for reducing oil dependence than drilling in frontier areas or investing in synthetic fuels. They provide data showing that from 1973 to 1986, efficiency gains significantly outperformed supply expansions in terms of effective energy supply. The paper highlights the transportation sector, particularly light-vehicle efficiency, as the most critical area for potential savings, suggesting that higher CAFE standards could save billions of barrels of oil. It also examines savings in buildings, industry, and utilities, arguing that these 'negabarrels' are cheaper to produce than extracting new oil. Finally, the authors link energy efficiency to broader national security goals, including the mitigation of climate change, the reduction of nuclear proliferation, and the decrease of geopolitical volatility in the Middle East.

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) analysis reveals that the majority of money spent on gasoline in the U.S. flows to oil companies rather than local communities. For a typical $50 fill-up, $33 goes toward crude oil, with $20 benefiting private and publicly traded companies and $13 benefiting government-run entities. The report argues that individual shareholders receive negligible returns from their own gasoline expenditures; for example, a person with $1 million in a balanced portfolio would earn less than a penny in stock returns from spending $1,700 annually on gas from ExxonMobil. Conversely, investing in fuel-efficient vehicles, such as a hybrid Ford Fusion, can result in lifetime savings of over $5,000. On a national scale, UCS estimates that federal fuel economy standards for 2017-2025 could provide consumers $50 billion in net savings by 2030 and create between 484,000 and 570,000 jobs. The document concludes that reducing oil use is essential to mitigate global warming, as transportation accounts for more than one-third of all U.S. carbon dioxide emissions.