Automakers, union leaders, environmental groups and the governors of California and Michigan joined President Barack Obama at the White House in 2009 to announce our country’s first joint standards to boost gas mileage and cut pollution from new cars and light-duty trucks through 2016.
Now, the Obama administration is reportedly looking at ambitious new targets for 2017-2025 that could increase the fuel standard significantly.
The greatest consumer and environment benefits would occur with a standard of 62 mpg, or as much as a 6 percent improvement annually, according to a report by the Environmental Protection Agency, the California Air Resources Board and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration released last September. Each additional mile per gallon improvement in fuel economy over the status quo reduces U.S. oil consumption. Given the nation’s near total dependence on oil for transportation — which accounts for 25 percent of U.S. carbon emissions — and the recent volatility of gas prices, this is welcome news.
But like many rules promising environmental benefits, this one is mired in controversy. Automakers protest that the proposal is too demanding, insisting it interferes with safety, affordability and choice. Environmentalists, meanwhile, want something more stringent.
There is another way forward. We worked together to pass the Clean Air Act of 1990, which affirmed California’s right to set automobile emissions standards that are more stringent than the federal government’s. Why? Because California suffers more from vehicle emissions than most states. Obama’s 2009 announcement could not have occurred if California had not first exercised its legal right to adopt aggressive standards.
The last time California set new vehicle emissions standards, 13 other states and the District of Columbia followed. This covers nearly half the nation’s vehicle market. Eventually, the nation was transformed by California’s lead.
Friction between those setting California’s standards and those setting national standards has been evident in the past. Just recently, the House Appropriations Committee voted to strip both the EPA and California of their power to set vehicle emissions standards.
The truth is, however, that California’s push, driven by the state’s unique air quality challenges, has resulted in better, cleaner car choices for all Americans.
California has used its right to drive innovation and progress in reducing pollution — which also reduces energy consumption. The catalytic converter, hybrid and battery electric cars, variable speed transmissions — these innovations were all adopted in the U.S. because of regulations that California passed first. All these advances came because California pushed carmakers to do what they initially said could not be done.
Automobile company spokespeople have argued against setting fuel-efficiency standards in the range proposed by the administration, arguing that though the technology to achieve the standards exists, there is a concern that consumers would decline to buy the lighter, smaller cars. California has historically served as the proving ground for vindicating consumer preference for more efficient cars, incentivizing carmakers to improve performance even as they learned to reduce pollution and fuel use.
Clearing the air and protecting people’s health are not the only benefits from strong fuel-efficiency standards. Clean cars save consumers money. Strong clean-car policies spark investment and spur innovation and job creation.
The global market for clean technology is growing, as China and other countries rapidly expand their automobile fleets. The U.S. must stay competitive. Without clear signals that efficiency and lower emissions matter here, finance and innovation are likely to migrate elsewhere.
More fuel-efficient cars can also make the U.S. more secure. With oil hovering around $100 per barrel, to secure the 19 million barrels Americans consume every day, we spend well more than a half-trillion dollars abroad annually — most of it for transportation. We import from countries that are unstable, conflict-prone and may have interests hostile to ours. Increased domestic oil production may help but can’t solve the balance-of-trade predicament or free our foreign policy from the consequences of oil dependency.
If the federal government cannot agree to strong new mileage and emissions standards, California should again lead the way. Better gas mileage and cleaner cars mean not only a healthier future for all Americans but also a more prosperous and innovative economy.
George Mitchell served as special envoy for Middle East peace in the Obama administration and chairman for the talks that brought peace to Northern Ireland. He served as Senate majority leader from 1989 to 1995. William Reilly served as administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency under President George H.W. Bush, when he worked closely with Mitchell to pass the 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act. Reilly served as co-chairman of President Obama’s National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling and is co-chairman of the Bipartisan Policy Center’s Energy Project.