Reg-Markets Center
Popularity Report
 |
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
|||
|
Rank
URL Tag Cloud
Bookmark History
Saved by 1 people (0 private), first by anonymouse user on 2008-04-13
- Trutledge on 2008-04-13 - Tags economics , environment , CAFE
Public Sticky notes
Economists agree that CAFE standards are a needlessly costly way to fight dependence on foreign oil and global warming because they regulate vehicles instead of driving, the activity more closely related to these problems. Policies that reduce driving, such as higher fuel prices, would achieve these goals at lower cost than new CAFE standards.
Highlighted by trutledge
driving increases because better fuel efficiency lowers the cost of operating a vehicle
Highlighted by trutledge
Adding the accident and congestion costs gives additional highway costs of roughly $110 to $250 per light truck per year for Daschle’s proposal.
Highlighted by trutledge
More stringent CAFE may worsen local air pollution. By 2004, new light trucks must emit no more nitrogen oxides than cars, but these standards are expressed per mile, so total emissions will rise as driving increases.
Highlighted by trutledge
A slight increase in fuel prices would reduce emissions and our dependence on Mideast oil more efficiently and quickly than a new CAFE standard. It would constrain rather than increase traffic accidents and delays. By applying to all fuel sources, it could do more to promote energy security than CAFE.
Highlighted by trutledge
Congress, if it is interested in reducing emissions and improving energy security, should instead adopt a tradeable permit system or shift taxes towards motor fuel and away from labor and capital, so as to avoid the unnecessary costs of CAFE.
Highlighted by trutledge
Public Comment