The new gas mileage standards mandated
by the recently passed energy legislation
defy the laws of physics...but Democrats,
including House Speaker Nancy Pelosi
don't seem to care.
---===0===---

Coping With The New CAFÉ Standards
By Jack Ward
December 29, 2007

The other day I took my Toyota Sienna van in for a
smog check. While I was waiting, I heard the news
that our Congress Critters were about to pass new
Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) standards.
The new fuel efficiency law will require manufacturers
to meet a fleet wide average of 35 miles per gallon for
cars, SUV's, and small trucks. A fleet average of 35
mpg is a 40% increase in fuel mileage over the
existing requirement. My van gets an average of 20+
mpg and can carry 6 passengers and luggage in
comfort. My wife drives a Honda Civic which gets 30+
mpg. But neither of our vehicles would meet the new
congressional requirements. It is obvious that the
CAFÉ standards would effectively outlaw most
current cars, vans, trucks, and SUVs.

So I began to wonder what vehicle would get an
average of 35 mpg. Since I was at a Toyota dealership
and Toyota has been a leader in fuel efficient vehicles,
I started checking out the vehicles on the lot. The
standard cars and small trucks failed immediately.
Then I spotted the smallest car on the lot, a
sub-compact Yaris. But even the sub-compact Yaris
failed the Congress Critters new efficiency
requirements. The Yaris had a maximum 36 mpg on
the highway, but its combined city and highway
average was below the required 35 mpg. The Toyota
Camry Hybrid also failed the new CAFÉ standards.
The only car that met the new CAFÉ standards was
the Prius Hybrid.

The efficiency of an internal combustion engine is
based on total energy of the fuel and the amount of
energy used to perform useful work. So by
legislating a fuel efficiency increase of about 40%,
our Congress Critters were attempting to rewrite Laws
of Thermodynamics. Congressional leaders were
warned that the mandated changes may not be
technologically or economically possible. But the
enlightened Democrat leaders disagreed. House
Speaker Nancy Pelosi, (D-Ca.), was heavily involved
in crafting the legislation and declared that "It's
groundbreaking in what it will do." She is right. I
wonder if she also plans to rewrite the Law of Gravity.

In a previous column I addressed the prototypical
micro-car envisioned by the Congress Critters - the
Smart Car 'ForTwo'. The Smart Car 'ForTwo' is about
4 feet shorter and 1,000 pounds lighter than a Mini
Cooper, so it isn't suitable for soccer moms.
Throughout the 1950's and 60's manufacturers offered
micro-cars but the public wasn't interested. But our
Congress Critters know best and will now require you
to drive one.

Researchers at Harvard University and the Brookings
Institution found that these micro-cars are not as safe
as the current U.S. fleet. Their research found that for
every 100 pounds shaved off cars to meet CAFÉ
standards between 440 and 780 additional people
were killed in auto accidents. This means that an
additional total of 2,200 to 3,900 lives will be lost per
model year. Adrian Lund, of the Insurance Institute
for Highway Safety said, "Fatalities are much higher
with small, lightweight vehicles." Politicians are
force-feeding the micro-cars on the American public
even if that means these vehicles will be less safe.

But what kind of cars do our Congress Critters have?
Spies in Washington DC tell us the congressional
parking lot is filled with large sedans, SUV's, and
trucks. While there are a few economy cars in the lot,
the estimated mileage for the cars in the lot is less
than 20 mpg. But don't expect to see Ted Kennedy
in a Smart Car because we know that politicians reek
with hypocrisy. They exempt themselves from the
very laws they expect us to follow. So, rest assured
that the Congress Critters will not be driving the
micro-cars that they will require you to drive. This is
supposed to be the 'Land of the Free' so why should
Americans be denied the opportunity to choose the
vehicle that meets their needs?

The New Media Journal.us (c) 2007