Показаны сообщения с ярлыком legislation and regulation. Показать все сообщения
Показаны сообщения с ярлыком legislation and regulation. Показать все сообщения

Happy Holiday Weekend from Wall Street, Big Oil

| четверг, 3 сентября 2009 г.

1926AssociatedOil_resized.jpg

While the speedy implementation of stricter CAFE requirements for automakers has been all the talk in the news lately, gasoline prices - at least in my neck of the upstate New York woods - are on the rise. Why?

Albany, N.Y. County Controller Michael Connors was quoted in this morning’s Albany, N.Y. Times Union blaming oil companies for the rise in prices at the pump: “The first reason is because (the oil companies) want (the price of fuel) to go up and the second reason is because they can.”

Mac Brownson, president of the New York State Gasoline Retailers Association was quoted in the same story calling the price increase “pure avarice” on the part of oil companies. “Prices are up so much with no supply-and-demand reason for it. The demand is down, people are driving less and buying different vehicles. The supply is up there is lots of gas. It’s not illegal, but it’s immoral in this bad economy,” he said.

The two were speaking out presumably because in my part of the Empire State we already fork over a whopping 61 cents per gallon in taxes on a gallon of fuel and they wanted everyone to know that politicians and the guy at the corner gas station aren’t behind the increase.

Meanwhile, a wire story in the paper notes that crude oil prices hit a six-month high this week as speculators on Wall Street, many of whom received huge government bailouts, are pouring money into oil futures, betting that oil prices will rise as inflation erodes the value of the dollar. “This turns oil futures contracts into a way for investors to hedge against inflation at the expense of American consumers, who have to pay more to fill their tanks as oil and gasoline prices rise,” the story explains.

Fuel is already ridiculously cheap here compared to Europe and some island nations, but because our society is so dependent on it and we spend so much federal money subsidizing oil production anyway, should its cost to consumers be more closely regulated? Your thoughts?

Image courtesy of The Old Car Manual Project.



Related posts:



Related posts:



High mileage memories

| суббота, 22 августа 2009 г.

According to Time magazine, 50 years ago, 44-year-old Woody Bell drove a Rambler American Deluxe to a 25.2878 miles per gallon victory in the 1959 Mobilgas Economy Run. The marathon mileage competition was run over five days and 1,898 miles from Los Angeles California to Kansas City, Missouri.

Sure, it was a Rambler but even a Cadillac 62 managed 19.03 mpg.

Yesterday the Obama Administration announced that it wants the new car/light truck fleet average to be 10 mpg higher than what the Rambler was capable of a half century ago. Considering how far we’ve come in other areas: aviation, space travel, personal electronics, this nutty Internet thing, etc., and the fact that CAFE ratings peaked in the 1980s and have leveled off or declined slightly since (while 0 to 60 mph times have ramped up drastically) isn’t it about time this happened?

One thing is for sure, with Chrysler and GM on government life support, they won’t be in any position to resist. Here’s what GM President And CEO Fritz Henderson had to say yesterday:

General Motors commends President Obama’s leadership to establish a harmonized National Program to improve vehicle fuel economy and lower greenhouse gas emissions.

Energy security and climate change are national priorities that require federal leadership and the President’s direction makes sense for the country and the industry. Harmonizing a variety of regulations will benefit consumers across America by getting cleaner, more efficient vehicles on the road quicker and more affordably. In turn, GM and the auto industry benefit by having more consistency and certainty to guide our product plans.

GM is fully committed to this new approach. As the President has previously said, all stakeholders must come together and act with a common purpose and sense of urgency to address the nation’s energy and environmental priorities.  We agree and this collaborative spirit is reflected in our viability plan.  Delivering innovation and solutions that will strengthen America’s energy security, economy and competitiveness are a central part of GM’s reinvention.

Maybe it’s just me, but why has this taken so long? Thoughts?

Image courtesy of The Old Car Manual Project



Related posts:



Related posts:



But the prospect is real that the cash-for-clunkers program could die in ...

| вторник, 7 июля 2009 г.

don't worry; this Packard was already crushed 30 years ago

Throughout our opposition of the federal cash for clunkers legislation, it can seem we collector car hobbyists are but tiny voices barely heard over the Washington din. Which is why we should be thankful for SEMA’s opposition efforts. Stuart Gosswein, the director of Regulatory Affairs at SEMA, recently sent us a letter letting us know how their battle against cash for clunkers proceeds.

The car collector community can be assured that SEMA has been in the trenches fighting cash for clunkers tooth and nail. However, this battle is being fought in front of cameras and behind the scenes. When cash for clunkers was a high-visibility target during the winter, SEMA used the collective and vocal clout of SEMA members & hobbyist groups to help defeat the legislation.

Since then, the campaign has largely been fought in the halls of Congress, as lawmakers faced pressure to enact a scrappage program comparable to those that had received favorable reviews in countries around the world. When President Obama endorsed the concept of scrappage on March 30th – the handwriting was on the wall.

In March, SEMA sent an open letter to President Obama in opposition to scrappage. In April, SEMA published and distributed to congressional lawmakers an analysis (“Cash for Clunkers – Facts/Fiction”) which challenged environmental claims and promoted better solutions for selling cars and cleaning the environment. Both documents received widespread attention in the press.

For months, behind the scenes and in front of microphones, SEMA has mounted its largest grassroots lobbying effort to date.  If it is impossible to prevent passage of a cash for clunkers bill, we will continue to fight to shape the legislation to ensure that it will have the least negative impact on the collector car hobbyist community. In that, you can trust.

Feel like helping SEMA on this front? They’ve put together a list of federal legislators who are members of the Congressional Automotive Performance and Motorsports Caucus, so write to them first and let them know how misguided any cash for clunkers proposal is - whether it’s H.R. 1550, H.R. 520, S. 247 or the Waxman energy bill that appears to be the latest cash for clunkers vehicle.

The other major industry group to step forward against cash for clunkers, the Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association, has kept a website dedicated to fighting scrappage bills called fightcashforclunkers.com.

Cash for Clunkers would prematurely destroy vehicles and their valuable parts and components, denying more affordable used vehicles to millions of low and middle income families who cannot afford to purchase a new car even with a $3,000 to $5,000 government voucher.

“Providing incentives for individuals to purchase fuel efficient vehicles or to have their current vehicle maintained would be a better use of federal money,” said Aaron Lowe, vice president of government affairs for the Automotive Aftermarket Industry Association. “The bottom line is that Cash for Clunkers is a bad idea and should be rejected by Congress.”

In other c4c news:

* The Detroit Free Press has gone on record supporting any cash for clunkers legislation with an editorial stating

From Michigan’s vantage point, anything that boosts auto sales cannot come soon enough. But the prospect is real that the cash-for-clunkers program could die in the midst of a standoff over a cap-and-trade plan for global warming gases or other energy-related disputes. Congress needs to understand the economic urgency here, as well as the longer term energy concerns.

I particularly like that passage because it exposes the true nature of cash for clunkers - help automakers first, then greenwash it and hope that sticks. Yes, we’re all for saving American jobs, and we’d hate to see Detroit descend any further into the crapper, but this is not the way to do it.

* There’s now some political wrangling over whether to include cash for clunkers in Waxman’s energy bill. It’s too early to get our hopes up that these politics will stall cash for clunkers legislation, though.

* The Wall Street Journal decries the current cash for clunkers proposal as toothless: It seems they would rather see one that would actually benefit the environment than the latest compromise. Still, they’re not on our side.

* Edmunds reports that automakers could see a huge bust if cash for clunkers fails, simply because people are now waiting on the sidelines for it to pass. There go your “it’s only voluntary” arguments, Mr. Voelcker.

* Aside from that local NPR story we mentioned earlier, CBS News is the first news outlet we’ve seen that presented a c4c story that actually presented arguments against cash for clunkers, noting both that it’ll do little to help the environment and that it may cause harm to poor taxpayers.

* With their podcast today, Scientific American declares any such scrappage bill currently considered by Congress a clunker in itself.

* We see in various other reports that the Automotive Service Association and Hagerty both expressed misgivings about cash for clunkers.

* And finally, we’d like to welcome RideLust to the opposition.

UPDATE (8.April 2009): The Automotive Recyclers Association weighed in on cash for clunkers.

What may be a voluntary program for a consumer turning in a vehicle under the “Cash for Clunkers” program now quickly becomes a compulsory program for non-participating consumers later because of reduced access to replacement parts, which in turn causes inflated prices. Not to mention that these recycled automotive replacement parts have the same performance, safety, fit, and durability standards because they were made by the Original Equipment Manufacturers. The Automotive Recyclers Association’s (ARA) Executive Vice President Michael E. Wilson questions the sensibility of the program given the current situation of the automotive manufacturers. “With the daily questions in the media about the economic survival of major automobile manufacturers and their suppliers, how irresponsible is it for Congress to push for the needless scrapping of millions of replacement parts when the very supply chain for new parts is in jeopardy.”

But it also looks like some scrap yards are licking their chops so they can make better margins on $100 per ton scrap prices.

Also, if you’re really interested in that MPG Illusion argument for cash for clunkers, the New York Times has an analysis. Reuters also takes a stab at it.



Related posts:



Related posts: