Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) Standards

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Tungsten, W The new, eco-friendly way to transport Orff instruments.
Advertisements

R O A D U S E R F E E T A S K F O R C E 1 OREGONS TRANSPORTATION FUNDING CHALLENGE.
OR 42: County Line Curves Environmental Assessment Purpose and Need February 17, 2009.
Advanced Steels in Vehicle Construction
Air Pollution: CAFE Standards and Gas Taxes Mario Samano Department of Economics.
C ORPORATE A VERAGE F UEL E CONOMY & THE R EASONS W HY I T I S C ONTROVERSIAL A Presentation ECON 331: The Economics of Energy and Climate Change Professor.
Just tightening failed CAFE standards will not work out Xiaojiao Chen February 3 rd, 2010.
Energy Law 9 – Transportation Fall 2013 November 5, 2013 Alan Palmiter Brian Bowman Not for distribution- for study purposes only.
Takahiko Kiso August 6, 2012 An Evaluation of Footprint-Based Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards.
Its Your Life…. Buckle Up. The Importance of Safety Belt Use Among Employees Presented by: Insert Presenters Name Insert Company Logo here or Delete box.
EU Tire Label. April 2011 Tire Performance Label: A Global TrendTrend 2 EU World wide introduction of a tire label EU-Label for the performance in Rolling.
The Need for a Political Roadmap: The Story of American Energy Conservation Policy Since the 1970’s Robert D. Lifset Joe C. and Carole Kerr McClendon Honors.
Blue Ribbon Committee on Highway Finance Act 374 of 2009.
1 ELECTRONIC STABILITY CONTROL March 2007 Status Report on Comments to NHTSA’s Proposed Rule and Next Steps for WP.29 Informal document No. WP ,
Fuel Economy/Consumption Tunisian Case study Center for Environment and Development For The Arab region and Europe.
I-69 Strategic Planning Corridor Study: Fulton To Eddyville, KY Fulton, Hickman, Graves, Marshall, Livingston, Lyon Counties Public Meeting November 15,
Beyond Gasoline: Fuel Economy. CAFE Standards Corporate Average Fuel Economy Mileage requirements for new vehicles.
By: Kristina Pesce and Olivia Stephens 2 nd period.
Transportation Issues. US Cars and Drivers US Population: 300 million Licensed drivers 190 million Cars and light trucks. 210 million.
Will Increasing the Gasoline Tax Decrease Gasoline Consumption?: A Review of the Literature Julia Michaels Oral Presentation #2 ECON 539 Public Policy.
The Road Ahead for Light Duty Vehicle Fuel Demand Joanne Shore Energy Information Administration July 7, 2005.
1. 2 Objectives  Explain how to implement green fleets  Learn about incentives for converting to fuel efficient fleets  Learn about the availability.
Presentation for the American Society of Safety Engineers The Missouri Department of Transportation Motor Carrier Services.
Alternative fuels for the cars of Today and Tomorrow By Christian Warton-Eyers.
Moving Efficiently: Improving How We Transport Goods in America Glen P. Kedzie Vice President, Energy & Environmental Counsel American Trucking Associations.
The Influence of Weight Freight-ton miles per heavy-duty diesel truck Average model weight of light-duty gas vehicles and trucks By Natalie Zaczek.
1 Corporate Average Fuel Economy Rulemaking National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Informal Document No. WP th session, June.
The Influence of Weight Average model weight of light-duty gas vehicles and trucks Freight-ton miles per heavy-duty diesel truck.
Should Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards be Changed? Stuart Evans Chemistry 127: The Art of Negotiation, Beloit College Draft of February.
Autos in Econ 331b. Agenda Wednesday: Autos Section: Misc and oil premium Monday: Continue autos and rebound effect Wednesday: Behavioral energy economics.
Measuring the Value of Seat Belt Programs OSHA-NHTSA Motor Vehicle Safety Symposium September 14, 2004 Kathy Lusby-Treber Executive Director Network of.
Fuel Economy Standards and Risk in the Auto Industry Irene Berry Virginia Tech ASME WISE Intern August 2, 2006 [
Quantifying Transportation Needs and Assessing Revenue Options: The Texas Experience presented to The Arkansas Blue Ribbon Committee on Highway Finance.
Business Logistics 420 Public Transportation Fall 2001 Lectures 15 Policy Issues II: Public Transportation and Energy Conservation.
Transportation Costs. Cost Categories Infrastructure Highway Construction Highway Maintenance Parking Facilities Operating Costs Vehicle Operation Congestion.
Driving Down GHG Emissions, Driving Up Fuel Efficiency: Coordinating a Groundbreaking National Vehicle Policy Kathryn Thomson Counselor to the Secretary.
Efficiency of Cars CREATE A PRESENTATION ABOUT HOW INCREASING THE EFFICIENCY OF CAR ENGINES WILL CHANGE AMERICA.
Should the Government Grant Individual States the Right to Waiver National Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) Standards? Meave Gagler and Caitlin MacDougall.
ELECTRONIC STABILITY CONTROL NHTSA’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking Briefing for WP.29 November, 2006 Informal document No. WP (140th WP.29,
Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Chapter 16.
Press Release 7/2/09. Safer Travel Cleaner air.
Part Five, Issue 12 Motor Vehicles and the Environment.
Earth’s Changing Environment Lecture 24 Increasing Transportation Efficiency.
1 EPA’s Climate Change Strategy Robert J. Meyers Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator U.S. EPA, Office of Air and Radiation December 3, 2007.
Presentation for Talking Freight, November 16, 2011 Debbie Bowden Freight and Economic Policy Analyst, Office of Freight and Multimodalism Maryland Department.
2  World oil reserves  U.S. owns 2-3%  U.S. uses 25% The Importance of Energy Independence.
Projects of National and Regional Significance Program.
ATA’s Sustainability Initiative Bob Pitcher V.P., State Laws American Trucking Associations.
Hybrids and EV's. Hybrid cars are cars that run on both an electric engine and a gasoline engine. The two engines work together giving the car good gas.
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Mass Reduction and Safety Considerations for Setting Fuel Economy Standards James Tamm Fuel Economy Division.
Towards A Unified North American Automobile GHG Standard Group 6 Elena Mager Riley O’Brien Sid Tetz.
Class Project Report, May 2005 ME/ChE 449 Sustainable Air Quality Highway Transportation: Trends from 1970 to 2002 and Beyond By Scott Kaminski Instructor.
Trucking Industry Perspectives on Transportation Funding Greg Owen Head Coach Ability/Tri-Modal Talking Freight – December 16, 2009.
By: Christina Nahar Conservation Transport.  An effective strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions must include: -Improved fuel economy -Reduce carbon.
 Transportation choices and CO 2 emissions By: Dayanara Veliz & Abel Adam.
Federal Acquisition Service U.S. General Services Administration 1 GSA Automotive Changing the Way We Drive our Future An Alternative: Low Speed Vehicles.
WHY WE LOVE OUR FUEL ECONOMY STANDARDS (Really, we do!) DR. DAVID L. GREENE SENIOR FELLOW, HOWARD H. BAKER, JR. CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH PROFESSOR,
@CostaSamaras - 1 Bending the Energy, Environment, and Safety Curves with Automation May 23, 2016 Costa Samaras Civil and Environmental Engineering Carnegie.
New Car Specifications Explained What do all those numbers mean to the car buyer? Automotive Design Mr. Graves.
NS4053 Winter Term 2015 U.S. EPA Fuel Efficiency Standards.
Striving for Sustainability Alternative Vehicles Effect on Luther’s Carbon Footprint November 10, 2008 Rich Tenneson, Facilities Services.
Carbon from Cars: Pollution Impacts of Vehicle Transportation
The Florida Energy and Climate Commission (FECC)
Ag Lenders Conference Fall 2014 David Ripplinger
Bob McKee Chief Economist Florida Department of Revenue
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) Fuel Economy Regulations
ITTS FEAT Tool Methodology Review ITTS Member States Paula Dowell, PhD
NS4960 Spring Term 2017 U.S. EPA Fuel Efficiency Standards
Chicago to Council Bluffs-Omaha
Presentation transcript:

Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) Standards Anticipated Impacts on Future Revenues

Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFÉ) Standards History First enacted by US Congress in 1975 to improve the economy of cars and light vans after the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo. Based on a weighted average of a manufacturer’s current model year passenger cars or light trucks with a Gross Vehicle Weight under 8,500 pounds. If the manufacturer exceeds the standard, a penalty is assessed. First enacted by US Congress in 1975 to improve the economy of cars and light vans after the 1973 Arab Oil Embargo. Based on a weighted average of a manufacturer’s current model year passenger cars or light trucks with a Gross Vehicle Weight under 8,500 pounds. If the manufacturer exceeds the standard, a penalty is assessed. $5.50 0.1 mpg under the standard X Manufacturer’s Total Production for the US Domestic Fleet $5.50 0.1 mpg under the standard X Manufacturer’s Total Production for the US Domestic Fleet

CAFÉ Standards National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulates the CAFÉ standards US Environmental Protection Agency measures vehicle fuel efficiency. US Congress specifies that CAFÉ standards must be set at the “maximum feasible level” with consideration for: Technological feasibility Economic practicality Effect of other standards on fuel economy Need of the nation to conserve fuel NHTSA must issue new standards eighteen (18) months in advance of model year production. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulates the CAFÉ standards US Environmental Protection Agency measures vehicle fuel efficiency. US Congress specifies that CAFÉ standards must be set at the “maximum feasible level” with consideration for: Technological feasibility Economic practicality Effect of other standards on fuel economy Need of the nation to conserve fuel NHTSA must issue new standards eighteen (18) months in advance of model year production.

Proposed CAFÉ Standards The new standards are presented not simply as passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. Standards are now expressed in terms of the vehicle’s footprint (Wheel Base X Average Track Width) For passenger vehicles the two categories are: 41 square feet or smaller (Honda Fit) 55 square feet or bigger (Mercedes-Benz S-Class) For light trucks the two categories are: 41 square feet or smaller (Nissan Juke) 75 square feet or bigger (Ford F-150) The new standards are presented not simply as passenger vehicles and light duty trucks. Standards are now expressed in terms of the vehicle’s footprint (Wheel Base X Average Track Width) For passenger vehicles the two categories are: 41 square feet or smaller (Honda Fit) 55 square feet or bigger (Mercedes-Benz S-Class) For light trucks the two categories are: 41 square feet or smaller (Nissan Juke) 75 square feet or bigger (Ford F-150)

Proposed CAFÉ Standards for Larger Passenger Vehicles Model Year Passenger Car Standard 1978 18.0 mpg 1980 20.0 mpg 1985 27.5 mpg 1990 2000 2010 2011 2012 * 28.0 mpg 2016* 31.0 mpg 2020* 36.0 mpg 2025* 46.0 mpg * Indicates new ‘footprint’ standard. You can see from this table which highlights larger passenger vehicles, from 1978 – 1985 there were increases in the Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. From 1985 to 2011 the standard was not increased. In 2012, the standard will change to a ‘footprint’ based formula as I mentioned in a previous slide. As proposed, the new standard for both passenger and light duty trucks shows a drastic increase in fleet fuel efficiency.

Factors Influencing Driving Habits Distance to Destination Presence of Passengers Personal Value of Time Comfort Cargo/Freight Needs Interim Stops / Destinations Roadway Congestion Safety Cost of Fuel Cost of Vehicle We have attempted to quantify the impacts of the proposed standard on the annual vehicle miles traveled in Arkansas, the volume of fuel consumed, and the subsequent impact to the state Motor Fuel Tax revenues. There are several factors related to personal driving habits. Driving habits include both the manner in which a person drives but also the choice of vehicle, both of which are directly linked to fuel efficiency. This is a brief list of some factors that could impact the fuel consumption of drivers. Distance to Destination Presence of Passengers Personal Value of Time Comfort Cargo/Freight Needs Interim Stops / Destinations Roadway Congestion Safety Cost of Fuel Cost of Vehicle

Impacts of An Increase in CAFÉ Standards Slight increase in vehicle miles traveled Slight decrease in the gallons of gasoline consumed Commensurate decrease in motor fuel revenues related to gasoline consumption at the State and National level Increased costs to society in the form of additional crashes, fatalities, injuries, and property damage Because of the many factors that influence driving habits, it is difficult to formulate anticipated impacts to the State of Arkansas and the Department. Preliminary estimates indicate there may be a slight increase in the vehicle miles traveled. This will be accompanied by a decrease in gasoline consumption and the revenues associated with gasoline consumption. Other possible impacts to the driving public have been identified at the national level. A National Research Council report found that standards implemented in the 1970s and 1980s “probably resulted in an additional 1,300 to 2,600 traffic fatalities in 1993.” There have been numerous studies that correlate the relative safety of the vehicle with the vehicle weight.

This graph displays both the historic Vehicle Miles Traveled on all public roadways in Arkansas as well as the project growth in VMT to 2025. Vehicle Miles Traveled account for both the average distance of daily travel as well as long-distance travelers on Arkansas roadways. Likewise, any growth in population at either the state or national level is reflected in VMT figures. Research regarding the impact of fuel efficiency on driving habits indicates that for each 10% improvement in fuel efficiency, there is an average increase in travel distance of 1-2%. This 1-2% increase in VMT is reflected on the chart with the projected 2025 VMT expected to be slightly higher if there are increased fleet fuel efficiency standards than if the standards remain constant. The higher 2025 VMT figure is 43.2 billion annual miles of vehicle travel.

This slide shows the anticipated consumption of motor fuels in Arkansas both without and with the proposed increased fleet fuel efficiency standards. Both gasoline and diesel consumption are displayed here. There is an assumption that diesel consumption will maintain its historic growth pattern with the continuation of national freight movement. The entire impact of improved fuel efficiency is attributed to gasoline-powered vehicles. To arrive at the estimated value for 2025 consumption, the VMT was calculated as shown in the previous slide. At this point, the incremental increase in fuel efficiency was applied to the VMT figure to arrive at a new gasoline consumption figure. It is estimated the 2025 consumption of gasoline will be roughly 640,000 gallons (or 24%) lower than status quo under the increased fuel efficiency scenario. It should be noted this is a WORST CASE scenario in that it uses the assumption that ALL gasoline powered vehicles will operate with increased fuel efficiency.

Nearly 70% of the motor fuels revenue can be attributed to gasoline consumption. There is a commensurate reduction in anticipated motor fuels revenues under this. Again, this is a WORST CASE scenario assuming all gasoline-powered vehicles will operate with increased fuel efficiency.

Strategies to Offset the Fiscal Impacts of Increased CAFÉ Standards Advocate revenue option other than Motor Fuel- based tax Increase Motor Fuel taxes Reduce expenditures Cost Savings Reduce System Miles Accept lower pavement conditions as the norm Allow more severe congestion along major corridors Advocate revenue option other than Motor Fuel-based tax Increase Motor Fuel taxes Reduce expenditures Cost Savings Reduce System Miles Accept lower pavement conditions as the norm Allow more severe congestion along major corridors

Anticipated Implementation Schedule Originally expected the proposed 2017-2025 standards to be officially released September 30, 2011. Indication from the US DOT and US EPA that a proposal is expected no sooner than November 2011. Delays are reportedly linked to preparing detailed of the official proposal to ensure it covers issues likely to be voiced during the comment period. The administration is expected to remain on track to issue final guidance by July 2012. Originally expected the proposed 2017-2025 standards to be officially released September 30, 2011. Indication from the US DOT and US EPA that a proposal is expected no sooner than November 2011. Delays are reportedly linked to preparing detailed of the official proposal to ensure it covers issues likely to be voiced during the comment period. The administration is expected to remain on track to issue final guidance by July 2012.

Shrinking Highway Dollar

Shrinking Highway Dollar

Shrinking Highway Dollar

Thank you again for inviting me to speak to your group today Thank you again for inviting me to speak to your group today. Any questions? If you have any questions please contact us through our website or by e-mail at: www.arkansashighways.com or info@arkansashighways.com ACE-P:P&R:10/3/2011 20