Copyright 1999 The Chronicle Publishing Co.
The San
Francisco Chronicle
DECEMBER 14, 1999, TUESDAY, FINAL EDITION
SECTION: EDITORIAL; Pg. A27; DEBRA J. SAUNDERS
LENGTH: 632 words
HEADLINE:
Protecting Mother Earth & Gas Guzzlers
BYLINE:
DEBRA J. SAUNDERS
BODY:
THERE ARE two ways to
interpret Ford Motor Company's decision not to renew its membership with the
Global Climate Coalition, a group that sagely questions whether there is enough
evidence to confirm global warming or its predicted dire consequences.
It could be a sign of unusual corporate social responsibility. Ford's
chairman, William Clay Ford Jr., has described himself as a "lifelong
environmentalist." Ford spokesman Terry Bresnihan explained to the Associated
Press, "Over time, being in GCC has become something of an impediment to
pursuing our environmental initiatives in a credible way."
Or it could
be a sign that Ford has figured out that it can talk green without worrying
about losing the green stuff, that it can cozy up to the current administration
rhetorically, secure in the knowledge that D.C. pols won't make it pay
regulatorally.
Consider the CAFE (corporate average
fuel economy) standards. When Bill Clinton was running for
president, he pledged to raise the average fuel efficiency for cars sold in
America from 27.5 miles per gallon to 40 mpg in 2000 and 45 mpg in 2020.
Clinton's running mate, Al Gore called for an end of internal combustion engine
around 2017 in his book "Earth in the Balance." Environmentalists were convinced
a Clinton/Gore administration would raise CAFE standards.
Didn't happen. "Who in the world would have thought that the Clinton
administration in eight years wouldn't have proposed an increase?" consumer
activist Ralph Nader marveled.
Indeed, a big loophole -- big enough to
drive a Ford Excursion through -- exempts sports utility vehicles from the 27.5
mpg standard. Because close to half of new vehicles sold in America are SUVs or
light trucks, fuel efficiency has gotten worse under Clinton.
An October
report released by the Environmental Protection Agency showed that automobile
fuel efficiency had hit a 19-year nadir of 23.8 mpg. The high point of 25.9 mpg
occurred during the Reagan administration. That's right, the Ronald Reagan
administration.
Bresnihan defended the status quo, noting, "We're not
selling SUVs just because we want to sell them. We're selling them because
that's what people want to buy."
And: "When you talk about a 45 mpg
CAFE, you're talking about putting most of America in cars smaller than an
Escort, and right now, those kinds of cars represent less than 1 percent in the
United States. People don't want to buy them."
Understood and agreed --
45 mpg would be going too far. But the administration at least could have pushed
to make sure that all vehicles abide by the same standard -- especially if
Clinton and Gore believe global warming is a real and severe threat. After all,
if there is a public interest in mandating fuel efficiency -- if only to improve
air quality -- surely the same standards should apply to people affluent enough
to afford SUVs.
Clinton and Gore are not the only culprits. The GOP-led
Congress included a rider in the transportation appropriations bill that
safeguarded the SUV loophole. The Sierra Club's Carl Pope explained that Gore
tried to talk Clinton into vetoing the measure, but the president signed it.
Ford, Pope noted, pushed for the veto.
As for Ford's pulling out of the
Global Climate Coalition, Pope said, "In a way, I don't think it costs them very
much."
It may not help much either. As one industry source noted,
"Environmentalists are not going to start driving Ford Excursions because of the
way they're talking. They're selling the biggest SUV on the market."
Or
as Nader noted, "Nothing is going to happen as a result of them switching. So
why not switch? The politician will take it as a victory. See what I got the
auto companies to do' and nothing happens. Just like nothing's happened for
seven years."
LOAD-DATE: December 14,
1999 
