Slashdot Mirror


The Oil Industry's Covert Campaign To Rewrite American Car Emissions Rules (nytimes.com)

When the Trump administration laid out a plan this year that would eventually allow cars to emit more pollution, automakers, the obvious winners from the proposal, balked. The changes, they said, went too far even for them. But it turns out that there was a hidden beneficiary of the plan that was pushing for the changes all along: the nation's oil industry. From an investigation by The New York Times: In Congress, on Facebook and in statehouses nationwide, Marathon Petroleum, the country's largest refiner, worked with powerful oil-industry groups and a conservative policy network financed by the billionaire industrialist Charles G. Koch to run a stealth campaign to roll back car emissions standards, a New York Times investigation has found. The campaign's main argument for significantly easing fuel efficiency standards -- that the United States is so awash in oil it no longer needs to worry about energy conservation -- clashed with decades of federal energy and environmental policy.

"With oil scarcity no longer a concern," Americans should be given a "choice in vehicles that best fit their needs," read a draft of a letter that Marathon helped to circulate to members of Congress over the summer. Official correspondence later sent to regulators by more than a dozen lawmakers included phrases or sentences from the industry talking points, and the Trump administration's proposed rules incorporate similar logic. The industry had reason to urge the rollback of higher fuel efficiency standards proposed by former President Barack Obama. A quarter of the world's oil is used to power cars, and less-thirsty vehicles mean lower gasoline sales.

17 of 304 comments (clear)

  1. You mean Big Oil has been LYING to us? Holy.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    You know, it's one thing for Republicans to lie to our faces about this stuff, fraud and treason etc, but when a trusted business sector like Big Oil lies, that kind of betrayal is truly inexcusable. (Unless well-paid to excuse it, of course.)

  2. Thank You, Oil Industry by djbckr · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You are making a wonderful world for my grandchildren.

    1. Re:Thank You, Oil Industry by b0s0z0ku · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There can be a happy medium. Most ground transport (cars, trains, buses) can be electric from nuclear or renewables. Plastics? Yeah, we need them. But does a tiny electronic device really need to be packed in plastic packaging that's 5x its size? There's a lot of oil usage that can be cut without changing our lives all that much.

    2. Re:Thank You, Oil Industry by jeff4747 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Did you know that time hasn't stopped?

      Also, did you know that unregulated capitalism has some issues, like setting rivers on fire?

    3. Re:Thank You, Oil Industry by greythax · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree with your post, but would go a step further and challenge even the assumption that we need plastics. The beverage industry was around for like a hundred years before plastic bottles. Food can be happily wrapped with wax paper, and electronics used to be housed in wooden cases. I'm not suggesting that we abandon all plastic, but if we were to regress packaging back to around the time of 1970, we would MASSIVELY reduce the problem.

    4. Re:Thank You, Oil Industry by Rob+Y. · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's almost as if you want to drive an SUV specifically because 'liberals' don't want you to. You big baby.

      --
      Posted from my Android phone. Oh, I can change this? There, that's better...
  3. Re:You mean Big Oil has been LYING to us? Holy.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    But, but what about "enhancing shareholder value", that is what Milton Friedman and the Chicago School of Economics have taught our business leaders is their ONLY ethical concern.

    Could it be that our entire business educational system has been corrupted by people who do not care if "people" live or die?

    Maybe, Milton Friedman was the real Terminator

  4. Who worries about scarcity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    With oil scarcity no longer a concern

    Conveniently omitting to mention pollution and greenhouse gas emissions as remaining concerns.

  5. Re:It's not covert, they were over-bearing by Ichijo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In the end it will not matter as electric car adoption will more than make up for any extra emissions from rolling back the rules.

    If that's true then the rules are not too harsh.

    --
    Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
  6. Seems pretty obvious by Lucas123 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The American auto industry is barely moving forward on EVs -- not that they're the be all to end all, but c'mon. The tech has been around longer than gas-powered vehicles and yet, even with modern lithium-ion batteries, car companies don't offer more than two models each -- most only offer one.

    It's going to take regulation to force their hand; that seems obvious. With the current administration kowtowing to big business, though, we won't be seeing any movement on this for at least another two years.

  7. Re:It's not covert, they were over-bearing by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 5, Informative

    And just think of the increased revenue from gas taxes! That ought to soothe any ruffled liberal feathers.

    Hey, gotta cover the shortfall from the Republican's trillion dollars added to the deficit.

  8. Re:It's not covert, they were over-bearing by Only+Time+Will+Tell · · Score: 4, Informative

    I am going to call bullshit on this. The proposed regulations were still on a path that was behind China, India, the EU, Japan, Korea, etc. The Obama regulations were still pretty weak compared to the world. Trump has knocked us down from being a C- student to a straight F. Source: https://www.nytimes.com/intera...

  9. Air Pollution is still a Concern by foxalopex · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Even if you don't care about CO2 and global climate change, there's still the localized issue of actual air pollution in cities especially which kills. I drive a plugin electric and notice gas fumes and other nasty things in the air from cars.

  10. Oil scarcity by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 4, Informative

    Implying that "oil scarcity" is the reason behind these regulations seems like such an obvious straw man that at first I figured everyone would see through it immediately... but then I realized this letter was targeted at Congress.

    --
    #DeleteChrome
  11. Root cause by OrangeTide · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We have a culture where we tolerate lying when someone is trying to make a quick buck.

    Businesses should tell the truth? Why do you hate capitalism? insert other facetious arguments here, etc

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  12. False choice by OrangeTide · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The choice isn't between oil and no oil. There is a middle ground where we regulate industry, control pollution, and use resources in a way that compensates everyone for the damage it causes. Wild west, zero responsibility bullshit isn't a serious business model even if idiots are serious about defending it.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  13. Cowards by Artagel · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Congress does CAFE because they are cowards. A car with higher efficiency can be driven more on the same gas. It does not reduce consumption by existing cars. If you genuinely believe in the cause, the only thing to advocate is taxation of fuel. A tax increase for the social cost of gasoline is something like $3.80 a gallon, more than doubling the current price. C'mon true believes, don't put off saving the planet for decades, bite the bullet and advocate that tax increase.