THE ENGINEER IN ME ASKS WHY III?

In 1974 the Congress of the United States decided to force automobile manufacturers to increase the corporate average fuel economy (café) of the vehicles they sell. Automobile engineers from all parts of the industry voiced their concerns about the negative consequences of such regulations. Lobbyists argued that it was a matter of national security and that we had to reduce our dependence on foreign oil as well as benefit the environment by burning less gasoline. The only real avenue available for engineers to increase mileage was decreasing the weight of the vehicles. The unintended consequence of making vehicles lighter was an increase in fatalities/accident. The other correct prediction by the auto companies was that people would not and in fact did not reduce their consumption of oil. People drove more miles and U.S. fuel consumption remained constant. The automakers safety engineers predicted the increase in miles driven and as miles / accident tends to be a constant a proportional increase in accidents occurred. Fatalities attributed to the café standards jumped by 3900 deaths in 1975.  A government sponsored study evaluating the effectiveness of café standards at reducing fuel consumption concluded that the program failed to produce any reduction in fuel consumption. The program failed so the bureaucratic regulatory machine doubled down on the failed program and increased the average mileage requirement again. In fact the café mileage requirement increased every year but one until 1990. The results continued to show the program failing to reduce fuel consumption while increasing fatalities, so the engineer in me asks why didn’t the regulators learn that it did not work and, in fact, caused the loss of tens of thousands of lives. Some sanity in the application of café standards prevailed for the next thirteen years as no changes were imposed through 2003.

It is unfortunate that legislators and regulatory bureaucrats are often so sure of their ideology that the facts are ignored. I have discussed this issue with liberal nontechnical friends and they all state and believe unequivocally, that higher mileage cars reduce our oil consumption and help the environment. No amount of empirical evidence has any effect on their convictions. The United States leads the world in engineering and technology but if real world facts disagree with the progressive agenda of the politicians and leftwing media we throw good money after bad and more lives are lost. The engineer in me asks why the current administration uses junk science and refuses to learn from the past as they implement new café standards requiring 54.5 average miles per gallon by 2025? Keep in mind, as well that even most motorcycles are too heavy to meet this standard. The latest auto industry study on fatal accidents finds that you are five times as likely to die if your average small car collides with a 3500 lb SUV and nine times as likely to die if the SUV weighs 5000 lb. The current administration estimates that higher mileage cars sold under the new standard will be driven the same number of miles as their lower mileage trade-ins. Every study to date shows that the miles driven grows with higher mileage vehicles offsetting any fuel savings. Based on their faulty logic the administration predicts a reduction of 1.8 billion barrels of oil usage equaling 900 million metric tons less green house gas.  The idiocy of the decision is mind boggling but sadly about what we have come to expect from ideology driven politicians with no business experience and no technical training to draw on while making decisions. The real tragedy is that the same politicians will pontificate about the great new mileage they have forced the greedy automakers into and will never be held accountable for the associated loss of life.

The engineer in me asks why our politicians are so blind? Could it be that the hundreds of millions of dollars in fines collected annually from auto makers for failing to comply with café standards is the goal? In 2010 the average fine for every car sale was $122 amounting to a windfall profit for the government. Is it possible that the mileage target is intended to be impossible to attain?

I have spoken of a similar regulatory ignorance in an earlier essay about diesel engine emissions. Regulations currently in effect require emissions from diesel engines that no manufacturer can meet. The EPA was forced to postpone the implementation of the new standards or stop the sale of all diesel powered equipment. Trying to change the physical world by writing regulations is stupid but also beyond the comprehension of the majority of our lawmakers. You might just as well make a regulation outlawing heart attacks and claim to have saved lives or mandate that all women’s fashions be sold exclusively in size two to combat obesity.