The auto industry last month beat back another attempt to raise fuel-economy standards for light trucks, but environmentalists say the fight is far from over, and time and consumers are on their side.
Congress has voted down efforts to raise the fuel standard for trucks five years in a row, prohibiting the Department of Transportation from spending money to even study the issue.
Federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards require that each manufacturer's passenger cars average 27.5 miles per gallon and its trucks (sport-utility vehicles, pickups and vans) 20.7 m.p.g. Manufacturers that fall below those levels face fines that can cost millions of dollars.
Congress created CAFE in 1975 during the OPEC oil embargo, when trucks accounted for less than 25 percent of the market and were mainly work vehicles. Now, trucks account for nearly half of sales, and most are used for personal transportation.
Environmental groups such as the Sierra Club contend the growing popularity of trucks has dragged overall fuel economy to its lowest level since 1980. They accuse car companies of promoting gas-guzzling SUVs and other trucks with V-8 engines over fuel-efficient cars because they generate higher profits.
"A lot of people want a more efficient truck, but the car companies won't give them that choice," said Daniel Becker, director of the Sierra Club's global warming and energy program. The Sierra Club wants truck CAFE raised to the same level as cars and believes it can be done over a five-year period.
Becker cites a study by the Union of Concerned Scientists that concludes Ford, for example, could boost fuel economy on the Explorer, the top-selling SUV, to 28 m.p.g. from 19 with a smaller V-6 engine with variable-valve technology, a more efficient automatic transmission, low rolling-resistance tires, improved aerodynamics and a 620-pound weight reduction.
The cost to consumers would be $750, but they would save more than $2,300 over the life of the vehicle by using less gas, according to the study, which says a smaller engine and more-advanced transmission would add another $220 to the cost but yield 34 m.p.g. and save another $800.
"The technology exists now to increase fuel economy through better aerodynamics, more efficient engines and better transmissions. That technology is less expensive than the gas it saves," Becker said.
Gloria Bergquist, a spokeswoman for the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, an industry group that represents major car companies and led the resistance to raising CAFE, calls the study cited by Becker "armchair engineering."
"It may drive on paper, but it may not make it up a steep hill in my neighborhood," Bergquist said. Because the auto industry is so competitive, such large fuel-economy gains would have been made on vehicles if they were feasible, she added.
"Why wouldn't automakers want to make their vehicles more efficient? It would be a great selling point," she said.
The auto industry fought efforts to raise truck CAFE with a major lobbying effort in Congress and a national advertising campaign that warned consumers they might not be able to drive vehicles of their choice if the proposal passed. In one ad, members of a family said they couldn't go on vacation together if it wasn't for their SUV.
Truck CAFE was last raised in 1994, from 20.6 m.p.g. , and the law calls for annual increases to the "highest feasible limit." The auto industry has convinced Congress to freeze the standard at 20.7 m.p.g. every year since.
Bergquist said the proposal to raise truck CAFE did not specify how much, but the debate in Washington indicated the Clinton administration wants to increase the standard at least 15 percent and as high as 35 percent, putting trucks on the same standard as cars.
"It comes down to simple physics. We would have to do the same things we did with cars to achieve improvements like that," she said. Trucks would have to shrink in size, lose as much as 1,000 pounds and drop V-8s for 6-cylinder engines
"Smaller, lighter trucks won't have the same utility for towing boats and hauling. If you make a mini-van smaller, you can't carry as many people. It becomes a passenger car. A mini-van today gets better mileage than a subcompact did in the 1970s."
Becker dismisses as hyperbole arguments that consumers need brawny SUVs and trucks for towing and cargo carrying.
"With a truck, you need a powerful engine, but that doesn't necessarily have to be a V-8," Becker said. "As long as it has pulling power and hauling power, people don't care what kind of engine it is.
"The vast majority of people aren't towing boats or trailers. They're hauling kids to school and lattes home from Starbucks."
Because gasoline is less expensive than Starbucks coffee, consumers value utility and performance more than fuel economy, Bergquist countered, and the auto industry is responding to demand.