|
In January 2002, FreedomCAR was established in an effort to develop emissions free and petroleum free cars and light trucks. The Bush Administration’s FreedomCAR is the successor of the Clinton administration’s PNGV program, with a greater emphasis on hydrogen fuel cells. FreedomCAR is a research initiative designed to promote greater coordination between the federal government and U.S. automobile manufacturers. The FreedomCAR initiative is a partnership of the U.S. Department of Energy, and the United States Council for Automotive Research (USCAR) which represents DaimlerChrysler Corporation, Ford Motor Company, and General Motors Corporation.
The FreedomCAR initiative differs from the PNGV program in that the FreedomCAR initiative shifts the focus away from technologies close at hand to fuel cells. Fuel cells are intended to create future products with far greater promise to reduce petroleum use and harmful emissions. PNGV had a ten year goal of creating a hybrid production prototype that is three times more fuel efficient than a comparable 1994 model, by 2004. FreedomCAR is taking a more long-term approach, with 2010 component technology goals to gauge progress. The main vision of FreedomCAR is to eventually eliminate the automobile as a factor in the environmental equation, as well as a factor that drives our dependency on foreign oil. There are four long-term goals of the FreedomCAR initiative: freedom from petroleum dependence; freedom from pollutant emissions; freedom for Americans to choose the kind of vehicle they want to drive and to drive where they want, when they want; and freedom to obtain fuel affordably and conveniently, (http://www.eere.energy.gov/).
FreedomCAR counter-productive policies. For example, the SUV tax loophole. In 1996, this provision was created to prevent farmers from being penalized by the 10 percent luxury tax on vehicles costing over $30,000. Under President Bush’s economic stimulus plan, this provision has been boosted to allow small business owners to write off up to $100,000 on the purchase of a vehicle weighing over 6,000 pounds. Currently, there are 38 different SUV models that qualify for this tax break. Most of these automobiles get on average approximately 11-20 miles per gallon, (Bailey). The production and sales of SUV’s have soared due to this incentive. For example, San Francisco area dealers saw a 51 percent increase in sales of full-size and luxury SUV’s comparable to the same month of the previous year, (Hopkins).
It is estimated that the SUV loophole could cost American taxpayers between $840 and $947 million dollars for every 100,000 vehicles sold, (Bailey). This loophole is encouraging an increase in size and inefficiency, and has allowed some of the biggest most fuel- inefficient vehicles to qualify for significant tax breaks. Many consumers who have never considered buying a large vehicle in the past, have bought the bigger size because of the savings that they receive from upsizing. It seems now that for many, there is a hefty incentive to drive the most inefficient passenger cars available. (http://www.ucsusa.org/).
Bigger Breaks
Prius vs. Hummer |
Toyota Prius |
Hummer H1 |
| Base Price |
$20,500 |
$102,581 |
| Deductions |
|
|
| Capital equipment |
0 |
100,000 |
| Post-September 11 bonus |
4,600 |
744.30 |
| Base first-year depreciation |
3,060 |
367.34 |
| Clean fuel vehicle deduction |
2,000 |
0 |
| Total first year deductions |
$9,660 |
$101,111.64 |
To compare the monstrous tax credits and incentive to drive the most inefficient passenger vehicles on the road with the meager tax credits offered to those looking to reduce U.S. dependency on foreign oil and impacts on the environment, seems to be ironic. The actions of the federal government to create programs to encourage energy conservation and independence and a reduction of environmental impacts are minimalized by policies like the detrimental and costly SUV tax.
Local Incentive Programs:
The federal government has sponsored a program to encourage the use of alternate fuel vehicles in cities around the country. The Department of Energy has designed “Clean Cities” to support public/private partnerships to promote energy security and environmental quality goals at the national and local level. The Clean Cities program takes a voluntary approach to the development and use of alternative fuel and alternative fuel vehicles (AFVs). Since 1996, the DOE has supported Clean Cities initiatives by providing funding to the State Energy offices through the State Energy Program for Clean Cities Special Projects.
The mission of the Clean Cities program is to “advance the economic, environmental, and energy security of the United States by supporting local decisions to adopt practices that contribute to the reduction of petroleum consumption in the transportation sector,” (www.eere.energy.gov). The Clean Cities program promotes this goal by working with more than 80 volunteer community- based coalitions which develop partnerships to encourage the use of alternate fuels and alternate fuel vehicles. Many Clean Cities and states have consumer incentives for buying clean fuel vehicles. For example, Salt Lake City, Utah has a clean fuel plate that allows the driver of a clean fuel vehicle to enjoy the benefits of driving in the HOV lanes without a passenger.
Since 1993, the Clean Cities program has worked to achieve its goals of increasing the use of alternate fuels. In 2004, the program expanded its goals to include the increase in the use of fuel blends; accelerate sales of hybrid vehicles; promote informed consumer choice on fuel economy; and encourage the use of idle reduction technology for heavy-duty trucks and other vehicles (www.eere.energy.gov). To date, Clean Cities stakeholders have added more than 157,000 ATVs to their fleets, which have displaced more than 133 million gallons of petroleum, (http://www.ucsusa.org/).
Conclusion:
The federal government has put many programs into place in an attempt to modify the transportation sector’s reliance on petroleum. Many programs have had limited success, while others have proved to be wildly counter-productive to our national goals. While it is important for the government to support domestic industries and research and development in programs like PNGV and the FreedomCAR, a better means of achieving its goal of increased national security and less environmental impact would undeniably be to create better incentive plans.
As we have seen from examples like the surge in SUV sales after the loophole tax breaks, incentives work. Instead of cooperative research and development programs between the major U.S. car companies and the federal government, why not provide legitimate incentive packages for the purchase of clean fuel vehicles? These consumer incentives would in turn provide car companies with the consumer driven demand and competition they need to create clean, fuel efficient products. If the national government could create consumer incentive policies in the transportation sector that were in line with our national goals, then it would be possible to see a dramatic shift in consumer trends. This shift would reduce U.S. dependency on foreign oil, increase national security and reduce negative environmental impacts.
|
About 
The Partnership for a New Generation of Vehicles (PNGV) was founded by the Clinton, Gore administration and was a groundbreaking partnership between the Federal government and the U.S. Council for Automotive Research whose members include DaimlerChrysler, Ford, and General Motors (GM), to plan and manage research and development activities for a wide range of leading-edge technologies that have the potential to dramatically improve the fuel economy of, while also reducing the emissions from, cars and other light duty vehicles, including vans, SUVs and pick-up trucks.
This is a free information exchange website run by donations only that will link the people that care about the future of our world. By connecting like minded people from various countries concerned about our environment PNGV hopes to bridge the gap between government and private enterprise for the good of the environment.