Sticky Gas Pedal Nothing Compared to CAFE Standards

The Feds announced they are fining Toyota $16.4 million for failing to promptly reveal their knowledge of faulty gas pedals in some of their cars. I don't want to get into a discussion about how this is a matter to be dealt with in court and not regulated by the government, but about the government's alleged concern for safety. After all, they regulate to protect us, right? Well, consider their history of imposing fuel economy (CAFE)standards on the automobile industry. Supposedly, that protects consumers from exorbitant gas prices, protects the environment and is a matter of national security, so we won't have to import so much fuel from terrorist nations. But how do auto manufacturers meet these requirements? Some part of the reduction in fuel consumption is by engineering more efficient engines. But the bulk of it is accomplished by making smaller and lighter cars. That requires using more plastic and aluminum and less steel. These materials aren't just lighter than steel, they are also less strong than steel. So in an accident, the smaller and lighter and less strong car will have more sever damage and less protection for the passengers. So, in effect, CAFE standards lead to more injuries and deaths. From the National Center for Public Policy Research:

* According to a 2003 NHTSA study, when a vehicle is reduced by 100 pounds the estimated fatality rate increases as much as 5.63 percent for light cars weighing less than 2,950 pounds, 4.70 percent for heavier cars weighing over 2,950 pounds and 3.06 percent for light trucks. Between model years 1996 and 1999, these rates translated into additional traffic fatalities of 13,608 for light cars, 10,884 for heavier cars and 14,705 for light trucks.

* A 2001 National Academy of Sciences panel found that constraining automobile manufacturers to produce smaller, lighter vehicles in the 1970s and early 1980s "probably resulted in an additional 1,300 to 2,600 traffic fatalities in 1993."

* An extensive 1999 USA Today analysis of crash data found that since CAFE went into effect in 1978, 46,000 people died in crashes they otherwise would have survived, had they been in bigger, heavier vehicles. This, according to a 1999 USA Today analysis of crash data since 1975, roughly figures to be 7,700 deaths for every mile per gallon gained in fuel economy standards.


* The USA Today report also said smaller cars - such as the Chevrolet Cavalier or Dodge Neon - accounted for 12,144 fatalities or 37 percent of vehicle deaths in 1997, though such cars omprised only 18 percent of all vehicles.


* A 1989 Harvard-Brookings study estimated CAFE "to be responsible for 2,200-3,900 excess occupant fatalities over ten years of a given [car] model years' use." Moreover, the researchers estimated between 11,000 and 19,500 occupants would suffer serious but nonfatal crash injuries as a result of CAFE.


* The same Harvard-Brookings study found CAFE had resulted in a 500-pound weight reduction of the average car. As a result, occupants were put at a 14 to 27 percent greater risk of traffic death.


* Passengers in small cars die at a much higher rate when involved in traffic accidents with large cars. Traffic safety expert Dr. Leonard Evans estimates that drivers in lighter cars may be 12 times as likely to be killed in a crash when the other vehicle is twice as heavy as the lighter car.

* "The negative relationship between weight and occupant fatality risk is one of the most secure findings in the safety literature." -Dr. Robert W. Crandall, Brookings Institution, and John D. Graham, Ph.D., Harvard School of Public Health


* "Why Does CAFE kill? It does so because it constrains the production of larger cars and, in most modes of collision, larger, heavier cars are more protective of their occupants than are small cars."
-Sam Kazman, Competitive Enterprise Institute


* "[I]n terms of just the total number of lives, when I purchase a larger car, there is a reduction of risk. I'm safer, and so is society overall... We can conclude, beyond any reasonable doubt, that when weight is reduced, as it must be under CAFE, we will increase casualties."
-Dr. Leonard Evans, physicist, author of Traffic Safety and president of Science Serving Society


* "During the past 18 years, the office of Technology Assessment of the United States Congress, the National Safety Council, the Brookings Institution, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, the General Motors Research Laboratories and the National Academy of Sciences all agreed that reductions in the size and weight of passenger cars pose a safety threat."
-National Highway Traffic Safety Administration


* "If you want to solve the safety puzzle, get rid of small cars."
-Brian O'Neill, Insurance Institute for Highway Safety


* "CAFE is a solution in search of a problem."
-Dr. Robert W. Crandall, Brookings Institution


* "The evidence is overwhelming that CAFE standards result in more highway deaths."
-Charli E. Coon, J.D., Heritage Foundation


* "The conclusion is that CAFE has caused, and is causing, increased deaths.... CAFE kills, and higher CAFE standards will kill even more."
-Dr. Leonard Evans, physicist, author of Traffic Safety and President of
Science Serving Society

And with new, even stricter CAFE standards coming into effect, the resulting death toll should escalate. But where is the penalty for the government? They get to blame the "free market" and greedy big business for anything that looks bad and then create more regulations. Of course the fine against Toyota is being dished out by the owner of their biggest competition, but let's ignore that. Toyota's sticky gas pedal has allegedly resulted in 52 driver fatalities (NHTSA estimate). How many thousands have died as a result of CAFE standards? The busy bodies who dream up these standards believe that auto makers can do it by snapping their fingers, that reality does not stand in the way of the fantasy land that they can imagine. To them, auto makers are in collusion with greedy oil men to force us to buy inefficient behemoths to drive around in, and could easily make more fuel efficient cars if they were just mandated to. But the laws of physics demand a trade off - less energy means less power means moving less weight per unit of distance. And that weight reduction comes at a steep price. Will super-strong, light-weight materials be invented to build ultra-efficient, safe and practical cars? Eventually, when engineers can create it and the market can bear it. Not by dictatorial decree.