| October 5, 2007 |  |
Toyota Campaign to Scuttle Stronger Fuel Economy Measures in Energy Bill Undermines Its Green Reputation
Statement by David Friedman, Union of Concerned Scientists
WASHINGTON (October 5, 2007) - Toyota's green reputation has come under fire from a number of quarters because of the company's opposition to a key provision in the Senate energy bill that would significantly improve vehicle fuel economy. In a company blog, Toyota Group's vice president for corporate communications, Irv Miller, attempted to defend his company's lobbying efforts to deflect criticism from New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman and groups that support a strong fuel economy increase, including the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). But, according to UCS-which was cited in the blog-Miller's "facts" do not add up.
Below is a statement by David Friedman, research director for the Clean Vehicles Program at UCS:
"Toyota's communications director says his company wants better fuel economy, but in fact it is trying to scuttle strong fuel economy standards currently proposed in Congress. In contrast, Toyota's competitor, Nissan, publicly supports the Senate fuel economy provision. Nissan also has committed to a 40 percent reduction in global warming pollution from their products over the next 10 years, a more aggressive target than the Senate provision. Rather than follow Nissan's example, Toyota is working with Detroit's Big Three in a misinformation campaign to persuade Congress to drop the Senate's fuel economy proposal and replace it with a weak, loophole-ridden alternative.
"Congress should pass the fuel economy provision in the current version of the energy bill into law, not replace it with this anemic alternative. The alternative, called the Hill-Terry bill, sets an extremely weak target and would allow automakers to meet part of that target through loopholes that would not produce actual fuel savings. The Hill-Terry bill would mean more oil dependence, higher annual fuel costs, and more pollution. The Senate provision would cut U.S. oil consumption by 1.2 million barrels a day, 140 percent more than Hill-Terry. The Senate provision also would save Americans $14 billion more than Hill-Terry, and cut 242 percent more global warming pollution.
"Toyota needs to pick sides. Is it for a cleaner world? Or is it just another polluter, willing to use misinformation to avoid accountability? So far, it seems the company is picking the latter option.
"Toyota's Irv Miller makes two points in his company blog that don't hold up to analysis.
"First, he cherry-picks research from my organization to bolster his argument. He cites Toyota's improved global warming performance for the 2005 model year, but fails to acknowledge that Toyota has since slipped on environmental performance and fuel economy. According to the latest fuel economy analysis from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Toyota is projected to backslide on truck fuel economy by 0.5 miles per gallon and on domestic car fuel economy by 3 miles per gallon.
"Second, Miller repeats the tired line that auto companies can't comply with the strong fuel economy legislation already in the Senate version of the energy bill. Toyota's own vehicles, like the Prius, belie these claims. Not to mention that the National Academy of Sciences and other analysts have shown that automakers can use conventional technology to meet those goals."
The Union of Concerned Scientists puts rigorous, independent science to work to solve our planet's most pressing problems. Joining with citizens across the country, we combine technical analysis and effective advocacy to create innovative, practical solutions for a healthy, safe, and sustainable future.
