Numbers that don't add up

• Article
• Comments ()
• Click-2-Listen
• Videos

By

Some people never learn. In an editorial last week castigating the energy bill, the New York Times fell back on the tired old claim that the solution to our nation's oil import problem is stricter fuel efficiency standards for automobiles. This "solution" -- officially known as the Corporate Average Fuel Economy standard or CAFE -- has long been the favorite of New York's Brie and Perrier set, a group always anxious to tell the rest of us poor mortals how to live our lives.

To bolster their argument, the Times editorialists cited China's plans to impose fuel economy standards on their vehicles significantly stricter than those currently in force in the United States because of concern over rising oil imports. Noting that the United States has an even higher import dependence, the editorial chides: "The difference is that the Chinese are ready to do something about it, whereas Congress is not."

Setting aside the fact that the Times chose to cite one of the world's most repressive dictatorships as its policy exemplar, the simple fact is that someone at their editorial page must have flunked second grade math. Nothing else could explain such a stance.

The calculus is really very simple, consisting of three basic facts:

In October, we imported 61.6 percent of our oil.

Currently, the transportation sector accounts for 67.5 percent of all oil consumed in the United States.

The U.S. passenger fleet currently averages 24.4 miles per gallon.

Therefore, in order to eliminate imports by increasing automobile efficiency, we would need to achieve a fleet average of around 413.6 miles per gallon.

But even that would provide only a temporary respite.