Editor:
This letter relates to an article on page C6 of the Aug. 18 edition of the Farm and Dairy regarding efficiency standards for heavy duty vehicles (“Obama outlines details of heavy-duty vehicles fuel efficiency standards.”)
What is in it for this industry to (ask) the government to place more stringent regulations on their product, specifically more expensive vehicles?
It is difficult for me to believe that there are enough owners, manufacturers, and drivers interested in what will likely be a very costly program.
Maybe something else is going on that is not covered in the article such as: 1. The manufacturer gets stimulus dollars. 2. The regulations will require many older model vehicles that do not adhere to the standards be removed from the highway, resulting in more new truck sales.
This whole idea doesn’t pass the smell test. Consumers are again going to ante up either in increased taxes to cover the government bailout or higher costs of goods being transported in more expensive rigs.
This article would fit better in an April 1 edition (April Fools).
Darrel Schweitzer
Centerville, Pa.
What’s so bad about using less fuel to do the same amount of work? I like saving money. As to your point about requiring old vehicles to be removed from the roads/fields, it is unlikely. The government for years now (yes, pre-Obama, too) has gradually been requiring more efficient vehicles and never have they required us to get rid of our old cars and trucks. I love my SUV, but I’m also very happy that I was able to find an SUV that gets 27 mpg when it was time to get rid of my old Explorer that got 17 mpg. I like saving money on fuel, so yes, I like tougher fuel standards. My one point of caution would be to make sure newer, lighter vehicles also have the toughest safety standards. I’d like to be both safer and richer!