It is estimated that CAFE standards, as they exist today, are responsible for 3000-5000 traffic fatalities per year. This seems to be a fair exchange for our lowered dependence on the evil fossil fuels, doesn’t it? In the ‘old days’, a ‘69 Cutlass could take out a telephone pole and the car would absorb most of the energy of the impact. Usually, the occupants would be jostled around a bit, but generally walk away most of the time.

Jump up to the 90’s where a vehicle travelling 35 MPH can hit a deer and cause the driver to be hospitalized. There just is not enough material to absorb the impact. This is because car makers are required to make vehicles weigh less and less. Sure there is a massive amount of research done to improve survivability of crashes, but each MPG mandated by the government will costs lives.

Going from 30->35 MPG will cost x lives, 35->40 MPG will cost 2x lives, 40->45 MPG will costs 4x lives. It’s not that hard to grasp the concept. The manufacturers will take the least costly route to achieve those numbers and frankly, that route is our safety.

The government knows some concession of lives will HAVE to be exchanged for mileage. While well intentioned, Sen Boxer’s recommendation is short sighted and aimed purely at appearing to do something.

If you had to hit a tree at 35 MPH, would you rather be in a 2006 Toyota Prius or a 1975 Buick Lesabre ? I’ll take the land yacht every day!