The mandate was outlined in last year’s energy bill in December, but this proposal gives a boost to the timeline by requiring the mileage of passenger vehicles to average 31.6 MPG by 2015. That’s up from today’s average of 25 MPG (which I can’t help but mentioning is identical to the mileage of the original Model T Ford).

The proposal is open for comment for the next 60 days. Although auto makers have publicly endorsed it, not everyone is satisfied. California is leading a group of states to require more dramatic increases in fuel efficiency. They want to see the average hit 35.7 MPG by 2016.

But why stop at 35.7 MPG? According to a poll of 1,013 Americans conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation, 76% of them would rather see 40 MPG reached by 2010. The advocacy group 40MPG.org says reaching this goal (even if it’s later than 2010) would “eliminate 1 billion tons of global warming pollution annually while saving consumers $3,000 to $5,000 over the life of a vehicle.” It would also eliminate our dependence on oil imports from the Middle East.

However far the proposal goes, it’s about time average fuel economy increased. Secretary of Transportation Mary Peters commented that, as it stands “this proposal will save nearly 55 billion gallons of fuel over the lifetime of the vehicles affected … And it will save America’s drivers over $100 billion in fuel costs over the lifetime of those vehicles.”

In a cap-and-trade like system, auto manufacturers who do better than the average requirements will gain credits they can trade to carmakers who don’t meet the them.

Publicly, large auto manufacturers have endorsed the new proposal. GM said it will “work with [the government] throughout its rulemaking process on the yearly targets and the sensible mechanisms needed to meet this challenge.” Similarly, Ford said they “are analyzing the proposal and remain committed to meeting the requirements set by Congress in last year’s energy bill.”

Photo Credit

Tim Hurst wrote, “I would argue that the only opportunity the current president has to leave a positive and lasting legacy is to take ownership of the climate change and global warming issue” in response to rumors that Bush supports a new climate proposal. Could this be Bush’s declaration of war on climate change? I hope not, as the United States has failed to previously win a war on cancer, poverty, or drugs, and these wars have gone on for decades. We don’t have decades to solve the problem of climate change; we must do it now. Of course, when Bush is involved, I have to be skeptical of his true intentions, especially when the Associate Press reports the Bush administration is motivated to avoid a “train wreck” of climate change regulations. I suspect the Bush climate policy would be a watered down version of these other regulations, besides the White House may already be retreating on the issue.

We don’t need to declare war on global warming; we need to take action. Action will require governmental regulation that is effective and not impotent. Water-downed policies created in an election year will not solve the problem and place the United States in a position of world leader on climate change. Action should be taken not for political reasons; actions should be taken to preserve our climate.

Image credit: Sierra Club

Related posts:

• Could Action on Climate Really Be Bush Legacy?
• 350 Parts Per Million: It’s the Magic Number!
• Bush Administration Just Says ‘No’ to Science
• Bush Continues to Erode Own Scientific Integrity

For me, I’m voting with my friend Roger Doiron and his campaign to get the next president to turn a chunk of the White House lawn into a kitchen garden. Roger contributed this idea (and currently leads the vote tally) to the On Day One project, a web platform of the Better World Fund to collect and share ideas about a to-do list for the President’s first day on the job.

Such a Presidential act would take the burgeoning local food movement to new levels of awareness and interest, and make an important global statement that America is taking self-reliant responsibility for our planet’s future. With a pack of zucchini seeds, the White House can send a message that the individual act of growing some of our own food can, collectively, combat and wrestle the looming weight of peak oil and global warming much more positively than further fertilizing the obese defense budget.

Interestingly, Roger’s crusade for the kitchen garden at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue roots in historic precedent. A local food advocate and founder of Kitchen Gardeners International, a global non-profit network of 4,900 gardeners in 90 countries working together to take a hands-on approach to championing the local food system, Roger admits this “is not so much a new idea as a good old one worth recycling.” As the first White House resident in 1800, President John Adams broke ground on a vegetable garden. And talk about eco-lawn care: During WWII, President Woodrow Wilson “hired” a herd of sheep to cut back the cost of maintaining the 18 acres of White House lawn, additionally resulting in thousands of dollars raised for the Red Cross through auctioning the wool. Eleanor Roosevelt inspired others with her Victory Garden on the White House lawn. Most recently, Alice Waters essayed to get the Clintons to plant a garden, but the idea never bloomed under that administration. Instead, the Clinton administration championed the North American Free Trade Agreement, steadfastly convinced its the economy, not ecology, that matters most.

Time to vote with our mouths and give this “Eat the View” idea prominence on the political plate. As seemingly none of the current presidential candidates have fully embraced and endorsed the idea that much of our global security links directly back to our food choices and wise use of energy (please correct me if I’m wrong here!), the White House kitchen garden can make these issues an appetizing main course in the rest of the campaign.

Of course, with planting season around the corner, the current administration could still readily get a garden up and running this season. A Resident Bush garden could bring beans and broccoli back on the national agenda. O.K., I know. Magic fairy wand time over. This upcoming season’s kitchen gardening possibilities lay in our own hands, one tomato seedling at a time.

Who says President George Bush isn't green? Alright, well, most of you -- but in a day and age when it's hip to be environmentally-friendly for all the right (and wrong) reasons, the current administration is making green headlines on a more consistent basis. From the Associated Press comes news this morning that Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman is set to announce funding from Bush's Solar America Initiative for growing technology company, Konarka.

Konarka is a leading developer of flexible plastic solar strips -- technology that could be embedded in everything from your laptop computer case to clothing to the underside of an iPod. The U.S. military (a major initial backer of the six-year-old company) is especially interested in harnessing the material for field operations and uniforms.