Monday, October 20th, 2014
False
Obama
"We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas."

Barack Obama on Tuesday, February 12th, 2013 in the State of the Union address

Obama says fuel efficiency has doubled

President Barack Obama said in his State of the Union address that the country’s progress toward energy independence can be measured in miles per gallon.

"Today, no area holds more promise than our investments in American energy. After years of talking about it, we're finally poised to control our own energy future," he said. "We produce more oil at home than we have in 15 years. We have doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas and the amount of renewable energy we generate from sources like wind and solar, with tens of thousands of good, American jobs to show for it."

A lot of energy claims are packed in that statement. Here, we’ll examine whether we’ve "doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas."

We reached out to the White House asking for backup to this claim but did not receive any. But back in 2011, the EPA announced a plan, in partnership with a dozen automakers, to increase average fuel economy to 54.5 miles per gallon for cars and light-duty trucks. (That figure represents a combined city/highway rating as tested in a lab. In real-world driving, the EPA estimates drivers would average closer to 43 mpg.)

Is that for cars coming off the assembly line now? Not hardly. The 54.5 mpg benchmark is the goal for model year 2025 vehicles.

Fuel efficiency is gradually increasing on the way to the 2025 goal. When he took office in 2009, federal standards called for an average rating of 27.5 mpg. For 2013 vehicles, the standard is 30.5 mpg. In 2016, it rises to 34.1.

So comparing fuel efficiency in 2009 and now, there’s an increase of 11 percent -- not nearly double.

Our ruling

Obama said the U.S. has "doubled the distance our cars will go on a gallon of gas," which clearly sounds as though cars on the road today are running at twice their earlier fuel efficiency. But he was comparing a real number with a projected one, a standard for vehicles manufactured more than a decade from now.

The statement was misleading and more importantly untrue. We rate it False.