New fuel efficiency/emission standards

Wait. Why is this a "great" accomplishment by our government?

What does this set of standards accomplish that the industry would not accomplish on its own with market forces driving consumers to seek higher mpg vehicles?

How much money do we waste on the EPA every year so they can "accomplish" great things that would have been done anyway?
 
Before anyone starts whining that this will kill the auto companies- they were in full support of this agreement and had worked with the administration to help finalize it. They did have the final number lowered by 1.5 mpg I believe.

Detroit, Japan and Germany can and will achieve this goal, we will reduce dependency on oil from it, we will help advance new technologies from it, and as a bonus- discretionary income will increase from the savings.

There's an expression that is something like- "Technology advances the fastest during times of crisis or wars etc." Well, I'd say between a volatile price environment, questionable abilities of supplies to match pace with ever-increasing demand from developing countries, connections to the Mid-East crisis/Wars, and pollution- we are definitely in a crisis.

Bravo to DC and Detroit for agreeing to get this done.
 
On a positive note- I can't wait for the day I can drive a Ford Explorer or similar that gets 35 mpg, or even better. The 2011 V6 version gets 26 mpg on the highway- if my memory is correct the ones from the 90's were lucky to break 18 mpg.

Some of the technologies I bet they use are:
1) Stop/start engine tech. eliminates waste at idle times.
2) There are 3 companies in Silicon Valley that claim to have a vastly superior internal combustion engine running for autos. Increased efficiencies by 20%- TBD
3) Clearly, improved batteries will play a role. It may be a plug in version partnering electric with the internal combustion engine. Multiple battery companies have developmental stage batteries that have 3x the charge capacity of existing batteries at 1/2 the price- should be exciting.
4) Reduced weight, reduced waste (heat, noise, drag.)
5) Turbo/Diesel design breakthroughs
6) Something else we don't know about yet.
 
There have been some great innovations in fuel economy, for sure. I just picked up a new Mustang, and the thing has 310 HP and still gets 31 mpg on the freeway. That's real progress, and it's certainly a good thing.

My issue is that when we focus on fleet like we do, it ignores the impact that will be felt by the businesses that have to buy them now to be competitive. I was looking for a link and can't find it, but most of the major companies are ahead of the curve in terms of meeting the requirements, so they're not going to be forced to buy a lot of new trucks. But smaller businesses may, and that means not only getting new trucks, but buying them at higher prices. There was some pretty loud objections from some of the small business associations, but that didn't get a lot of play.

My personal belief is that pushing for better standards is great, but it has to be done intelligently and by people who aren't just putting an arbitrary number on paper and saying "you should hit this target by this date."
 
Automobile industry is developing a new generation of smaller engine diesels with twin turbo chargers for trucks. Also, must take weight out of next generation trucks by using more expensive steel and carbon fiber. There will undoubtedly be more maintenance expense and reliability issues. Of course the cost of all next generation cars and trucks are going to go up by several thousand dollars in stages to meet the goals.
 
Don't forget- Toyota, BMW, Nissan etc must observe the same laws here and the US will NOT give out loans to every or any company because they sell cars in the USA.

Changing manufacturing lines is something all manufacturers would do anyways because the cars change every year.

It's about competing at the end of the day- like it is already. Who can make the best changes at the highest profit margins.

Small businesses probably benefit the most- as they drive their cars the most and thus benefit the most from the gas savings. This is not a tax, its a reduction of gas expenses at the cost (temporarily) of the new technology's premium.
 
It's about competing at the end of the day- like it is already.

I'm not attacking this post specifically, but just want to vent that in today's economic and regulatory and legal and governmental cliimate: it's not just about competing (as in everything is all free-market goodness). It's about maxing out subsidies, lobbying your congressman, getting tax breaks, along with "competing' based on priced, quality, and value.

The world is a lot more complex than just "competing at the end of the day".
 
More plastic in our automobiles!
bounce.gif
 
Hornpharm- nice answer, and don't forget that the trillions of gas savings can now be spent elsewhere in the American economy instead of towards oil companies.
 
Just to raise an additional wrinkle... Federal highways are funded by gasoline taxes which are based on a per gallon basis. Higher MPGs will result in lower revenue per mile. How will funding shortfalls be addressed? Currently the federal government already subsidizes highway funds in the general budget. Can we afford to do so at a higher extent? Seems we can't afford our current bills. Were all the unintended consequences considered in making these policy decisions? Probably not....
 
so how will governments gas taxes be made back up?

how much will this really save the average Joe?

we should be drilling as much as we can. bho could not get cap & trade passed so he is telling the EPA do do this for him. see his latest illegal immigration executive order as the latest example of how king obama gets his way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

NEW: Pro Sports Forums

Cowboys, Texans, Rangers, Astros, Mavs, Rockets, etc. Pro Longhorns. The Chiefs and that Swift gal. This is the place.

Pro Sports Forums

Recent Threads

Back
Top