Zap
Elite Member
(I originally wrote this for another, private forum (at 3am, haha). Some of this has been talked about here already, but it just summarizes my thoughts. - Zap)
-----------------------------------------------
These are regulations/laws which try to "encourage" higher fuel economy. Since people often don't care how much gas they use, the government tries to influence this on two fronts.
First, encourage the manufacturers to make vehicles with higher fuel economy by requiring all cars made by a company ("Corporate") to "average" a minimum MPG ("Fuel Economy"), or face financial penalties.
Second, make fuel inefficient vehicles more expensive for consumers to buy, by directly "taxing" the manufacturer a big chunk of change on vehicles that are extremely fuel inefficient ("Gas Guzzlers"), which directly adds to the bottom line of the purchase price of a vehicle.
I think they're doing it wrong. Not what the are trying to do but how they implement it.
CAFE stayed static for way too long at 27.5 MPG, and now suddenly it will shoot up to astronomical heights of something like 61 MPG by the year 2025. Sounds good, right? Our future cars will be super fuel efficient. Well, not really. The reason is that CAFE can be "gamed."
1) No it does not require vehicles to average 27.5MPG right now. That is a fake number that gets influenced by various factors, so the real number is already much lower. It gets even worse! For some reason gasoline vehicles are over-rated in MPG while diesel vehicles are underrated. Those who have driven diesel vehicles know that they get terrific MPG. An example of even more insanity is that a vehicle which can use E85 (mostly ethanol) gets a super boosted MPG rating for the purposes of the CAFE calculations, when the reality is that ethanol has a lower energy content than traditional gasoline, and thus results in lower real world gas mileage.
2) Car companies can trade "credits" with companies above CAFE selling their "excess" to companies below CAFE. Or maybe just pay the penalties of $55 per vehicle per negative MPG. That isn't much for car companies which build mostly premium vehicles. For instance Mercedes Benz routinely fails to meet CAFE MPG standards, and thus has to pay $122 (most recent numbers) per vehicle it sells in the USA. That's a drop in the bucket on the total selling price of their vehicles, thus little incentive to improve.
3) CAFE is mostly for passenger cars. Guess what? Pickup trucks, SUVs, crossovers and mini vans, which we all know the majority are used as passenger vehicles, are allowed much, MUCH more lax numbers that aren't part of the normal CAFE calculations. In fact, CAFE is the reason we have mini vans and SUVs instead of station wagons, because station wagons would have to meet the higher CAFE numbers of passenger vehicles, thus many car companies stopped making them and offered up the "truck based" alternatives instead. For those who would have bought a station wagon, that was often the only alternative. A side issue is that because the excess truck based "non-passenger" vehicles on the market made it more dangerous for "passenger" vehicles in collisions, more and more safety equipment has been mandated, which leads to heavier passenger vehicles, which leads to less gas mileage (all else being equal). A real clusterfuck.
4) Because instead of gradually increasing over the years, the sudden jump in CAFE means car manufacturers have to use newer and more expensive technologies to meet the suddenly higher numbers instead of gradually introducing them, thus new vehicle pricing is expected to jump up significantly, to the tune of thousands of dollars per vehicle.
5) A possible side effect of CAFE going up is that roads won't be as well maintained. Why? Because funds for road maintenance comes from gasoline taxes. Less gas used means less tax money, meaning roads aren't as well maintained. Some have suggested that there be a tax based on mileage driven (actual road usage) instead of gallons used.
This brings me to the Gas Guzzler Tax, which is a complete failure. Basically it makes the car buyer cough up a big chunk of money for buying a fuel inefficient vehicle, by raising the selling price at the car dealer. For instance that fancy new 2012 BMW M5 may have $5000 of its selling price go towards this tax (my estimate pulled from my ass). This is a double whammy for consumers who consider such vehicles by not only costing them more at the pump, but costing them more up front as well, with the hopes that it discourages them from buying such vehicles.
It has completely failed.
Why? It only covers "passenger cars." It exempts mini vans, SUVs and pickup trucks. This makes it cheaper to sell (or conversely more profitable for the manufacturer) a mini van/SUV/truck, thus encouraging manufacturers to make them instead of more fuel efficient "passenger" vehicles.
Here is what I would do if I could wave a magic wand to implement whatever laws I could.
1) Stop giving mini vans/SUVs/trucks a free MPG/tax ride and mandate/tax them into higher MPG brackets by making them meet CAFE/Gas Guzzler Tax that passenger vehicles have to meet, because after all the majority are used as normal passenger vehicles. This will do two things. First, REALLY increase fuel economy of ALL the real passenger vehicles on the roads. Second, eventually make the roads safer when fewer people are buying ginormous vehicles that are so dangerous to smaller vehicles. For those who actually use the vehicles for work/utility, make it a deduction on taxes. The framework is already there, because you can write off work vehicle purchases. Just make it a bigger deduction to make up for the extra cost of the Gas Guzzler Tax. This will also promote more fuel efficient vehicles for work use because you can get the same tax deductions even if you don't have to pay the Gas Guzzler Tax by buying a more efficient vehicle.
2) End gas taxes, but add a mileage tax payable at time of vehicle registration. This will be for purposes of roads maintenance.
3) Simplify CAFE calculations, and stop the "new math" they use. This will make real world MPG more in line with CAFE numbers, and promote such technologies such as diesel by not dinging them just for being diesel. Heck, diesels are super popular in Europe, and Europe enjoys around twice the MPG of the USA when averaging all cars on the roads. I think this is a very viable alternative to hybrids
4) Make CAFE increase more gradually. This will be offset by #3 above, so even if CAFE numbers stay the same, not allowing "new math" will make for a real world increase in MPG.
5) Make vehicles more dangerous. Oh teh noes! Seriously though, an excellent way of making cars more fuel efficient is to make them lighter. All the safety equipment mandated in the past two decades have added hundreds of pounds to the average vehicle (plus thousands of dollars), and probably close to a half ton to some. I wouldn't mandate vehicles to be less safe, but just remove laws requiring all the safety equipment that they currently require. People can still opt for less efficient, more expensive cars with the safety equipment. Or opt for cheaper, more efficient cars. Or somewhere in-between, having some safety equipment (such as airbags, anti-lock brakes) but not others (such as tire pressure monitoring systems, stability control). Heck, this calls for a mini-rant to follow. ***
So, am I crazy? Does anyone care?
***Mini rant on car safety features required by law.***
Some safety features are super useful, like seat belts, anti-lock brakes, airbags. Others are IMO not as useful, and sometimes are just knee jerk reactions to stupid people.
TPMS - Tire Pressure Monitoring System
This was mandated because a few idiots couldn't be bothered to check the air pressure in their Ford Explorers, letting their tire pressure get too low and causing them to roll their Explorers when cornering too fast while speeding. I am 100% serious. So, to protect idiots from themselves, TPMS was required for 2008+ model year. This adds a bit of weight (negligible to a few pounds depending on system type) and a bit of cost (dev costs, to probably over a hundred dollars depending on system type) to all vehicles.
Rear view cameras
Not yet law, but supposedly coming into effect. This is because people don't know how to drive and keep backing into shit. Really. Alternately cars can be made with sonars or something - anything - that shows or warns of something behind the vehicle. Doesn't actually have to be rear view cameras. Yes, more cost/weight added to the car.
Stability control/Traction control
Because people like to buy cars with more power than they (the driver) can handle.
-----------------------------------------------
These are regulations/laws which try to "encourage" higher fuel economy. Since people often don't care how much gas they use, the government tries to influence this on two fronts.
First, encourage the manufacturers to make vehicles with higher fuel economy by requiring all cars made by a company ("Corporate") to "average" a minimum MPG ("Fuel Economy"), or face financial penalties.
Second, make fuel inefficient vehicles more expensive for consumers to buy, by directly "taxing" the manufacturer a big chunk of change on vehicles that are extremely fuel inefficient ("Gas Guzzlers"), which directly adds to the bottom line of the purchase price of a vehicle.
I think they're doing it wrong. Not what the are trying to do but how they implement it.
CAFE stayed static for way too long at 27.5 MPG, and now suddenly it will shoot up to astronomical heights of something like 61 MPG by the year 2025. Sounds good, right? Our future cars will be super fuel efficient. Well, not really. The reason is that CAFE can be "gamed."
1) No it does not require vehicles to average 27.5MPG right now. That is a fake number that gets influenced by various factors, so the real number is already much lower. It gets even worse! For some reason gasoline vehicles are over-rated in MPG while diesel vehicles are underrated. Those who have driven diesel vehicles know that they get terrific MPG. An example of even more insanity is that a vehicle which can use E85 (mostly ethanol) gets a super boosted MPG rating for the purposes of the CAFE calculations, when the reality is that ethanol has a lower energy content than traditional gasoline, and thus results in lower real world gas mileage.
2) Car companies can trade "credits" with companies above CAFE selling their "excess" to companies below CAFE. Or maybe just pay the penalties of $55 per vehicle per negative MPG. That isn't much for car companies which build mostly premium vehicles. For instance Mercedes Benz routinely fails to meet CAFE MPG standards, and thus has to pay $122 (most recent numbers) per vehicle it sells in the USA. That's a drop in the bucket on the total selling price of their vehicles, thus little incentive to improve.
3) CAFE is mostly for passenger cars. Guess what? Pickup trucks, SUVs, crossovers and mini vans, which we all know the majority are used as passenger vehicles, are allowed much, MUCH more lax numbers that aren't part of the normal CAFE calculations. In fact, CAFE is the reason we have mini vans and SUVs instead of station wagons, because station wagons would have to meet the higher CAFE numbers of passenger vehicles, thus many car companies stopped making them and offered up the "truck based" alternatives instead. For those who would have bought a station wagon, that was often the only alternative. A side issue is that because the excess truck based "non-passenger" vehicles on the market made it more dangerous for "passenger" vehicles in collisions, more and more safety equipment has been mandated, which leads to heavier passenger vehicles, which leads to less gas mileage (all else being equal). A real clusterfuck.
4) Because instead of gradually increasing over the years, the sudden jump in CAFE means car manufacturers have to use newer and more expensive technologies to meet the suddenly higher numbers instead of gradually introducing them, thus new vehicle pricing is expected to jump up significantly, to the tune of thousands of dollars per vehicle.
5) A possible side effect of CAFE going up is that roads won't be as well maintained. Why? Because funds for road maintenance comes from gasoline taxes. Less gas used means less tax money, meaning roads aren't as well maintained. Some have suggested that there be a tax based on mileage driven (actual road usage) instead of gallons used.
This brings me to the Gas Guzzler Tax, which is a complete failure. Basically it makes the car buyer cough up a big chunk of money for buying a fuel inefficient vehicle, by raising the selling price at the car dealer. For instance that fancy new 2012 BMW M5 may have $5000 of its selling price go towards this tax (my estimate pulled from my ass). This is a double whammy for consumers who consider such vehicles by not only costing them more at the pump, but costing them more up front as well, with the hopes that it discourages them from buying such vehicles.
It has completely failed.
Why? It only covers "passenger cars." It exempts mini vans, SUVs and pickup trucks. This makes it cheaper to sell (or conversely more profitable for the manufacturer) a mini van/SUV/truck, thus encouraging manufacturers to make them instead of more fuel efficient "passenger" vehicles.
Here is what I would do if I could wave a magic wand to implement whatever laws I could.
1) Stop giving mini vans/SUVs/trucks a free MPG/tax ride and mandate/tax them into higher MPG brackets by making them meet CAFE/Gas Guzzler Tax that passenger vehicles have to meet, because after all the majority are used as normal passenger vehicles. This will do two things. First, REALLY increase fuel economy of ALL the real passenger vehicles on the roads. Second, eventually make the roads safer when fewer people are buying ginormous vehicles that are so dangerous to smaller vehicles. For those who actually use the vehicles for work/utility, make it a deduction on taxes. The framework is already there, because you can write off work vehicle purchases. Just make it a bigger deduction to make up for the extra cost of the Gas Guzzler Tax. This will also promote more fuel efficient vehicles for work use because you can get the same tax deductions even if you don't have to pay the Gas Guzzler Tax by buying a more efficient vehicle.
2) End gas taxes, but add a mileage tax payable at time of vehicle registration. This will be for purposes of roads maintenance.
3) Simplify CAFE calculations, and stop the "new math" they use. This will make real world MPG more in line with CAFE numbers, and promote such technologies such as diesel by not dinging them just for being diesel. Heck, diesels are super popular in Europe, and Europe enjoys around twice the MPG of the USA when averaging all cars on the roads. I think this is a very viable alternative to hybrids
4) Make CAFE increase more gradually. This will be offset by #3 above, so even if CAFE numbers stay the same, not allowing "new math" will make for a real world increase in MPG.
5) Make vehicles more dangerous. Oh teh noes! Seriously though, an excellent way of making cars more fuel efficient is to make them lighter. All the safety equipment mandated in the past two decades have added hundreds of pounds to the average vehicle (plus thousands of dollars), and probably close to a half ton to some. I wouldn't mandate vehicles to be less safe, but just remove laws requiring all the safety equipment that they currently require. People can still opt for less efficient, more expensive cars with the safety equipment. Or opt for cheaper, more efficient cars. Or somewhere in-between, having some safety equipment (such as airbags, anti-lock brakes) but not others (such as tire pressure monitoring systems, stability control). Heck, this calls for a mini-rant to follow. ***
So, am I crazy? Does anyone care?
***Mini rant on car safety features required by law.***
Some safety features are super useful, like seat belts, anti-lock brakes, airbags. Others are IMO not as useful, and sometimes are just knee jerk reactions to stupid people.
TPMS - Tire Pressure Monitoring System
This was mandated because a few idiots couldn't be bothered to check the air pressure in their Ford Explorers, letting their tire pressure get too low and causing them to roll their Explorers when cornering too fast while speeding. I am 100% serious. So, to protect idiots from themselves, TPMS was required for 2008+ model year. This adds a bit of weight (negligible to a few pounds depending on system type) and a bit of cost (dev costs, to probably over a hundred dollars depending on system type) to all vehicles.
Rear view cameras
Not yet law, but supposedly coming into effect. This is because people don't know how to drive and keep backing into shit. Really. Alternately cars can be made with sonars or something - anything - that shows or warns of something behind the vehicle. Doesn't actually have to be rear view cameras. Yes, more cost/weight added to the car.
Stability control/Traction control
Because people like to buy cars with more power than they (the driver) can handle.
