Obama to unveil big increase in required mpg

[Suspicious-Teach8788]

Link

While the 30 percent increase would be an average for both cars and light trucks, the percentage increase in cars would be much greater, rising from the current 27.5 mpg standard to 42 mpg starting in 2016. The average for light trucks would rise from 24 mpg to 26.2 mpg.

HOLY! Wow. That's a huge increase. And people were saying Bush's push for 35mpg was outrageous? Wasn't that 2020 also? I wonder how feasible this is because honestly how far have we come in the past 10 years for your average sedan? You can talk about introducing hybrid cars and subcompacts to skew the average fleet MPG upwards, but how far technologically have we gotten to see a jump in MPG in your average car?


UPDATE:

35.5 mpg fleet average planned While the 30 percent increase translates to a 35.5 mpg average for both cars and light trucks, the percentage increase in cars would be greater, rising from the current 27.5 mpg standard to 39 mpg starting in 2016. The average for light trucks would rise from 24 mpg to 30 mpg.

 

[OCGuy]

:laugh:

 

[frostedflakes]

Big increase. Should be no problem to meet that equivalent MPG with plug-in electric vehicles, though. But I'd agree, I think it would be hard to meet that with regular gas engines unless you significantly cut power or cut weight, which are both things a lot of people don't really want.

edit: So I'm assuming this is going to be a fleet average MPG similar to the current emission requirements? If so it should be too bad, because like I said, electrics have *very* high equivalent MPG (for example, the Tesla Roadster has a 135 equivalent MPG). So all the automakers would need is one or two high equivalent MPG electrics to pull up their fleet average. Chevy is already coming out with the Volt in 2010, which may be all they need to meet these stricter requirements.

edit 2: Nevermind, I guess CAFE calculations use harmonic mean, which is less prone to the effects of outliers than a simple arithmetic mean.

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: OCguy
:laugh:

yeah keep laughing, looks like the auto makers have backed off their opposition to state mandated increased mpg's because the federal gov't is taking over and jumped on board. Change we can believe in. Conservatives can suck it down 😛

Obama's plan also would effectively end litigation between states and automakers. The latter had opposed state-specific rules, arguing that having to meet several state standards would be much more expensive for them than just one federal rule.

The Detroit News reported that automakers were on board with the new rule because of that, and because they worked with the administration on creating a timeline for the transition.

 

[OCGuy]

So if the government owns the car companies, and they dont comply, do they fine themselves?

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: OCguy
:laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

fixed

 

[frostedflakes]

Originally posted by: OCguy
So if the government owns the car companies, and they dont comply, do they fine themselves?

OK, I'll admit it, I lol'd. :laugh:

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: OCguy
So if the government owns the car companies, and they dont comply, do they fine themselves?

This is the beauty of it all. They fine the taxpayers. The taxpayers will scream the Big 3 deserve it! Tax us more!

 

[boomerang]

Looks like it's time to start rolling out all that secret technology they've all been sitting on for decades.

Of course Fiat is movin' on up, so maybe they'll share theirs.

Now, no complaining about the price of cars. This is all good stuff.

 

[Drako]

LOL @ 42 MPG. Why didn't they just come out and say that you will only buy a Prius or Insight in 2016.

 

[Hacp]

I'm conflicted. On one hand, the union rats will finally disappear once the big 3 fails. On the other, he is practically gifting the market to foreign automakers.

 

[MotF Bane]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: OCguy
So if the government owns the car companies, and they dont comply, do they fine themselves?

This is the beauty of it all. They fine the taxpayers. The taxpayers will scream the Big 3 deserve it! Tax us more!

Government wins. Union wins. Taxpayers lose.

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Link

While the 30 percent increase would be an average for both cars and light trucks, the percentage increase in cars would be much greater, rising from the current 27.5 mpg standard to 42 mpg starting in 2016. The average for light trucks would rise from 24 mpg to 26.2 mpg.

HOLY! Wow. That's a huge increase. And people were saying Bush's push for 35mpg was outrageous? Wasn't that 2020 also? I wonder how feasible this is because honestly how far have we come in the past 10 years for your average sedan? You can talk about introducing hybrid cars and subcompacts to skew the average fleet MPG upwards, but how far technologically have we gotten to see a jump in MPG in your average car?

Uh, Bush pushed for NOTHING. In fact he wanted to change the formula for mpg so the car companies could get lower mileage.

And, this sounds like what happened when the Congress wanted the car companies to put seat belts in their cars. The car companies said it would cost 2,000 a car in 1961!
Set a difficult standard, and guess what? With old fashioned ingenuity American business can do it.

 

[Xellos2099]

Is this mpg even achievable without cutting weight or less horsepower on gas vehicle? Before everyone scream hybrid not everyone can afford 30-40k car.

 

[Ackmed]

Two of my 3 vehicles need 93, and both get under 15mpg... and I love it.

 

[mugs]

April fools? 😕

 

[boomerang]

Originally posted by: Ackmed
Two of my 3 vehicles need 93, and both get under 15mpg... and I love it.

You won't love it when they tax you to the point you're forced to knuckle under. They won't just tax your gas, you'll be paying gas-guzzler fees. But remember comrade, it's for the greater good.

 

[glenn1]

Originally posted by: Xellos2099
Is this mpg even achievable without cutting weight or less horsepower on gas vehicle? Before everyone scream hybrid not everyone can afford 30-40k car.

Environmentalists don't want most people to be able to own cars. The proletariats can use public transportation to get around should that be absolutely necessary.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Link

And, this sounds like what happened when the Congress wanted the car companies to put seat belts in their cars. The car companies said it would cost 2,000 a car in 1961!
Set a difficult standard, and guess what? With old fashioned ingenuity American business can do it.

The problem your argument overlooks is that current petroleum engine technology is 100yrs old and is an extremely mature platform. Virtually all of the efficiency available from the platform has already been squeezed out of it, so the only way to cost effectively increase MPG is reduce weight and power.

Mandating high MPG while offering no rational objective on how to acheive it is bad policy IMO, and totally ignores the reality of the situation for the sake of pandering to green intrests. Instead of more of the same old dumb energy policy maybe we should try thinking out of the box and place incentives that reward innovative alternatives and stop with the meaningless MPG standards.

Viable alternatives like CNG which would reduce emissions more than any increases in MPG ever could with the added benie of ending our dependancy on foreign oil could providing a logical next step in weaning ourselves off fossil fuels. And the environmental reality is that the total carbon footprint of all the cars in the US is less than the coal fired electricty plants so in the big picture MPG standards do little to address our emmisions problems.

Where is the change we were promised? Where is a strong concerted forward thinking energy policy? They might as well mandate flying cars by 2012

 

[CycloWizard]

Originally posted by: Drako
LOL @ 42 MPG. Why didn't they just come out and say that you will only buy a Prius or Insight in 2016.

The Insight doesn't make the cut (41 mpg "combined"), though the Civic hybrid does (or did in '08).

If the cost of gas warrants going to such mileage requirements, then people will demand it of their own accord. This happened last summer when Prius sales went through the roof. To say that government should dictate what kind of cars I can buy, let alone what kind of cars struggling companies can produce, is a recipe for failure.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: DLeRium
Link

And, this sounds like what happened when the Congress wanted the car companies to put seat belts in their cars. The car companies said it would cost 2,000 a car in 1961!
Set a difficult standard, and guess what? With old fashioned ingenuity American business can do it.

The problem your argument overlooks is that current petroleum engine technology is 100yrs old and is an extremely mature platform. Virtually all of the efficiency available from the platform has already been squeezed out of it, so the only way to cost effectively increase MPG is reduce weight and power.

Mandating high MPG while offering no rational objective on how to acheive it is bad policy IMO, and totally ignores the reality of the situation for the sake of pandering to green intrests. Instead of more of the same old dumb energy policy maybe we should try thinking out of the box and place incentives that reward innovative alternatives and stop with the meaningless MPG standards.

Viable alternatives like CNG which would reduce emissions more than any increases in MPG ever could with the added benie of ending our dependancy on foreign oil could providing a logical next step in weaning ourselves off fossil fuels. And the environmental reality is that the total carbon footprint of all the cars in the US is less than the coal fired electricty plants so in the big picture MPG standards do little to address our emmisions problems.

Where is the change we were promised? Where is a strong concerted forward thinking energy policy? They might as well mandate flying cars by 2012

The problem with that is?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: CycloWizard

Originally posted by: Drako
LOL @ 42 MPG. Why didn't they just come out and say that you will only buy a Prius or Insight in 2016.

The Insight doesn't make the cut (41 mpg "combined"), though the Civic hybrid does (or did in '08).

If the cost of gas warrants going to such mileage requirements, then people will demand it of their own accord. This happened last summer when Prius sales went through the roof. To say that government should dictate what kind of cars I can buy, let alone what kind of cars struggling companies can produce, is a recipe for failure.

No. Waiting for "The Market" is a policy of Fail. It is too Short-Sighted to be of any value.

 

[Moonbeam]

It's a matter of national security.

 

[abaez]

42 mpg? I thought it was going to be 35mpg? 42 seems high.

 

[cubeless]

Originally posted by: abaez
42 mpg? I thought it was going to be 35mpg? 42 seems high.

audacity of hope...

i wonder if they're going to put up numbers for tanks and ships and militaty vehicles... and it looks like the pleasure boating industry will probably be abolished...

and you will be using a push mower and a broom, too...