Obama to unveil Big Increase in Required MPG

[ConcordCowboy]

Obama to unveil big increase in required mpg


Change driven by 30 percent cut in CO2; will cost $1,300 per vehicle


WASHINGTON - Determined to reduce new vehicle carbon emissions by 30 percent, President Barack Obama on Tuesday is announcing that automakers will have to improve car and light truck mileage by that much starting in 2016

The new requirement is estimated to cost consumers an extra $1,300 per vehicle, while saving 1.8 billion barrels of oil through 2016 — the environmental equivalent to taking 177 million cars off the road, senior administration officials said Monday night.

It also marks the first time federal vehicle standards require cuts in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases tied to global warming.

While the 30 percent increase would be an 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.

California, 13 other states and the District of Columbia had earlier urged the Bush administration to let them enact rules to cut vehicle greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent. The Bush administration blocked the request and fought a lawsuit, but Obama has decided to adopt key elements of that strategy.

Will phase in new standards

The California program essentially requires new cars to eventually get 42 mpg. But administration officials later noted that their plan sets a 39-mpg benchmark.

Administration sources noted that while a 2007 federal law requires a 30 percent cut by 2020, Obama's plan steps that up by four years. The requirement will gradually phase in, starting with 2011 vehicle models.


The plan also would effectively end a feud between automakers and statehouses over emission standards — with the states coming out on top but the automakers getting a single national standard and more time to make the changes.

Sen. Barbara Boxer, a California Democrat and chair of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, thanked the Obama administration for bringing together "the federal government, the State of California, and the auto industry behind new national automobile emissions standards that follow California’s lead.

"This is good news for all of us who have fought long and hard to reduce global warming pollution, create clean energy jobs, and reduce our dangerous dependence on foreign oil," she added.

Environmentalists also praised the move. Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, called it "one of the most significant efforts undertaken by any president, ever, to end our addiction to oil and seriously slash our global warming emissions."

Daniel Weiss, director of climate strategy at the Center for American Progress, described it as "a triple play: It will help move America off foreign oil, save families money and spur American businesses to take the lead in developing the job-creating, clean-energy technologies of the future."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30810514/

[JBond]

Another rewrite of a Bush policy. Quite the trend Obama is establishing. God forbid he has an original thought.

[iceberg]

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourCar/small-cars-get-poor-marks-in-crash-tests.aspx

next step will be to outlaw the larger cars that destroy the small "gas/eco friendly" cars and leave their "green" drivers crunched.

[Yeagermeister]

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/Insurance/InsureYourCar/small-cars-get-poor-marks-in-crash-tests.aspx

next step will be to outlaw the larger cars that destroy the small "gas/eco friendly" cars and leave their "green" drivers crunched.

I wonder if we'll get to choose which color of box we get to drive? Probably not.

[JBond]

I wonder if we'll get to choose which color of box we get to drive? Probably not.

Funny you mention that. Not too long ago someone posted a story about car colors and global warming. Something about light colored cars vs dark color and some possible mandates. Does anyone else remember that?

[iceberg]

I wonder if we'll get to choose which color of box we get to drive? Probably not.

the real question is - to force this change this fast, how "safe" will these cars be?

there's gonna be a lot of holdover SUVs and full size cars out there for some time to come. if you're in a wreck, you wanna be in the 2001 dodge 4x4, or a toyota yaris?

[WoodysGirl]

Analysis: Obama brings foes together for auto deal

By Jennifer Loven, Ap White House Correspondent – 36 mins ago

WASHINGTON – The White House-forged auto emissions deal among long-warring states, carmakers and environmentalists is the most dramatic evidence yet of what President Barack Obama is hoping to brand — and eventually sell to voters — as his signature governing style.

"In the past, an agreement such as this would have been considered impossible," Obama said Tuesday in announcing the deal, the usually pokerfaced president reveling in his own achievement. "It represents not only a change in policy in Washington but the harbinger of a change in the way business is done in Washington."

Maybe.

A stack of other complicated issues — health care overhaul, Mideast peace, global warming — probably won't unfold in such a favorable environment for agreement. They will challenge anew Obama's promise to be the kind of pragmatic leader who refuses to get boxed in by ideological labels and can persuade divergent interests to cooperate.

Still, he proved that remarkable results can be won. Under the mileage-and-emissions compromise that Obama built, traditional enemies came together. Everyone agreed to give something:

• The federal government will now do what it long refused under President George W. Bush — bend to the desires by several states to set more stringent fuel-efficiency rules than Washington.

• States, for their part, agreed to abandon efforts to go their own way, at least for the time being.

• Automakers pledged to drop their budget-sapping lawsuits protesting the enactment of a patchwork of differing state rules.

• Environmentalists accepted a longer buildup to more fuel-efficient vehicles.

• Consumers will shell out an average of $1,300 more for new vehicles by 2016.

The proposed new federal rules call for the auto industry to produce by 2016, four years faster than required by a 2007 law, vehicles that average 35.5 miles per gallon overall, which each company adhering to slightly different fuel-efficiency standards across their fleet and vehicle class sizes. Even more, the plan sets the nation's first-ever federal limits on greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks, achieving a 30 percent reduction through the new fuel-efficiency levels and by changing standards for air conditioners.

Extraordinary as this grand bargain is, however, it is just as notable that it was driven by a near-perfect storm of circumstances.

The recession makes Americans more leery than ever of paying to drive gas-guzzlers. A climate change crisis is building momentum for action among policymakers. Last year's election turned Washington's government all Democratic. The auto industry, struggling to survive on billions in federal bailout money, is under unprecedented pressure to remake itself into a producer of cleaner cars. A 2007 Supreme Court ruling declared greenhouse gases pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

On other issues, Obama's approach has been taking serious hits.

He deeply irritated liberal backers by reversing course to fight the court-ordered release of prisoner-abuse photos, by reviving military trials for some terror suspects at Guantanamo Bay and by declining to support a truth commission to investigate detainee interrogations.

Republicans, meanwhile, are keeping up a drumbeat of doubt about Obama's decisions to release once-classified legal memos authorizing the use of harsh questioning methods for terror suspects.

Why, some commentators ask, is Obama all over the map? For what does he stand without compromise?

Behind the scenes, the White House is not discomfited by these questions, but delighted.

Aides are gambling that the public will see — and like — a president making decisions and forging coalitions based on circumstances instead of creed. It worked during his successful presidential campaign, when trying to pin down Obama's specific positions amid his soaring rhetoric could sometimes be frustrating. It seems to be working now in his relations with Congress, where Obama refrains from haggling over legislative details in favor of merely setting broad goals.

Carol Browner, Obama's energy adviser who shepherded the auto deal from the beginning of the administration four months ago, said the most important lesson the White House learned was that setting ambitious, difficult goals is good, but only achievable if stakeholders are allowed to be flexible about how they meet them.

"His whole approach is about coalition-building," Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick said glowingly of the president on Tuesday. "It's all about bringing people together."

The president hopes that view will only expand — and hold.

___

EDITOR'S NOTE — Jennifer Loven has covered the White House for The Associated Press since 2002.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_obama_autos_analysis

[ninja]

Can you picture 4 each 250 pound Americans in a Yaris?

How about a family of 4 on a two week vacation in a Yaris? That trunk ain't big enough to hold their luggage.

[iceberg]

Can you picture 4 each 250 pound Americans in a Yaris?

How about a family of 4 on a two week vacation in a Yaris? That trunk ain't big enough to hold their luggage.

i actually fit (passenger side) in a yaris and i'm over 300 at 6'4". i'd not want to sit in back and no, you better not bring more than an overnight bag - but these are "long term vision things" that will simply "solve themselves" as issues if we just embrace the green.

[Yeagermeister]

i actually fit (passenger side) in a yaris and i'm over 300 at 6'4". i'd not want to sit in back and no, you better not bring more than an overnight bag - but these are "long term vision things" that will simply "solve themselves" as issues if we just embrace the green.

I'm a couple of inches shorter but just as big so I know how you feel. When we go on trips we can take my explorer or my wife's focus. I think you can guess which one we choose.

[Jon88]

This is a good idea to get us off foreign oil.

Right now my truck won't cut it. I don't know if there's something wrong with the gas tank or gauges but it doesn't get the 22 mpg it used to.

[jrumann59]

The easiest solution right now is to relax some of the over the top safety equipment in the cars many of these cars now days have another 300-500 pounds of "safety" stuff that saps MPGs, we could have v-8's in the high 20's to low 30 MPGs if there was so much extra weight for questionable "safety" equipment.

[Royal Laegotti]

I wonder if we'll get to choose which color of box we get to drive? Probably not.

You get to choose between green and green.

[ologan]

Get ready to see another chunk of 'change' come out of the coffers. Who else is going to foot the bill to retool all the factories to make these small cars? It's my understanding these requirements will be based on an average of all autos a company sells,where you can still buy that truck you want from someone like Toyota because the Prius (50+mpg) production has been ramped up to offset your consumption. Then if you do want that Tundra,you will pay a hefty "gas guzzler" tax on it,sorta like the "gas guzzler" tax they slap on some of the pricier Mercedes Benz cars. I saw one in a showroom the other day at a MB dealer that had a $3000 "gas guzzler" tax added to the already outrageous sticker price. Too bad I wasn't in there to buy a new MB,but rather a 2008 Camry with 14,000 miles on it that someone had traded in on a new Benz.I got a hell of a deal on it because The dealership was having trouble selling it as a used car because it wasn't a Mercedes. An interesting note was that while there to complete the transaction,at least five people came in and bought new ones off the showroom floor.
I'll still keep my Tundra,thank you,because I don't think I could put all the tools,ladders,etc. I need to run my business in a little box,or have the horsepower needed to haul all of it up and down the mountains I have to travel to get and keep business.
On second thought,maybe the new requirements will force me out of business,like it may do to a lot of others,too. I guess I could just go "on the dole"and let Uncle Sugar take care of me....Like so many others in this country right now.

[sacase]

Get ready to see another chunk of 'change' come out of the coffers. Who else is going to foot the bill to retool all the factories to make these small cars? It's my understanding these requirements will be based on an average of all autos a company sells,where you can still buy that truck you want from someone like Toyota because the Prius (50+mpg) production has been ramped up to offset your consumption. Then if you do want that Tundra,you will pay a hefty "gas guzzler" tax on it,sorta like the "gas guzzler" tax they slap on some of the pricier Mercedes Benz cars. I saw one in a showroom the other day at a MB dealer that had a $3000 "gas guzzler" tax added to the already outrageous sticker price. Too bad I wasn't in there to buy a new MB,but rather a 2008 Camry with 14,000 miles on it that someone had traded in on a new Benz.I got a hell of a deal on it because The dealership was having trouble selling it as a used car because it wasn't a Mercedes. An interesting note was that while there to complete the transaction,at least five people came in and bought new ones off the showroom floor.
I'll still keep my Tundra,thank you,because I don't think I could put all the tools,ladders,etc. I need to run my business in a little box,or have the horsepower needed to haul all of it up and down the mountains I have to travel to get and keep business.
On second thought,maybe the new requirements will force me out of business,like it may do to a lot of others,too. I guess I could just go "on the dole"and let Uncle Sugar take care of me....Like so many others in this country right now.

That's interesting. My Benz dealer doesn't even sell cars other than Mercedes. If you trade your non mercedes in, they just turn around and sell it at an auction. They only deal in mercedes new and used cars.

As far as the gas guzzler tax goes, the tax is on cars with engines V8 and above. If it is a V6 you don't have to pay the tax. Some of the AMG models are V8 or V12 engines. I think the E500 is a V8 as well. I think this just opens up the way for a mileage tax since tax revenues are going to decrease.

You should have got a Benz, its so much better.

[iceberg]

Get ready to see another chunk of 'change' come out of the coffers. Who else is going to foot the bill to retool all the factories to make these small cars? It's my understanding these requirements will be based on an average of all autos a company sells,where you can still buy that truck you want from someone like Toyota because the Prius (50+mpg) production has been ramped up to offset your consumption. Then if you do want that Tundra,you will pay a hefty "gas guzzler" tax on it,sorta like the "gas guzzler" tax they slap on some of the pricier Mercedes Benz cars. I saw one in a showroom the other day at a MB dealer that had a $3000 "gas guzzler" tax added to the already outrageous sticker price. Too bad I wasn't in there to buy a new MB,but rather a 2008 Camry with 14,000 miles on it that someone had traded in on a new Benz.I got a hell of a deal on it because The dealership was having trouble selling it as a used car because it wasn't a Mercedes. An interesting note was that while there to complete the transaction,at least five people came in and bought new ones off the showroom floor.
I'll still keep my Tundra,thank you,because I don't think I could put all the tools,ladders,etc. I need to run my business in a little box,or have the horsepower needed to haul all of it up and down the mountains I have to travel to get and keep business.
On second thought,maybe the new requirements will force me out of business,like it may do to a lot of others,too. I guess I could just go "on the dole"and let Uncle Sugar take care of me....Like so many others in this country right now.

the real trick is this is just a "knee jerk" type move. go green and the problems will take care of themselves.

i can hear lobby groups then come after older bigger cars for being so dangerous to the green cars in wrecks. everything to me has a good and bad side and while going "green" may be considered "good" - it's not being thought all the way through by forcing things like MPG to come up so much in just 6 years. they can build the cars that i'd need one for each foot to use, but i'll never buy one.

this is just setting up an epic fail. maybe for good reasons, but damn sure w/o proper forsight and planning.

[Doomsday101]

So now the Government will determin what we drive? wow thanks Obama you are all knowing and knows what is best for us all. Your fan club seems to think this, put the screws to people and they thank you for it what a bunch of sheep

[burmafrd]

The libs always think they know better then us poor dumb normal people. We have to be told how to do everything and cannot be allowed to make decisions on our own.

[Kangaroo]

That's interesting. My Benz dealer doesn't even sell cars other than Mercedes. If you trade your non mercedes in, they just turn around and sell it at an auction. They only deal in mercedes new and used cars.

As far as the gas guzzler tax goes, the tax is on cars with engines V8 and above. If it is a V6 you don't have to pay the tax. Some of the AMG models are V8 or V12 engines. I think the E500 is a V8 as well. I think this just opens up the way for a mileage tax since tax revenues are going to decrease.

You should have got a Benz, its so much better.

That is funny on a truck most V8's get better gas mileage than the V6 model

Oh wait typical government stupidty

[ologan]

That's interesting. My Benz dealer doesn't even sell cars other than Mercedes. If you trade your non mercedes in, they just turn around and sell it at an auction. They only deal in mercedes new and used cars.

As far as the gas guzzler tax goes, the tax is on cars with engines V8 and above. If it is a V6 you don't have to pay the tax. Some of the AMG models are V8 or V12 engines. I think the E500 is a V8 as well. I think this just opens up the way for a mileage tax since tax revenues are going to decrease.

You should have got a Benz, its so much better.

Wish I could really afford one,but at 1/4th the price of a Benz,and paying in cash,I'll stick with the best selling American made car over a very expensive American made car.
btw,the dealer was Mercedes of Buckhead.

[Bach]

This is a good idea to get us off foreign oil.



An even better idea would be to drill our own oil

[adamc91115]

That is funny on a truck most V8's get better gas mileage than the V6 model

Oh wait typical government stupidty

Yup... People are too stupid and lazy to do research like that. There is almost no reason to buy a V6 truck.

But Obama knows best... So it must be true :rolleyes:.

[iceberg]

An even better idea would be to drill our own oil

what is the cost per a gallon of gas for drilling oil stateside vs buying it at current market value?

[Kangaroo]

what is the cost per a gallon of gas for drilling oil stateside vs buying it at current market value?

That depends on the type of drilling you are doing

I am not kidding about this if you drill on land it is cheaper

When you get to offshore it depends on if it is shallow vs deepwater

Then your cost may go up because you have to build infrastructure that connects tot he current infrastructure to get the oil where you need it to go.

It would be cheaper to keep drilling in the Gulf of Mexico because there is already drilling so it would be cheaper to build out. The cost to drill of California's cost would be higher due to the initial investment in infrastructure to get the oil to where it needs to go.

That is the basic of it that was explained to me when working for oil companies sometimes foreign oil is cheaper to drill with less environmental restrictions; but then you have the headaches of dealing with foreign governments which get to be a pain in the arse

[Phrozen Phil]

i actually fit (passenger side) in a yaris and i'm over 300 at 6'4". i'd not want to sit in back and no, you better not bring more than an overnight bag - but these are "long term vision things" that will simply "solve themselves" as issues if we just embrace the green.

Maybe, just maybe, the "Green" you should embrace first is a salad.;)
In all seriousness, I drove my son's Honda Fit and found that it had better shoulder and head room than a lot of comparable domestic models. I'd buy a domestic product if it was a better car. I hope that the Big Three can produce a better car, but they've not shown much in the recent past.

[trickblue]

Maybe, just maybe, the "Green" you should embrace first is a salad.;)
In all seriousness, I drove my son's Honda Fit and found that it had better shoulder and head room than a lot of comparable domestic models. I'd buy a domestic product if it was a better car. I hope that the Big Three can produce a better car, but they've not shown much in the recent past.

When I was in Vancouver a couple of weeks ago, I barely saw any domestics. Most were driving Hondas and Toyotas by a large margin.

[TheCount]

the real trick is this is just a "knee jerk" type move. go green and the problems will take care of themselves.

i can hear lobby groups then come after older bigger cars for being so dangerous to the green cars in wrecks. everything to me has a good and bad side and while going "green" may be considered "good" - it's not being thought all the way through by forcing things like MPG to come up so much in just 6 years. they can build the cars that i'd need one for each foot to use, but i'll never buy one.

this is just setting up an epic fail. maybe for good reasons, but damn sure w/o proper forsight and planning.

Knee jerk? How so? It's been a long time coming and it's not the only issue being raised

Hell, people still don't understand that the mandate is across the range. You won't need to fit 250 lbs American's in a Yaris. There are a million ways to meet the mandate, from improving the efficiency of your entire line, creating news ones or dropping inefficient ones.

People want to focus on the outright cost instead of the long term savings, that's fine. It's like refusing to put insulation in your house because it costs so much and then spending much more on your heating and cooling bills.

[Doomsday101]

Knee jerk? How so? It's been a long time coming and it's not the only issue being raised

Hell, people still don't understand that the mandate is across the range. You won't need to fit 250 lbs American's in a Yaris. There are a million ways to meet the mandate, from improving the efficiency of your entire line, creating news ones or dropping inefficient ones.

People want to focus on the outright cost instead of the long term savings, that's fine. It's like refusing to put insulation in your house because it costs so much and then spending much more on your heating and cooling bills.

The consumer should determine what they want to drive not the Government. They work for us remember not the other way around.

[burmafrd]

Love how the liberals keep saying the government is so smart - and should be running everything. Really kind of pathetic.

[iceberg]

Maybe, just maybe, the "Green" you should embrace first is a salad.;)
In all seriousness, I drove my son's Honda Fit and found that it had better shoulder and head room than a lot of comparable domestic models. I'd buy a domestic product if it was a better car. I hope that the Big Three can produce a better car, but they've not shown much in the recent past.

i eat at least 2 salads for lunch weekly and have at least one on the weekends.

go feel stupid now.

[iceberg]

Knee jerk? How so? It's been a long time coming and it's not the only issue being raised

Hell, people still don't understand that the mandate is across the range. You won't need to fit 250 lbs American's in a Yaris. There are a million ways to meet the mandate, from improving the efficiency of your entire line, creating news ones or dropping inefficient ones.

People want to focus on the outright cost instead of the long term savings, that's fine. It's like refusing to put insulation in your house because it costs so much and then spending much more on your heating and cooling bills.

i didn't say it wasn't a long time coming.
i didn't say we shouldn't move to this direction.

raising it to 35mpg in 7 years? you're going to wind up with a lot of small cars that become a hell of a lot smaller after hitting the 87 chevy van people still drive.

want to take a long trip? not likely to happen in an econobox now is it?

there's likely good reasons why it's not happened yet and sheer "don't wanna" can't be the only cause, can it? and yes i call it knee jerk cause he's in office ranting and raving these demands everywhere but what's the real world scenario like?

and isn't it funny that NOW the automakers say this can be done now that the gov pretty much owns 2 of the 3 for the time being?

so yea, knee jerk.

[burmafrd]

So count if you are in a econobox and get hit by a truck, will your last thoughts be " I am so glad I am green!"

[TheCount]

i didn't say it wasn't a long time coming.
i didn't say we shouldn't move to this direction.

raising it to 35mpg in 7 years? you're going to wind up with a lot of small cars that become a hell of a lot smaller after hitting the 87 chevy van people still drive.

want to take a long trip? not likely to happen in an econobox now is it?

there's likely good reasons why it's not happened yet and sheer "don't wanna" can't be the only cause, can it? and yes i call it knee jerk cause he's in office ranting and raving these demands everywhere but what's the real world scenario like?

and isn't it funny that NOW the automakers say this can be done now that the gov pretty much owns 2 of the 3 for the time being?

so yea, knee jerk.

I still don't see how it's knee-jerk if it's a long time coming, knee-jerk implies a rash or quick decision, that isn't the case. America has been weaseling out of this thing for decades. Everytime gas prices go up it gets popular and as soon as they go down all of a sudden people start hemming and hawing.

Again, it doesn't change the type of car you can buy. If you need an 18 Wheeler to take your cross country trip, you will still be able to buy an 18 wheeler.

So count if you are in a econobox and get hit by a truck, will your last thoughts be " I am so glad I am green!"

If you're in a truck and get hit by a bus, will your last thoughts be, "I am so glad I am not green!"?

Right now I drive an SUV, I've got a fiance, two dogs and we go camping often when the season is right, so it fits my lifestyle. I also take public transit to work and back 5 days a week and use it when convenient or necessary during the weekends (say I'm going out drinking). I don't support this because I'm some kind of green nut, I support it because it makes sense. I prefer this to wasting money on various other programs that are more theory than practical.

[iceberg]

I still don't see how it's knee-jerk if it's a long time coming, knee-jerk implies a rash or quick decision, that isn't the case. America has been weaseling out of this thing for decades. Everytime gas prices go up it gets popular and as soon as they go down all of a sudden people start hemming and hawing.

Again, it doesn't change the type of car you can buy. If you need an 18 Wheeler to take your cross country trip, you will still be able to buy an 18 wheeler.

i think forcing the 35 mpg by that timeframe is pushing it. knee jerk refers to obama wanting to *always give the appearance* of doing all the right (or popular) thing. the push he's making while overhauling the car industry to me is knee jerk - not a plan to ensure we get there safely and with products people will buy.

i think it's a PR move moreso than a "get green" move and he just tossed it out there to be "popular" w/o much thought on the actual ability to get it done in that timeframe.

[Phrozen Phil]

i eat at least 2 salads for lunch weekly and have at least one on the weekends.

go feel stupid now.

:bow: Touche. I stand humbled and corrected.

I imagine you face a problem similar to taller friends of mine: finding a car that can accommodate folks with larger frames. a golfing buddy of mine had a terrible time finding an import that gave him enough leg room. If somebody can produce a car with plenty of leg and head room, good mileage, decent passenger capacity (at least 4 bodies) that's also really reliable, then I'm in.

[TheCount]

i think forcing the 35 mpg by that timeframe is pushing it. knee jerk refers to obama wanting to *always give the appearance* of doing all the right (or popular) thing. the push he's making while overhauling the car industry to me is knee jerk - not a plan to ensure we get there safely and with products people will buy.

i think it's a PR move moreso than a "get green" move and he just tossed it out there to be "popular" w/o much thought on the actual ability to get it done in that timeframe.

He got elected on this platform, he's following through on what he said he would do in that regard. 7 Years seems like enough time to make up 8 extra MPG over the previous mandate of 27.5.

Hell, the CAFE requirement for passenger cars went from 20 to 27 between 1980 and 1984. That's 7 MPG in 4 years right there.

The CAFE standard itself follows several rules, it's not some arbitrary number or concept pulled out of thin air, included in those rules is that the raise has to be feasible.

You say it's been a long time coming and then say it hasn't been thought out, how can it be both?

The fact of the matter is it had to happen sometime and the closer to a gas or oil crisis the better, because once gas goes down (like it has now) some people start arguing that it isn't necessary... till the next gas/oil crisis.

[iceberg]

He got elected on this platform, he's following through on what he said he would do in that regard. 7 Years seems like enough time to make up 8 extra MPG over the previous mandate of 27.5.

Hell, the CAFE requirement for passenger cars went from 20 to 27 between 1980 and 1984. That's 7 MPG in 4 years right there.

The CAFE standard itself follows several rules, it's not some arbitrary number or concept pulled out of thin air, included in those rules is that the raise has to be feasible.

You say it's been a long time coming and then say it hasn't been thought out, how can it be both?

The fact of the matter is it had to happen sometime and the closer to a gas or oil crisis the better, because once gas goes down (like it has now) some people start arguing that it isn't necessary... till the next gas/oil crisis.


you could be right - but if obama were really concerned with campaign promises, gitmo would be closed. : )

we'll see - i just think it's going to result in a lot of ecoboxes no one wants as long as gas stays affordable.

[burmafrd]

DO a little research on WHY the so called MPG went up. You will find it was not because of technology. AND THEN look at why MPG has barely moved over the last 10 years.

Facts are facts. There have been no breakthroughs in engine or battery technology. Cars are already more plastic then metal. So the ONLY way to make vehicles more efficient is to make them smaller and lighter. Which means much more susceptible to heavy damage. Go ahead and buy an econobox= then pray you are never in an accident.

[jrumann59]

DO a little research on WHY the so called MPG went up. You will find it was not because of technology. AND THEN look at why MPG has barely moved over the last 10 years.

Facts are facts. There have been no breakthroughs in engine or battery technology. Cars are already more plastic then metal. So the ONLY way to make vehicles more efficient is to make them smaller and lighter. Which means much more susceptible to heavy damage. Go ahead and buy an econobox= then pray you are never in an accident.


You are partially right, While cars now are have a lot of plastics and light weight metals they also have a lot creature comfort things and safety stuff that adds even more weight tot he car which off sets any small gains technology makes in fuel economy for the internal combustion engine. A good example is take a truck that offers a v-6 and v-8 they both get roughly the same MPGs, why because the v-6 works harder to accelerate while v-8 doesn't the biggest difference would be at highway speeds where the v-6 picks up a few points. If manufacturers figured out a way to get rid of the couple hundred pounds of sound deadening material in cars, the NVH dampers in the steering wheels, engine mounts, flywheels and crank shafts. Got rid of most of the SRS systems in cars today. I would guarantee it I could squeeze 30+mpg out of a Charger R/T.

[TheCount]

you could be right - but if obama were really concerned with campaign promises, gitmo would be closed. : )

we'll see - i just think it's going to result in a lot of ecoboxes no one wants as long as gas stays affordable.

He plans to close it in a year, I'd say he's following through but exercising due diligence, you can afford to get MPG wrong and change the policy, you better make sure you get Gitmo right.

DO a little research on WHY the so called MPG went up. You will find it was not because of technology. AND THEN look at why MPG has barely moved over the last 10 years.

Facts are facts. There have been no breakthroughs in engine or battery technology. Cars are already more plastic then metal. So the ONLY way to make vehicles more efficient is to make them smaller and lighter. Which means much more susceptible to heavy damage. Go ahead and buy an econobox= then pray you are never in an accident.

So you think there have been no significant improvements to engines and engine efficiency between 1983 (CAFE 26 MPG) and 2009 (CAFE 27 MPG)?