The End of the Gas Guzzler 897
Hugh Pickens writes "Michael Grunwald reports that President Obama will announce today a near-doubling of fuel efficiency standards for cars and light trucks, and the Big Three automakers — GM, Ford and Chrysler — will support it in a final deal that will require vehicle fleets to average 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, which will reduce fuel consumption by 40% and carbon emissions by 50%. Although environmentalists had pushed for 60 mpg and the White House had floated a compromise of 56.2, 54.5 is pretty close, considering that last year's standards were only 28.3. 'I might point out that the same auto industry that ran attack ads about how 56.2 would destroy their businesses and force everyone to drive electric cars has embraced 54.5 as an achievable target,' writes Grunwald. 'It almost makes you wonder if the automakers may have exaggerated the costs of compliance, the way they always do.'"
Re:How many... (Score:5, Informative)
The "Hydrogen Economy" is a scam. The cheapest way to make hydrogen is via hydrocarbon fractionation. Both green houses gasses will not be affected or reliance on fossil fuels.
Re:And while they're at it - they should... (Score:5, Informative)
Also notice how GM, Ford and Chrystler are the ones who recommended 54.5 mpg as opposed to the 56.2 that the administration wanted and the 60 that environmentalists wanted. Oh wait, that must mean that GM, Ford and Chrystler are part of the hated Obama administration! Source of all evil! The truth is out there, man!
reasonable final compromise (Score:2, Informative)
The difference between 54.5mph and 60mpg really was not worth fighting over. The Obama Administration would've been idiots to go to the mat over that. Sure, when you're talking about badly designed tanks that get 20mpg, another 5.5mpg is a substantial difference, but once you start getting up to actually efficient numbers like these standards are talking about, that difference doesn't make that big a deal.
As my main vehicle, I ride a motorbike that gets 90mpg. I started fretting about it when it wasn't running quite so well and it was getting 80mpg or less, but then I did the math and realized how little difference that meant. I still got it fixed (some basic maintenance was all it needed), but that was because I also wasn't getting the speed I wanted.
Re:Here's an idea (Score:4, Informative)
Bull-fucking-shit. If it was that simple I wouldn't be seeing mommy SUVs speeding down the highway anymore, because gas is so expensive.
Oh dear. It seems you don't quite understand how a free market works.
You see the determination of whether or not a good/service is "worth it" is not made by a person or a group of people for the whole economy -- instead, it's made on an individual, purchaser-by-purchaser basis.
Yes, it might not make sense to you to pay the cost of an SUV's fill-up. And indeed you might not have an SUV for that very reason. But some people have decided that it is worth it -- and those are the people who drive those "mommy SUVs" that you're talking about.
The parent's point still stands: eventually, gas will get expensive enough that most people don't think it's worth it to drive inefficient cars anymore.
Re:Duh. (Score:5, Informative)
Express it in amount per distance, it's easier to deal with. (It's also easier in daily life. People want to know how much fuel / money it will take to drive a certain distance, rather than how far they can drive with $20 of fuel.)
I'll use L/100km, as that's the normal measurement in metric countries (and what I'm more familiar with).
10 (miles per US gallon) = 24 litres per (100 km)
20 (miles per US gallon) = 12 litres per (100 km)
30 (miles per US gallon) = 8 litres per (100 km)
40 (miles per US gallon) = 6 litres per (100 km)
I think it's now clear. From 20mpg to 40mpg saves 6L, but from 10mpg to 20mpg saved 12L.
Re:Duh. (Score:3, Informative)
Hell, 20 years ago, a 1983 VW rabbit could get 54 mpg.
Re:Duh. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Just a game (Score:4, Informative)
Wrong. From http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/cafe/overview.htm [nhtsa.gov] : "Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) is the sales weighted average fuel economy [snip] " Scroll down to "How is a manufacturer’s CAFE determined for a given model year?" for more details.
Re:Here's an idea (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Just a game (Score:4, Informative)
Yes. Also 54 seemed kinda high so I looked into it and it looks like CAFE still uses outdated MPG ratings which are different from what goes on the current EPA sticker rating. Turns out the way they are rating MPG for CAFE standards is about 20% over current consumer EPA ratings [time.com].
So while CAFE will be 54mpg, for the rating system consumers see will probably be closer to 54 * 0.80 = 43mpg.
In my opinion, the current EPA rating is still a little optimistic so real world drivers will probably only see 35-40mpg with current driving habits.
Re:Better mileage (Score:3, Informative)
I usually get at least 35mpg in severely congested traffic (like roads filled with stop lights) if not >~40mpg on the side streets without too many stops.
My car is not spartan by any measure (electrically adjustable leather seats with heaters, heated mirrors, sun(and moon)roof, satellite radio, traction control, ABS, full airbag compliment, 6 disc changer, large trunk, and in-dash navigation). It is a stick shift (by choice, auto is available). My car is not especially light either at about 3200 lbs curb weight but it's not especially heavy either which gives it good handling in snow and ice (I live in the northern US).
If I went to buy this again in 2011 (@ ~$22-24K fully loaded) it is less than the cost of the Prius ($25-30K) or the Volt (@ ~40K) and I can refuel anywhere, my maintenance is fantastically cheaper and I don't have to wait for it to charge.
Granted, it's not using electricity, but the expenditure in fuel is about the same over the whole tank (Volt is electric only for the first X miles, then gas). This is without me having to press any buttons to switch between "Normal" driving and "Eco" driving. I don't have to do squat to enjoy it.
Why we (as Americans) get typically suck on "electric" being the only way to go "Green" or "cheaper" I will never understand. And as a matter of fact, the VW's were the only non-hybrid or fully electric cars to qualify for that green tax credit.
Enjoy!