Obama finalizes auto mileage mandate

[Papageorgio]

That's unlikely to happen. Unless there's a breakthrough in materials tech that makes carbon fiber and the like incredibly cheap.

Besides, the focus is now taken away from these lighter expensive materials, aerodynamics, and engine efficiency performance and puts it squarely in the lap of electric or hydrogen vehicles.

And this is exactly where Obama wants it. No more hydrocarbons.

Is it worth the extra loss of life or greater risk of severe injuries?

Why do you assume better mileage cars will be more dangerous?

Because they will need to use lighter parts to get better mileage. Less weight, better mileage.

 

[AmyNation]

Is it worth the extra loss of life or greater risk of severe injuries?

Why do you assume better mileage cars will be more dangerous?

Because they will need to use lighter parts to get better mileage. Less weight, better mileage.

That's true, but it's been my experience that newer lighter cars have far more safty features than older cars.

 

[IGetItAlready]

Great, a clown that doesn't know jack shit about cars or fuel is setting standards.....

Im going to go out on a limb, and say he most likely consulted with experts.

Yeah, he's consulted a lot of experts over the past four years.
The problem is he rarely listens to them.
Ask all his former economic advisers.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Obama finalizes auto mileage mandate
The Hill ^ | August 28, 2012 | Ben Geman & Keith Laing
Obama finalizes auto mileage mandate - The Hill's E2-Wire

The Obama administration issued final rules Tuesday that require a major boost in vehicle mileage standards, highlighting a clash with Mitt Romney as the GOP convention gets under way.



The Transportation Department and Environmental Protection Agency announced joint mileage and carbon emissions rules for model years 2017 through 2025 that will eventually force automakers to meet a standard equivalent to 54.5 miles per gallon.



Administration officials have made the rules a cornerstone of their energy agenda, noting that alongside earlier 2012-2016 rules, the mandate will eventually save consumers an estimated $1.7 trillion in fuel costs and save 12 billion barrels of oil.

“These fuel standards represent the single most important step we’ve ever taken to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” President Obama said in a statement Tuesday, noting that by 2025 cars will get almost twice the mileage they provide today.

“It’ll strengthen our nation's energy security, it's good for middle class families and it will help create an economy built to last,” Obama said.

The rules will provide an average fuel cost savings of more than $8,000 by 2025 over the lifetime of a vehicle, according to the White House. The administration estimates the auto mileage program will cut oil U.S. consumption by more than 2 million barrels a day by 2025, which the White House emphasized as a way to further curb reliance on OPEC.

A draft of the rules late last year estimated they would cost the auto industry a total of $157 billion to make cars and light trucks that comply with the tougher standards.

The rules drew a quick rebuke from the Romney campaign, which emphasized higher upfront costs for consumers buying vehicles that meet the new requirements.

Last year, in the draft of the proposal, the administration estimated that the 2017-2025 rules would add costs that reach an average of $2,000 per new vehicle in 2025.

“Governor Romney opposes the extreme standards that President Obama has imposed, which will limit the choices available to American families. The President tells voters that his regulations will save them thousands of dollars at the pump, but always forgets to mention that the savings will be wiped out by having to pay thousands of dollars more upfront for unproven technology that they may not even want,” Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said in a statement.

Environmental groups cheered the standards.

“This is truly a watershed moment. Twenty years from now we’ll be looking back on this as the day we chose innovation over stagnation,” said Michelle Robinson, director of the clean vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

But the announcement follows sharp criticism of the gas-mileage standards by some Capitol Hill Republicans, in particular House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.).

Issa has criticized the rules’ effect on vehicle costs, and he has suggested that the Obama administration used leverage from the bailouts of U.S. auto companies in 2008 and 2009 to convince them to back the new rules.

"Increased fuel efficiency is a goal all parties support — but pursuing new standards that increase vehicle cost and decrease vehicle safety is dangerous for consumers and unacceptable from regulators," he said in a statement earlier in August.

The trade association for the U.S. auto industry, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said Tuesday that new gas-mileage standards unveiled would level the playing field for car companies that have been dealing with differing state rules.

"The Auto Alliance has called for a single, national program because conflicting requirements from several regulatory bodies raise costs, ultimately taking money out of consumers' pockets and hurting sales," the group said in a statement. "We all want to get more fuel-efficient autos on our roads, and a single, national program with a strong midterm review helps us get closer to that shared goal."

However, the auto alliance added that the market's reaction to fuel-efficient cars is still to be determined.

"After years of billion-dollar investments by automakers, consumers have a lot of choice in fuel-efficient cars and light trucks, and automakers are working to sell these high-mileage vehicles in high volumes," the group said. "Compliance with higher fuel-economy standards is based on sales, not what we put on showroom floors."

Administration officials called the rules a landmark step in efforts to battle global warming.

“Combined, the Administration’s standards will cut greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light trucks in half by 2025, reducing emissions by 6 billion metric tons over the life of the program – more than the total amount of carbon dioxide emitted by the United States in 2010,” the White House said.

The rules include incentives for electric vehicles, hybrid systems in large pick-up trucks, and other technologies.

The White House said the standards are achievable but also allow a “mid-term evaluation” that could enable the Transportation Department and EPA to make adjustments.

Officials said the standards will boost industry innovation, and argue that a range of technologies are already available, such as advanced engines and transmissions, air conditioning improvements, weight reductions, better aerodynamics and other steps.

I wonder why you didn't mention that GM is idling the Volt plant, again. This is the second time this year.

Obama Raises CAFE Standards; GM Suspends Volt Production - Hit & Run : Reason.com

 

[gallantwarrior]

..

I was gonna ask where they put the groceries, but if O'bozo is reelected, we won't be able to afford groceries, so no need to put them some place.

 

[Mr. H.]

Is it worth the extra loss of life or greater risk of severe injuries?

Why do you assume better mileage cars will be more dangerous?

Because they will need to use lighter parts to get better mileage. Less weight, better mileage.

I just explained that the sacrifice will not be safety, it will be hydrocarbons.

The auto industry has tweaked just about every ounce of weight and every erg of aerodynamic resistance out of vehicles.

Sure, power plants could be more efficient, but at the expense of horsepower.
Regarding safety, that's pretty much a standard and will remain so.

No- the last bastion of mileage efficiency rests with the abandonment of hydrocarbons.

And, like I also mentioned- this is Obama's goal.

 

[Mr. H.]

Well, Obama's goal as well as Old Rocks'.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why do you assume better mileage cars will be more dangerous?

Because they will need to use lighter parts to get better mileage. Less weight, better mileage.

I just explained that the sacrifice will not be safety, it will be hydrocarbons.

The auto industry has tweaked just about every ounce of weight and every erg of aerodynamic resistance out of vehicles.

Sure, power plants could be more efficient, but at the expense of horsepower.
Regarding safety, that's pretty much a standard and will remain so.

No- the last bastion of mileage efficiency rests with the abandonment of hyrrocarbons.

And, like I also mentioned- this is Obama's goal.

Yes, it is Obama's goal. The problem is that, since this is actually impossible, they will be forced to compromise safety, and the government will pretend they aren't.

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]A number of studies have documented the lethal consequences of requiring carmakers to improve fuel standards.[/SIZE][/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]* According to a 2003 NHTSA study, when a vehicle is reduced by 100 pounds the estimated fatality rate increases as much as 5.63 percent for light cars weighing less than 2,950 pounds, 4.70 percent for heavier cars weighing over 2,950 pounds and 3.06 percent for light trucks. Between model years 1996 and 1999, these rates translated into additional traffic fatalities of 13,608 for light cars, 10,884 for heavier cars and 14,705 for light trucks.12[/SIZE][/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]* A 2001 National Academy of Sciences panel found that constraining automobile manufacturers to produce smaller, lighter vehicles in the 1970s and early 1980s "probably resulted in an additional 1,300 to 2,600 traffic fatalities in 1993."13

* An extensive 1999 USA Today analysis of crash data found that since CAFE went into effect in 1978, 46,000 people died in crashes they otherwise would have survived, had they been in bigger, heavier vehicles. This, according to a 1999 USA Today analysis of crash data since 1975, roughly figures to be 7,700 deaths for every mile per gallon gained in fuel economy standards.14[/SIZE][/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]* The USA Today report also said smaller cars - such as the Chevrolet Cavalier or Dodge Neon - accounted for 12,144 fatalities or 37 percent of vehicle deaths in 1997, though such cars comprised only 18 percent of all vehicles.15[/SIZE][/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]* A 1989 Harvard-Brookings study estimated CAFE "to be responsible for 2,200-3,900 excess occupant fatalities over ten years of a given [car] model years' use." Moreover, the researchers estimated between 11,000 and 19,500 occupants would suffer serious but nonfatal crash injuries as a result of CAFE.16[/SIZE][/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]* The same Harvard-Brookings study found CAFE had resulted in a 500-pound weight reduction of the average car. As a result, occupants were put at a 14 to 27 percent greater risk of traffic death.17 [/SIZE][/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]* Passengers in small cars die at a much higher rate when involved in traffic accidents with large cars. Traffic safety expert Dr. Leonard Evans estimates that drivers in lighter cars may be 12 times as likely to be killed in a crash when the other vehicle is twice as heavy as the lighter car.18[/SIZE][/FONT]

CAFE Standards Kill: Congress' Regulatory Solution to Foreign Oil Dependence Comes at a Steep Price

 

[Jroc]

I'm for high mileage standards, but am a bit leery as to how they'll be attained.

No way we get a 58 MPG! By 2025, that’s crazy talk. If Obama and the libs get their way we'll be riding around on motor scooters and taking mass transit like good little sheep. $4.00 a gallon gas, just were the libs want it

 

[Papageorgio]

Why do you assume better mileage cars will be more dangerous?

Because they will need to use lighter parts to get better mileage. Less weight, better mileage.

That's true, but it's been my experience that newer lighter cars have far more safty features than older cars.

Safety features have improved. However the laws of physics over rule your experience.

http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr041409.html

The size and weight of a vehicle matters, it matters a lot.

 

[Mr. H.]

Diesel vehicles, albeit rather compact, already get 58 mpg. Trouble is diesel has not been accepted or adopted en masse by U.S. automakers.

These CAFE standards are average fleet numbers.

Considering that the EIA has for decades consistently forcast hydrocarbons to be the dominant world source of energy to 2030, the only solution for manufacturers is to make a quantum jump to electric vehicles and/or hydrogen powered vehicles.

This will happen if Obama is re-elected, and the succeeding Presidents are also left wing Marxist Socialist anti-market enviro-cock jobs.

Ya never know.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Diesel vehicles, albeit rather compact, already get 58 mpg. Trouble is diesel has not been accepted or adopted en masse by U.S. automakers.

These CAFE standards are average fleet numbers.

Considering that the EIA has for decades consistently forcast hydrocarbons to be the dominant world source of energy to 2030, the only solution for manufacturers is to make a quantum jump to electric vehicles and/or hydrogen powered vehicles.

This will happen if Obama is re-elected, and the succeeding Presidents are also left wing Marxist Socialist anti-market enviro-cock jobs.

Ya never know.

There is exactly one car on sale in the US that meets the 58 MPG standard. The reason European cars are able to produce the wonderful gas mileage you are talking about is that they have less stringent safety standards. Stop pretending you understand the issues and admit that the only way to get high mileage cars is to kill more people.

 

[Luissa]

Diesel vehicles, albeit rather compact, already get 58 mpg. Trouble is diesel has not been accepted or adopted en masse by U.S. automakers.

These CAFE standards are average fleet numbers.

Considering that the EIA has for decades consistently forcast hydrocarbons to be the dominant world source of energy to 2030, the only solution for manufacturers is to make a quantum jump to electric vehicles and/or hydrogen powered vehicles.

This will happen if Obama is re-elected, and the succeeding Presidents are also left wing Marxist Socialist anti-market enviro-cock jobs.

Ya never know.

There is exactly one car on sale in the US that meets the 58 MPG standard. The reason European cars are able to produce the wonderful gas mileage you are talking about is that they have less stringent safety standards. Stop pretending you understand the issues and admit that the only way to get high mileage cars is to kill more people.

Are you serious?
I don't think you know what you are talking about.

 

[Luissa]

Diesel vehicles, albeit rather compact, already get 58 mpg. Trouble is diesel has not been accepted or adopted en masse by U.S. automakers.

These CAFE standards are average fleet numbers.

Considering that the EIA has for decades consistently forcast hydrocarbons to be the dominant world source of energy to 2030, the only solution for manufacturers is to make a quantum jump to electric vehicles and/or hydrogen powered vehicles.

This will happen if Obama is re-elected, and the succeeding Presidents are also left wing Marxist Socialist anti-market enviro-cock jobs.

Ya never know.

There is exactly one car on sale in the US that meets the 58 MPG standard. The reason European cars are able to produce the wonderful gas mileage you are talking about is that they have less stringent safety standards. Stop pretending you understand the issues and admit that the only way to get high mileage cars is to kill more people.

I would like you to show me where more people per capita are dying in say United Kingdom and Germany from automobile accidents. Oh! Wait, you can't.
They might have different safety standards, but they aren't killing more people.

 

[Politico]

This mandate is the same pablum bullshit as all the others that evreyone laps up. They are all strung out over some ridiculous timeframe and based on an overall average. It gives the car companies and out and politicians a chance to look good.

 

[Mr. H.]

Well, I'll be darned... check it out.

Obama Fuel-Economy Rule Gives Sweeteners to Honda, Tesla - Yahoo! Finance

Honda Motor Co. (7267), which last year complained that a proposed fuel-economy rule was unfair to non- U.S. automakers, got a boost when the final version added extra credits for sellers of natural gas-powered vehicles.

Honda, based in Tokyo, is the only automaker selling compressed natural gas-powered cars to U.S. drivers and will be able to use the credits to meet the fuel-economy standards.

I heartily endorse this natural gas credit.

 

[Mr. H.]

Diesel vehicles, albeit rather compact, already get 58 mpg. Trouble is diesel has not been accepted or adopted en masse by U.S. automakers.

These CAFE standards are average fleet numbers.

Considering that the EIA has for decades consistently forcast hydrocarbons to be the dominant world source of energy to 2030, the only solution for manufacturers is to make a quantum jump to electric vehicles and/or hydrogen powered vehicles.

This will happen if Obama is re-elected, and the succeeding Presidents are also left wing Marxist Socialist anti-market enviro-cock jobs.

Ya never know.

There is exactly one car on sale in the US that meets the 58 MPG standard. The reason European cars are able to produce the wonderful gas mileage you are talking about is that they have less stringent safety standards. Stop pretending you understand the issues and admit that the only way to get high mileage cars is to kill more people.

My bad. For the past 3 years I assumed we've all been pretending to understands the issues.

 

[Old Rocks]

Diesel vehicles, albeit rather compact, already get 58 mpg. Trouble is diesel has not been accepted or adopted en masse by U.S. automakers.

These CAFE standards are average fleet numbers.

Considering that the EIA has for decades consistently forcast hydrocarbons to be the dominant world source of energy to 2030, the only solution for manufacturers is to make a quantum jump to electric vehicles and/or hydrogen powered vehicles.

This will happen if Obama is re-elected, and the succeeding Presidents are also left wing Marxist Socialist anti-market enviro-cock jobs.

Ya never know.

Still don't understand why they are not using diesel engines in the hybrids. That would really put the mileage up there.

 

[Katzndogz]

That car is not an SUV. It's a small car the size of a Prius.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Diesel vehicles, albeit rather compact, already get 58 mpg. Trouble is diesel has not been accepted or adopted en masse by U.S. automakers.

These CAFE standards are average fleet numbers.

Considering that the EIA has for decades consistently forcast hydrocarbons to be the dominant world source of energy to 2030, the only solution for manufacturers is to make a quantum jump to electric vehicles and/or hydrogen powered vehicles.

This will happen if Obama is re-elected, and the succeeding Presidents are also left wing Marxist Socialist anti-market enviro-cock jobs.

Ya never know.

There is exactly one car on sale in the US that meets the 58 MPG standard. The reason European cars are able to produce the wonderful gas mileage you are talking about is that they have less stringent safety standards. Stop pretending you understand the issues and admit that the only way to get high mileage cars is to kill more people.

Are you serious?
I don't think you know what you are talking about.

What part do you think I don't know what I am talking about? The safety standards? Europe does not require the same side impact testing, rear impact testing, and they only require the full on frontal impact testing, not the newer 25% frontal standards we have in the US. Additionally, they do not require cars to protect people who do not where seat belts, have lower roll over standards, and have different rules for the placement, and protection, of crash test dummies. The US just started testing using dummies that are specifically designed to simulate the average adult female in the driver seat. All of this adds weight to the car, and thus reduces gas mileage.

This site is uglier than fuck, but it shows the differences.

Everything Crash - Crash Testing Safety Standards for Europe & the USA