Deanh Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Plug-in hybrids are going to skew CAFE high. They are going to give the Volt a 100 m.p.g. rating. That thing is going to sell in California, so my bet is this is going to be a non-event. I just hope Ford has something similar soon. I don't have much faith in Eco-boost, sorry to say. imagine all that clean coal being burnt to produce additional electricity..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 sidebar...does bama know that some cars that get 35mpg are not as clean as some that get 25........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Extreme4x4 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 It doesn't matter. The greenies spent a lot of money to help get him elected. Its time to pay up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpd80 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 sidebar...does bama know that some cars that get 35mpg are not as clean as some that get 25........... On Toyota's website they have graphs showing that their cars already achieve a CAFE of 36 mpg. If Toyota is at that level, the cost burden of meeting the 2020 levels will be far less than that of D3. Makes you wonder what the outcome of this social exercise will be..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
92merc Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 On Toyota's website they have graphs showing that their cars already achieve a CAFE of 36 mpg.If Toyota is at that level, the cost burden of meeting the 2020 levels will be far less than that of D3. Makes you wonder what the outcome of this social exercise will be..... I remember a few years back, I saw statistics on the Ford Focus. While it wasn't getting "award winning" fuel mileage, it was emitting less pollution than a Toyota Prius. So all things aren't equal. But later Ford re-programmed the Focus for better mileage, sacrificing some pollution ability. No leave it to the government. They want both. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I remember a few years back, I saw statistics on the Ford Focus. While it wasn't getting "award winning" fuel mileage, it was emitting less pollution than a Toyota Prius. So all things aren't equal. But later Ford re-programmed the Focus for better mileage, sacrificing some pollution ability. No leave it to the government. They want both. THAT was my pointexactly....what do we want, cleaner air, better MPG's, less foreign oil dependency...seems its a COMPROMISE the politicians are completely oblivious too.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 What will Arnie drive in California when Hummers get banned from his State by 35 MPG EPA rules and regulations? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) What will Arnie drive in California when Hummers get banned from his State by 35 MPG EPA rules and regulations? I think a BETTER bet would be to base taxes and DMV fees on a cars "cleanliness'.....co-erse people into smaller cars, and NO "hey just pay the penalty up front" hall passes..... Edited January 27, 2009 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I tink a BETTER bet would be to base taxes and DMV fees on a cars "cleanliness'.....co-erse people into smaller cars, and NO "hey just pay the penalty up front" hall passes..... I only wash my cars about once a year, it rains 340 days a year in the UK which helps to keep them clean. Gotta say l am glad l don't live in California if you tax dirty cars l would end up skint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I only wash my cars about once a year, it rains 340 days a year in the UK which helps to keep them clean. Gotta say l am glad l don't live in California if you tax dirty cars l would end up skint. +1...Mini is black and sits out front....on the plus side though, it makes my house look bigger.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I think a BETTER bet would be to base taxes and DMV fees on a cars "cleanliness'.....co-erse people into smaller cars, and NO "hey just pay the penalty up front" hall passes..... Umm..taxes and DMV fees are basically already based on a car's cleanliness. People pay tax on the fuel they use. The less-efficient and more polluting vehicle will use more fuel and the owner will pay more fuel tax. And light trucks usually cost more to register than cars do. It's not an exact science, but what you are proposing already very much happens through existing means. The last thing we need to do is complicate the tax code even more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark B. Morrow Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) What will Arnie drive in California when Hummers get banned from his State by 35 MPG EPA rules and regulations? I read that he is having his HUMMER converted to a Hybrid by the guy who did Neil Young's '59 Lincoln Mark V. http://www.lincvolt.com/ Edited January 27, 2009 by Mark B. Morrow Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 Umm..taxes and DMV fees are basically already based on a car's cleanliness. People pay tax on the fuel they use. The less-efficient and more polluting vehicle will use more fuel and the owner will pay more fuel tax. And light trucks usually cost more to register than cars do. It's not an exact science, but what you are proposing already very much happens through existing means. The last thing we need to do is complicate the tax code even more. nope, I'm talking purely the taxes on the selling price...if the car doesn't measure up add penalties, DMV ( at least here is based on selling price too, but its different state to state ) is based on SP too, so my thinking ( flawed as you all know ) is if a "dirty" car ends up costing as much as a more expensive "costlier' car then people would be swayed no?....probably too simplistic...and PS, like I said less efficient does not instantly mean more polluting.........and less polluting does not mean more efficient ( at least in MPG terms ) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 nope, I'm talking purely the taxes on the selling price...if the car doesn't measure up add penalties, DMV ( at least here is based on selling price too, but its different state to state ) is based on SP too, so my thinking ( flawed as you all know ) is if a "dirty" car ends up costing as much as a more expensive "costlier' car then people would be swayed no?....probably too simplistic...and PS, like I said less efficient does not instantly mean more polluting.........and less polluting does not mean more efficient ( at least in MPG terms ) People are already being swayed away from "polluting" cars. How were sales of Expeditions and F-150's at your dealership when gasoline was $4+ a gallon? Not very good, huh? The current system already works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 (edited) People are already being swayed away from "polluting" cars. How were sales of Expeditions and F-150's at your dealership when gasoline was $4+ a gallon? Not very good, huh? The current system already works. I'm talking specifically cars...although there could be seperate parameters with comparable SUV's....ie, higher fees on the dirtier of say the Landcruiser, Expedition or Tahoe....get my drift? ie, hey they cost the same but the "XYZ" fee is higher on the tahoe..... Edited January 28, 2009 by Deanh Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ford Jellymoulds Posted January 27, 2009 Share Posted January 27, 2009 I read that he is having his HUMMER converted to a Hybrid by the guy who did Neil Young's '59 Lincoln Mark V.http://www.lincvolt.com/ Sod the Volt rubbish or Hummer, that Lincoln Continental is magic why can't Lincoln make something like that today gotta say l would buy one if Lincoln sold a R/H version in UK. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 What will Arnie drive in California when Hummers get banned from his State by 35 MPG EPA rules and regulations? More than 35, my friend. California, meanwhile, has battled with auto companies to impose even stiffer regulations that would force carmakers to achieve a fleetwide 35.7 mpg by 2016 and 42.5 mpg in 2020. LINK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 More than 35, my friend. LINK my answer would be better public transport, better traffic flow...and LESS F"IN TRAFFIC LIGHTS!....ridiculous here, even worse on a motorcycle as the detectors don't go off....running red lights makes me feel rebelious though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deanh Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 More than 35, my friend. LINK unfortunately pioneer, with California having the population here that they do, and the % they take up of the car buying market, the "lawmakers" as such have WAY too much power and leverage to FORCE the manufacturers to do as they say....manipulation 101.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bored of Pisteon Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 (edited) oops... Wrong thread! Edited January 28, 2009 by Bored of Pisteon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pioneer Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 unfortunately pioneer, with California having the population here that they do, and the % they take up of the car buying market, the "lawmakers" as such have WAY too much power and leverage to FORCE the manufacturers to do as they say....manipulation 101.... You can only force so much. When the consumer walks into the showroom in a few years and sees the higher prices due to the technology needed to reach the newer requirements, who are they going to blame? The automaker, the dealer, or the politicians? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RangerM Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 You can only force so much. When the consumer walks into the showroom in a few years and sees the higher prices due to the technology needed to reach the newer requirements, who are they going to blame? The automaker, the dealer, or the politicians? Who do the people blame now for the increased price of food: the food companies, the grocery store, or the food wasted to make ethanol (read: politicians)? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noah Harbinger Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 One step closer to sleeping on a cot in the factory dorm, and riding a bicycle to get your groceries. Liberal nirvana... Little paranoid there, dontcha think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickF1011 Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 I'm taliking specifically cars...although there could be seperate parameters with comparable SUV's....ie, higher fees on the dirtier of say the Landcruiser, Expedition or Tahoe....get my drift? ie, hey they cost the same but the "XYZ" fee is higher on the tahoe..... We already pay different taxes just for cars also. The guy driving the inefficient V8 Mustang GT is going to pay a lot more in fuel taxes per mile driven than the guy driving a 4 cylinder Focus. Point is, a system is already in place that is based on the amount of fuel consumed. Any measure beyond that will simply become a complicated mess with undoubted loopholes every which direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RichardJensen Posted January 28, 2009 Share Posted January 28, 2009 But did not the Supreme Court, in the same ruling, state that only the Feds can regulate CO2? Not exactly... What happens is the EPA can either regulate CO2 emissions or allow CARB to regulate CO2 emissions. I believe the CAFE standards got moved from NHTSA to the EPA as part of the law that gave us the 35mpg by 2020 requirement. Anywho.... The EPA denied CARB's waiver and incorporated the bulk of CARB's regs into the proposed 2015 timeline. Therefore, those who are protesting this series of decisions are, effectively, protesting WHO is implementing the new standards. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.