REPORT: Obama to announce new CAFE standards tomorrow, require 34 mpg standard

[taxman100]

This will also be coupled with large increases in the gasoline tax, either directly, or indirectly through the horrid "cap and trade" rubbish.

 

The next effect is all you can buy is little crackerbox cars, but in total you will be spending the same (or more) in total for gasoline, as the price increases will more than offset the increased efficiency.

 

Welcome to Amerika, Comrade!

[Deanh]

This will also be coupled with large increases in the gasoline tax, either directly, or indirectly through the horrid "cap and trade" rubbish.

 

The next effect is all you can buy is little crackerbox cars, but in total you will be spending the same (or more) in total for gasoline, as the price increases will more than offset the increased efficiency.

 

Welcome to Amerika, Comrade!

we counter oil dependence with more economical and costly to manufacture cars...they counter less demand with higher prices to maintain their own profits.....big game of chess really...and the only loser is the consumer....

[atomaro]

All of this is nice...until a different President comes in and changes everything. Sorry Obama, you can't borrow any more money from me to fund GM's R&D...I'm broke.

[xr7g428]

heres another thing...pretty soon that economical, air friendly, great MPG world savior, built to govt regulations will be as costly as the new SHO....trying to meet ludicrous standards is NOT cheap....political whims come at a cost...TO NOT ONLY THE MANUFACTURER but the Joe Schmoe buyer as well....more $ means less overall sales, so costs ( along with development expenditure ) have to raise to remain economically viable.....but hey, $40k for a frugal sub-compact sounds just peachy doesn't it?

 

Dean, meeting these standards is cheap. Just throw a 998cc engine in what ever and your there. Physics is pretty clear on this. a Moped will meet the CO2 standards today. The way to meet the standard is to build cars that Americans would NEVER buy unless they are forced.

 

The other tax that is going unmentioned here is the gas guzzler tax. As they adjust CAFE, the threshold for the gas guzzler tax also falls. We already have a form of carbon tax its just called a different name.

[LSFan00]

heres another thing...pretty soon that economical, air friendly, great MPG world savior, built to govt regulations will be as costly as the new SHO....trying to meet ludicrous standards is NOT cheap....political whims come at a cost...TO NOT ONLY THE MANUFACTURER but the Joe Schmoe buyer as well....more $ means less overall sales, so costs ( along with development expenditure ) have to raise to remain economically viable.....but hey, $40k for a frugal sub-compact sounds just peachy doesn't it?

 

Bonjour monsieur. Bien venue a Paris.

 

I propose that Ford produce a few of these types of models, pay a (few) thousand "taxicab" drivers in NY/LA to use them, and voila, Cafe problem solved. Viva la bonne vie!

 

(Note to moderator not named Nick: this is a joke, not to be taken seriously. Have a nice day!)

[Critic]

Bonjour monsieur. Bien venue a Paris.

 

I propose that Ford produce a few of these types of models, pay a (few) thousand "taxicab" drivers in NY/LA to use them, and voila, Cafe problem solved. Viva la bonne vie!

 

(Note to moderator not named Nick: this is a joke, not to be taken seriously. Have a nice day!)

 

BAN HIM PLEASE

[ford4v429]

Ive said it before...its looking like 1971 again- anyone wanting a performance car better get one quick- in a few years the v8 camaro/challenger/mustang is gonna be nonexistant or very pricey...but unlike the early 70's I'm guessing the 'good cars' are gonna go up in value, not down...unless the pres decides to round up ALL the pre 2015 cars and crush them- with the way things are going, wouldnt be 'impossible' for them to try such a thing in our own best interests...

 

Pinto may be unlikely to return, but give it another 'small horse' name, something not associated with fiery explosions, I wont be at all suprised...

[Mark8LSC CE0464]

I am amazed that a man who can't speak without a teleprompter has managed to cause so much damage to our nation in such a small window of time....

 

Note to obama, the automakers have run out of money supporting your union and your CAFE standards.

Edited May 19, 2009 by RichardJensen
see provocations post

[the_spaniard]

Unlikely to affect my future vehicle purchases negatively, so no biggie.

[Critic]

.

Edited May 19, 2009 by RichardJensen
redundant

[jpd80]

The current EPA economy figures quoted for all vehicles are actually understated 20%.

 

Many people do not know that:

The CAFE figures used on the MSRP are not the figures CAFE uses to calculate fleet average,

they are reduced 20% from actual results to better reflect what drivers can expect.

This was explained on a recent interview on Autoline Detroit TV

[Critic]

US auto companies fought significant increases in fuel standards for decades before Congress and the Bush administration agreed to stricter targets in 2007. Some vehicles, most made by overseas manufacturers, already meet or exceed the standards set to be proposed

Edited May 19, 2009 by Critic
incendiary and off topic

[RichardJensen]

The current EPA economy figures quoted for all vehicles are actually understated 20%.

 

Many people do not know that:

The CAFE figures used on the MSRP are not the figures CAFE uses to calculate fleet average,

they are reduced 20% from actual results to better reflect what drivers can expect.

This was explained on a recent interview on Autoline Detroit TV

One minor correction: It's an approximate 20%.

 

The story:

 

The original fuel economy test regimen was codified into law as the basis of the CAFE requirement.

 

The original fuel economy test regimen was subsequently given a 'correcting factor' of 10% city & 22% highway, or .1 * .55 + .22 * .45, or 15.4% overall (CAFE is fixed at a 45% city/55% highway ratio).

 

Subsequently, the fuel economy testing method was changed, and combined mileage was reduced, on average, another 10%.

 

So, how do you find out official CAFE rating of your vehicle?

 

Let's do the 2010 Fusion S: 23MPG city, 34MPG highway

 

23 * .55 + 34 * .45 = 28MPG

 

28MPG / .9 = 31MPG

 

31MPG / .846 = 37MPG.

 

So, per this scratchpad analysis, the 2010 Fusion already exceeds the 2015 35MPG standard.

 

----

 

NB: The 10% reduction from the old EPA method to the current method is just an estimate.

 

So how is the CAFE economy calculated? Simple. The two fuel economy test procedures used to calculate the CAFE mileage are still performed, but they are now performed with three additional tests. Therefore the CAFE mileage can still be extracted from the test data.

Edited May 19, 2009 by RichardJensen

[jpd80]

One minor correction: It's an approximate 20%.

 

The story:

 

The original fuel economy test regimen was codified into law as the basis of the CAFE requirement.

 

The original fuel economy test regimen was subsequently given a 'correcting factor' of 10% city & 22% highway, or .1 * .55 + .22 * .45, or 15.4% overall (CAFE is fixed at a 45% city/55% highway ratio).

 

Subsequently, the fuel economy testing method was changed, and combined mileage was reduced, on average, another 10%.

 

So, how do you find out official CAFE rating of your vehicle?

 

Let's do the 2010 Fusion S: 23MPG city, 34MPG highway

 

23 * .55 + 34 * .45 = 28MPG

 

28MPG / .9 = 31MPG

 

31MPG / .846 = 37MPG.

 

So, per this scratchpad analysis, the 2010 Fusion already exceeds the 2015 35MPG standard.

 

----

 

NB: The 10% reduction from the old EPA method to the current method is just an estimate.

 

So how is the CAFE economy calculated? Simple. The two fuel economy test procedures used to calculate the CAFE mileage are still performed, but they are now performed with three additional tests. Therefore the CAFE mileage can still be extracted from the test data.

 

Thanks Richard, this is what Tom Cackette from the CARB was trying

to explain to John McElroy (Ritchie Cunningham) on Autoline Detroit TV. - LINK to “Bulking Up”

He explains some interesting points on CO2 and fuel economy in gasoline, Diesel and ethanol.

Edited May 19, 2009 by jpd80

[timmm55]

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/04/22/bi...reased-gas-tax/

 

Since Bill Ford is in favor of a gas tax, he must be confident FoMoCo can meet the upcoming demand for fuel efficient cars.

 

Imagine what a different political climate we would have in the mid-east if we had followed Carter's 1979 plan

http://hnn.us/articles/52030.html

 

Sure the gas prices have stabilized, but for how long?

I drive a V8 Mustang GT..... but I'm only a couple of miles from work.

 

Between the Fusion/Hybrid, Focus and the upcoming Fiesta, KA and future Focus....I think Ford will do well. And like they do in Europe Ford actually makes $$$ on small cars.

[calypsocoral]

42mpg by 2016!?! Is he Nucking Futs?

 

To accomplish that, an automaker's ENTIRE FLEET has to be hybridized or electric. Think about how much those complex systems add to the price of a new car. Even a compact hybrid costs more than a gas-only mid-size. Why bother with that when we could all just pick up a pre-owned car, which offers more space and better value?

 

If the recession and the public's current resistance to buying a new car doesn't sink the auto industry, this sure as hell will.

[jpd80]

42mpg by 2016!?! Is he Nucking Futs?

 

To accomplish that, an automaker's ENTIRE FLEET has to be hybridized or electric. Think about how much those complex systems add to the price of a new car. Even a compact hybrid costs more than a gas-only mid-size. Why bother with that when we could all just pick up a pre-owned car, which offers more space and better value?

 

If the recession and the public's current resistance to buying a new car doesn't sink the auto industry, this sure as hell will.

It's trickery with numbers.

The uncorrected CAFE test figures are roughly 20% higher than what's posted on windshields.

[lfeg]

Along with this, we all must remember:

CO2 is now considered to be a regulated emission. Standards are being written. Get ready for a wild ride, because even fairy farts may produce too much CO2 when burned!

The carbon cap and trade bonanza is working its way through the house. (called the "green" energy bill) From the numbers I have seen tossed around, this will amount to a carbon based fuel tax of $560,000,000,000.00 per year (only about $1850.00 for every man, woman, and child per year).

And then we will have the surcharge on that due to the "market" for carbon credits. You think the commodities market went crazy with crude last year? Just wait and see what is planned for the market for carbon credits - the feds are planning to auction them off, not just to fuel producers and users, but to speculators also. Al already has a carbon credit trading enterprise set up, and it will be a major profit center.

 

Get ready for $1.00 per kWhr electricity, and much, much higher gasoline and diesel prices. Diesel will likely be hit harder than gasoline, as it is more carbon dense.

[Deanh]

Dean, meeting these standards is cheap. Just throw a 998cc engine in what ever and your there. Physics is pretty clear on this. a Moped will meet the CO2 standards today. The way to meet the standard is to build cars that Americans would NEVER buy unless they are forced.

 

The other tax that is going unmentioned here is the gas guzzler tax. As they adjust CAFE, the threshold for the gas guzzler tax also falls. We already have a form of carbon tax its just called a different name.

not sure I would agree, load the vehicle up and it HAS to work harder...and thus fuel economy goes down the toilet...get ready for cars like the Flintstones, no floors so one can utilize Leg power for overtaking manouvres...

[Noah Harbinger]

It's trickery with numbers.

The uncorrected CAFE test figures are roughly 20% higher than what's posted on windshields.

 

My estimates - taken from the test scores for a 2008 Focus - say that CAFE scores are closer to 30% higher than EPA scores.

 

Plus, any E85-capable vehicle gets hugely exaggerated numbers (an extra 85% on top of its real ratings).

 

So for instance, if the 2010 SHO Taurus, rated at about 20 combined miles per gallon, were E85-capable (probably it isn't, but if it were...), it would have a CAFE score of 48MPG.

 

Now THAT'S change you can believe in!

Edited May 20, 2009 by Noah Harbinger

[theoldwizard]

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2009/04/22/bi...reased-gas-tax/

 

Since Bill Ford is in favor of a gas tax, he must be confident FoMoCo can meet the upcoming demand for fuel efficient cars.

Yep. Ford has one empty (in transition) plant (MAP). Once the new Focus starts production at MAP, WAP will be moth-balled. Well, at least they have not announced what is going in there.

 

Most (all?) of Ford's NA assembly plants have (or will soon have) flexible manufacturing, meaning they can assemble pretty much any size vehicle. I'm certain there is a lot of spare capacity at Oakville.

[RichardJensen]

My estimates - taken from the test scores for a 2008 Focus - say that CAFE scores are closer to 30% higher than EPA scores.

 

Plus, any E85-capable vehicle gets hugely exaggerated numbers (an extra 85% on top of its real ratings).

 

So for instance, if the 2010 SHO Taurus, rated at about 20 combined miles per gallon, were E85-capable (probably it isn't, but if it were...), it would have a CAFE score of 48MPG.

 

Now THAT'S change you can believe in!

I believe jpd misspoke, the sticker ratings are c. 20% lower than the CAFE estimates, and conversely, the CAFE estimates are 30% higher than the sticker ratings....

 

--

 

And I believe the E85 exception is being phased out, although I'm sure all the manufacturers want it to be phased out quite slowly.

[Critic]

My estimates - taken from the test scores for a 2008 Focus - say that CAFE scores are closer to 30% higher than EPA scores.

 

Plus, any E85-capable vehicle gets hugely exaggerated numbers (an extra 85% on top of its real ratings).

 

So for instance, if the 2010 SHO Taurus, rated at about 20 combined miles per gallon, were E85-capable (probably it isn't, but if it were...), it would have a CAFE score of 48MPG.

 

Now THAT'S change you can believe in!

 

Where do you come up with all of this? check your math, a 240% improvement huh??

Edited May 20, 2009 by Critic

[RichardJensen]

Settle down Critic.

 

First of all, the Taurus SHO is c. 26MPG per the CAFE system if it's at 20MPG combined under the current rating.

 

If the engine were E85 capable Ford would get credit for that (at least under the current regime). That credit I believe, assumes that the engine is run on E85 half the time, and since it does not take into account fossil fuels required to produce ethanol, you get a further boost of 1/.425 or 2.35 (or 235%).

 

In fact, Noah may be -underestimating- the CAFE mileage of a putative E85 SHO. But I'm relying on my memory for that).

[Critic]

don't you think it would be better to search a forum for a window sticker that shows what Ford says it would be, than to sit here and tell people it's a 235% increase?