President Barack Obama has his own idea of how to fix the auto industry, and part of that plan is to increase the federal fleet fuel consumption average to 35.5 MPG by 2016. The plan calls for incremental increases of 5% per year from 2012 to 2016, and the standard is nationalized, putting an end to the costly legal battle that California and several other states have been waging to use their own stricter MPG requirements. The plan will supposedly reduce domestic oil consumption by some 1.8 billion barrels, and for the first time the EPA will be required to measure the contaminants coming from a cars exhaust pipe.
Cars will be required to get an average of 42 mpg, and vehicles classified as trucks need to achieve just 26 mpg, only a 2 mpg bump over the current fleet average of 24. American companies will have the hardest time meeting these goals, especially with Chrysler bankrupt and GM teetering on the brink and both under de facto government control. Obama also wants to introduce tax incentives to buying these new green vehicles, as Americans have displayed time and again a preference for big, gas guzzling autos.
Personally, I feel like this initiative will take money and attention away from the development of alternative-energy vehicles as companies struggle to meet the mandate. This means a lot of cheap, tiny cars which American automakers struggle to make even the slimmest profits on. But more than that, politicians should not be allowed to make cars. Do you really want a politician deciding how much headroom you get?
According to Obama, “Everybody wins.” Well, everybody except the people who need or want a bigger car.
PDF 
About Christopher DeMorro
Speaking as a hypermiler who regularly milks 42+ mpg out of my
stick-shift 2005 Pontiac Vibe in mixed driving, I think this is a bad idea. I don’t like big brother limiting my choice in autos.
Speaking as a hypermiler who regularly milks 42+ mpg out of my
stick-shift 2005 Pontiac Vibe in mixed driving, I think this is a bad idea. I don’t like big brother limiting my choice in autos.
Why not set it at 50mpg? Those auto manufacturers have been way too lazy these past few years. Now that the government owns GM I’m sure they’ll crank out some of the best automobiles in the world!
Why not set it at 50mpg? Those auto manufacturers have been way too lazy these past few years. Now that the government owns GM I’m sure they’ll crank out some of the best automobiles in the world!
Why in God’s name would you say that alternative fuels would be out of the running when Hybrids with fuel extending engines are the best hope for reaching those targets and exceeding them. Couple those new technologies with use of carbonfiber body panels and carbonfiber frames and we can be looking at a fleet that gets 150 mpg instead of the puny 35.5 mpg? When you exhibit intentional ignorance I don’t know if you really don’t know or just hope to keep the rest of the country from finding out.
Why in God’s name would you say that alternative fuels would be out of the running when Hybrids with fuel extending engines are the best hope for reaching those targets and exceeding them. Couple those new technologies with use of carbonfiber body panels and carbonfiber frames and we can be looking at a fleet that gets 150 mpg instead of the puny 35.5 mpg? When you exhibit intentional ignorance I don’t know if you really don’t know or just hope to keep the rest of the country from finding out.
Set a maximum speed on all cars at 85mph, then we won’t have any excuses for pointless, big engines on cars.
Highway patrolmen would be out of jobs as well, saving taxpayers more money.
Set a maximum speed on all cars at 85mph, then we won’t have any excuses for pointless, big engines on cars.
Highway patrolmen would be out of jobs as well, saving taxpayers more money.
If GM and Chrysler fail to meet the new CAFE standards, will the feds fine them? Or will NHTSA and the EPA “help” GM and Chrysler to the detriment of Ford, Toyota, BMW, ect?
If GM and Chrysler fail to meet the new CAFE standards, will the feds fine them? Or will NHTSA and the EPA “help” GM and Chrysler to the detriment of Ford, Toyota, BMW, ect?
So instead of trying to get better alternative fuels, we will have to spend money trying to increase fuel economy. This can onlly work if we count all of the miles covered by each class of vehicles, including plug-in electric vehicles, and divide this number by the total gasoline consumed.
Martin K, Try again. We used to have the best schools in the world. Then the government started funding them and also setting regulations along with turning them over to the NEA. We now have the worst schools among any developed nation. This does not bode well for the American automobile industry.
When you listen to anyone from a country that has had government controlled “FREE” medical care, they warn us to not follow that path. It leads to poorer health care. Think about it. If these congressmen and senators can not even keep the country running on a balanced budget, how can they run a car company. (The answer is tax subsidies from the rest of us.)
So instead of trying to get better alternative fuels, we will have to spend money trying to increase fuel economy. This can onlly work if we count all of the miles covered by each class of vehicles, including plug-in electric vehicles, and divide this number by the total gasoline consumed.
Martin K, Try again. We used to have the best schools in the world. Then the government started funding them and also setting regulations along with turning them over to the NEA. We now have the worst schools among any developed nation. This does not bode well for the American automobile industry.
When you listen to anyone from a country that has had government controlled “FREE” medical care, they warn us to not follow that path. It leads to poorer health care. Think about it. If these congressmen and senators can not even keep the country running on a balanced budget, how can they run a car company. (The answer is tax subsidies from the rest of us.)
ChuckL — Wrong. I have friends from free medical care countries and they love it. They actually think care things are much worse here. One of them actually goes home when his family needs care even though he can afford anything they need.
ChuckL — Wrong. I have friends from free medical care countries and they love it. They actually think care things are much worse here. One of them actually goes home when his family needs care even though he can afford anything they need.
So when Bill Maher keeps saying that the American public is fat and stupid, I think it’s a cartoon. Then I read this blog. Somehow Mr Morro believes that cafe restrictions will keep him from driving his Suburban. Perhaps this is part of the ‘pry the gun from my cold dead hands’ or ‘the Democrat socialist party’ thinking. Great, just what we need, unproductive dogma.
CAFE standards say that you only get 2,738 BTUs to move a car one mile instead of the 4,600 BTUs (25 mpg) – so that’s about 80% of one kilowatthour. This is an engineering challenge, not a restriction of personal choices.
The pressure is to satisfy demand for cars – whatever size they may be – while making a giant dent into the $600 billion we send to the Saudi’s every year. This is a classic case of productivity increase, the very engine of wealth creation.
BTW, the idea of your car as an expression of freedom is just some juvenile hallucination in your head. The fact is that your gas consumption fuels terrorism 6000 miles away that just may come back to kill you. I’m not even going to consider the environmental stuff.
How this requires more government funding is beyond me, the technology for this already exists. And no, they’re not tinny little cars, Mr. Imagination. It’s the old fossil fuel companies that will not like this – they’ll start screaming about costs in shifting the infrastructure. They would be the very one’s that want us to keep fighting the wars over this crap.
How does this limit the choice in Autos? I just don’t see the connection. Of course, if you listen to GM it’s just impossible. Then of course, they do it three years later.
So when Bill Maher keeps saying that the American public is fat and stupid, I think it’s a cartoon. Then I read this blog. Somehow Mr Morro believes that cafe restrictions will keep him from driving his Suburban. Perhaps this is part of the ‘pry the gun from my cold dead hands’ or ‘the Democrat socialist party’ thinking. Great, just what we need, unproductive dogma.
CAFE standards say that you only get 2,738 BTUs to move a car one mile instead of the 4,600 BTUs (25 mpg) – so that’s about 80% of one kilowatthour. This is an engineering challenge, not a restriction of personal choices.
The pressure is to satisfy demand for cars – whatever size they may be – while making a giant dent into the $600 billion we send to the Saudi’s every year. This is a classic case of productivity increase, the very engine of wealth creation.
BTW, the idea of your car as an expression of freedom is just some juvenile hallucination in your head. The fact is that your gas consumption fuels terrorism 6000 miles away that just may come back to kill you. I’m not even going to consider the environmental stuff.
How this requires more government funding is beyond me, the technology for this already exists. And no, they’re not tinny little cars, Mr. Imagination. It’s the old fossil fuel companies that will not like this – they’ll start screaming about costs in shifting the infrastructure. They would be the very one’s that want us to keep fighting the wars over this crap.
How does this limit the choice in Autos? I just don’t see the connection. Of course, if you listen to GM it’s just impossible. Then of course, they do it three years later.
Think about it like this; you’re telling two bankrupt auto manufacturers they need to meet a 20% increase in fuel economy standards in seven years. I think that is just going to push one, or both companies (GM, Chrysler) into the grave, taking with them whatever technologies they might have been developing.
Instead of getting hybrids and alt-fuel cars, we are gonna end up driving tiny like Fiats and the like that are all the rage in Europe…not because that’s what people necessarily want to drive, but because of artificially inflated gas prices.
GM and Chrysler have made plenty of mistakes, but I don’t see how this is going to do any good for two automakers who employ hundreds of thousands of people.
As usual, my sarcasm has been filtered out by the comment system.
As usual, my sarcasm has been filtered out by the comment system.
Is innovation a zero sum game? I don’t know if you’re familiar with bankruptcy proceedings, but it involves taking underutilized assets and selling them to people who will make more efficient use of them. This is the American Way, my friend, and if I could fault Obama for one thing, it’s that he’s been propping up moribund incompetents at GM – and Chrysler. I suppose the CAFE standards are an attempt to counterbalance this.
The union babble that jobs would be lost is also non-sense. What’s lost is the right to large pensions and $45/hr rates. Somebody will buy the assets, hire the people at a more reasonable rate, and off we go. That’s how it works. How is an auto worker divinely entitled to more than the average US worker?
Again, there is no economical or physical immediacy whatsoever between increased mileage standards and smaller cars. Yield, or efficiency, breaks that imperative.
Some of the biggest cars in the world come from those countries you refer to (Italy, France, Germany), and they are made for people with money. Sat in a Porsche Cayenne lately, or a Maserati? Yes, people who don’t have money don’t get to drive really big cars. There is no inherent right to drive big expensive cars, it is an earned privilege.
Finally, as the efficiency curve continues to go up, and you will get to drive your Hummer at only a fraction of its energy consumption. However, it will be made by a chinese company, because they pay attention to things like that.
Is innovation a zero sum game? I don’t know if you’re familiar with bankruptcy proceedings, but it involves taking underutilized assets and selling them to people who will make more efficient use of them. This is the American Way, my friend, and if I could fault Obama for one thing, it’s that he’s been propping up moribund incompetents at GM – and Chrysler. I suppose the CAFE standards are an attempt to counterbalance this.
The union babble that jobs would be lost is also non-sense. What’s lost is the right to large pensions and $45/hr rates. Somebody will buy the assets, hire the people at a more reasonable rate, and off we go. That’s how it works. How is an auto worker divinely entitled to more than the average US worker?
Again, there is no economical or physical immediacy whatsoever between increased mileage standards and smaller cars. Yield, or efficiency, breaks that imperative.
Some of the biggest cars in the world come from those countries you refer to (Italy, France, Germany), and they are made for people with money. Sat in a Porsche Cayenne lately, or a Maserati? Yes, people who don’t have money don’t get to drive really big cars. There is no inherent right to drive big expensive cars, it is an earned privilege.
Finally, as the efficiency curve continues to go up, and you will get to drive your Hummer at only a fraction of its energy consumption. However, it will be made by a chinese company, because they pay attention to things like that.
If you can afford a Maserati, you can afford $10 a gallon gas. For the rest of us?
Also, how do you “earn” the privilege to drive a big car?
This isn’t going to increase fuel efficiency because the technology improves, but because cars will get smaller. Again, I refer to Europe, because while they do have some big cars, a majority of the population that does drive gets around in econo-boxes.
35 miles per gallon is an insult to the rest of the world, what is happening here is, the larger american cars are going to be made to do the millage here.
Why on earth make a 3.5 or larger engine do 35 to the gallon, when some of the very best models are already available and do double that now.
You could apply the magnificent German engineering and use it instead of making a new design and wasting billions.
Getting from A to B is what we are all doing, the speed limit is never adheared to, why make an engine produce 200 plus bhp when a 1000cc engine with at least 65 would do the trick and give you more than double 35.
You make me LOL
35 miles per gallon is an insult to the rest of the world, what is happening here is, the larger american cars are going to be made to do the millage here.
Why on earth make a 3.5 or larger engine do 35 to the gallon, when some of the very best models are already available and do double that now.
You could apply the magnificent German engineering and use it instead of making a new design and wasting billions.
Getting from A to B is what we are all doing, the speed limit is never adheared to, why make an engine produce 200 plus bhp when a 1000cc engine with at least 65 would do the trick and give you more than double 35.
You make me LOL