The future used to hold so much promise. Flying cars. Atomic robots. Space travel to distant galaxies. These days though, the future still holds promise, but many problems too, like the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico that will affect the environment for decades even after it is eventually capped. Just the tip of the iceberg, really. And while 15 years may not seem that far away… think about how much different the world is today than is was in 1995.
President Obama is looking ahead though. Whatever your opinion of the guy, he is undeniably trying to shape the country not just for today, but for the future. After securing a 35 mpg standard for cars by 2016, Obama is pushing for even higher standards through 2025.
It doesn’t look like I’ll get flying cars or atomic robots anytime soon, but the 35 mpg standard is an important first step towards getting more fuel efficient cars and new technologies on the road. Some have criticized the 35 mpg standard as not high enough, or with too many loopholes and tax credits. Yet if we didn’t give automakers sufficient time to create and test new technologies, like plug-in hybrids and hydrogen vehicles, we might end up with a bunch of half-baked solutions that would be nothing but headaches.
Obama is already pushing automakers to get back to the table and set up standards for 2017 and beyond. Good move, as the CAFE standard did not budge for 20 years, hovering at 27.5 mpg since 1990. That stagnation in fuel economy standards really seemed to affect the quality of cars as a whole. The mid-to-late 90′s cars, at least to me, seem to be especially bland and problematic. Then came the SUV craze, where automakers could sell millions of gas guzzlers based on truck bodies, as the standards had not moved in a decade.
By calling automakers back to the table, Obama is trying to prevent individual states (California, I’m looking at you) from creating their own standards. The California Air Resource Board was created as a response to the lack of federal mandates regarding fuel efficiency and emissions, so it had its time and place. But the Feds really need to take the lead on this issue, and Obama is.
So let me ask you, what do you think the average car fuel economy could should be in 2025?
Source: Detroit Free Press | Image: BarackObama.com
PDF 
About Christopher DeMorro
Judging by European car makers success with diesels and advanced engine design, I see no reason that cars cannot reach at 60mpg by 2025 and light trucks at 40. These goals are steep but obtainable.
Judging by European car makers success with diesels and advanced engine design, I see no reason that cars cannot reach at 60mpg by 2025 and light trucks at 40. These goals are steep but obtainable.
I think the fuel economy standards should be 75mpg for small cars and 50 for trucks and vans by 2015. This is already doable considering that an amateur tinkerer on your site got over 100mpg with a home modified Honda CRX.
It’s time to get big oil’s bribes away from the CEO’s of the car companies, NO?
Who wouldn’t buy a good car with the above mileage? Motorcycles also need to get with it, with say 100mpg by 2015.
I think the fuel economy standards should be 75mpg for small cars and 50 for trucks and vans by 2015. This is already doable considering that an amateur tinkerer on your site got over 100mpg with a home modified Honda CRX.
It’s time to get big oil’s bribes away from the CEO’s of the car companies, NO?
Who wouldn’t buy a good car with the above mileage? Motorcycles also need to get with it, with say 100mpg by 2015.
Chris, at the rate we are being shoved into a socialist state, the fuel mileage standards will have no meaning. With taxes approaching 80% and energy costs to the average person more than tripled, we won’t be going anyplace even if we could buy the vehicles.
Historically socialism has always destroyed any society that tried it. The cause is that human beings are not truly species centered, but are self-centered.
Read the posts. They are almost completely about what “I” will get from this advance.
The end result is that socialism is only able to redistribute poverty and destroy wealth. Even the wealth of those at the top of the chain is less than they would have enjoyed in a free enterprise society.
Chris, at the rate we are being shoved into a socialist state, the fuel mileage standards will have no meaning. With taxes approaching 80% and energy costs to the average person more than tripled, we won’t be going anyplace even if we could buy the vehicles.
Historically socialism has always destroyed any society that tried it. The cause is that human beings are not truly species centered, but are self-centered.
Read the posts. They are almost completely about what “I” will get from this advance.
The end result is that socialism is only able to redistribute poverty and destroy wealth. Even the wealth of those at the top of the chain is less than they would have enjoyed in a free enterprise society.
50mpg for all cars, minimum.
50mpg for all cars, minimum.
Technology already exists to take us down the road at over 200 mpg so why shouldn’t that be the standard? I believe the engines are diesel hybrids and whether or not they are NOW using lightweight bodies and frames, they can and SHOULD be expected to do so. A body and frame that weighs 1/10th as much with 10 times the strength of steel deserves more than a nod and a raised eyebrow. Quirky, tiny, uncomfortable and ugly body designs do not serve the public interest. They simply turn buyers off and consumers run from such grotesque creations as fast as their legs will carry them. (That’s not planned obsolescence. It’s planned rejection.) Put a car on the market that looks good, keeps them safe and gives them good value for their dollar and consumers will reward the car maker that delivers the goods.
Technology already exists to take us down the road at over 200 mpg so why shouldn’t that be the standard? I believe the engines are diesel hybrids and whether or not they are NOW using lightweight bodies and frames, they can and SHOULD be expected to do so. A body and frame that weighs 1/10th as much with 10 times the strength of steel deserves more than a nod and a raised eyebrow. Quirky, tiny, uncomfortable and ugly body designs do not serve the public interest. They simply turn buyers off and consumers run from such grotesque creations as fast as their legs will carry them. (That’s not planned obsolescence. It’s planned rejection.) Put a car on the market that looks good, keeps them safe and gives them good value for their dollar and consumers will reward the car maker that delivers the goods.
It always amazes me how nobody asks the question why fuel efficiency standards don’t rise on their own. Maybe it’s because we really don’t care about gas mileage that much. Hybrids make up a pathetically low amount of new car sales (less than 5%). Car manufacturers are just responding to the market, and it’s not sending the message, “We want better gas mileage!”
It always amazes me how nobody asks the question why fuel efficiency standards don’t rise on their own. Maybe it’s because we really don’t care about gas mileage that much. Hybrids make up a pathetically low amount of new car sales (less than 5%). Car manufacturers are just responding to the market, and it’s not sending the message, “We want better gas mileage!”