Fuel economy standards are about to go up for the first time in more than 25 years, the Detroit Free Press reports.
The newspaper says the Obama administration today will announce a combined car and light-truck fuel economy standard for the 2011 model year of 27.3 mpg., an increase of about 2%.
Under the plan, new cars will need to meet a 30.2 mpg standard, while light trucks, including SUVs, must hit 24.1 mpg. It reports that automakers say they can meet them easily.
The newspaper calls this a “placeholder” for a much-broader reworking of fuel efficiency rules later this year. The administration is required to set the standard before the end of the month under the 2007 energy law, it says.
The Detroit News reports that the proposal may anger some environmentalists, because the 2011 proposal doesn’t go as far as what the Bush administration proposed in April 2008.
The Free Press says the Bush administration decided not to issue its plan because of the high cost to automakers at a time of economic difficulties.
There’s the problem, no one is pushing for diesel here except the Germans. W/ diesel, it’s easy to surpass CAFE but the problem is automakers are forced to work w/ gasoline engines, not diesel. The government can be nice enough to help them out by cutting the diesel tax to encourage the use of it (like Europe does) but no, it has to be more expensive. W/ gas, you can only go so far. Hybrids also have a limit. However, diesels surpass both in mileage (even beating hybrids in city driving) and there is still room for improvement, unlike in gas. Of course, you also have the enviro-nazis who do whatever they can to try and ban diesel, regardless of the fact they emit less CO2 (if you believe that BS), less emissions/mile, and gets superior mileage. This is another reason why the Germans took a break until they can add more emissions systems to meet EPA and CARB standards. Yet w/ that, they still beat hybrids.
Regardless though, the government should not have a say in what automakers make. There should be no CAFE at all. The people themselves should choose what car they want to drive whether it be a Excursion or Fiesta, the government should not make that choice. The people need to decide, by buying cars, what cars should the automakers make.
By bassman97. April 1st, 2009 at 10:21 amOK, this is all fine and dandy, but after watching an older Top Gear episode where the three guys are in diesel powered vehicles, this whole MPG deal here in the States is a damn joke.
Jeremy: driving a Jag 4 door big car, with a twin turbo V6 diesel, car averaged better than 50 mpg during their “test” put on by the show’s writers. This was including his typical hammering the car, running everything and AC on for 95% of the trip.
I forget the two other guys’ names…the short guy was driving some VW econocrapbox called a “Polo”, little boxy looking sedan with a hatchback. Sort of like a rounded Scion XB, only uglier. That thing got over 70 MPG, but it was a 1.3L 3 cylinder.
The other tall guy was driving a suburu wagon, it was a decent sized car, and had the boxer 4 cylinder diesel engine. He was averaging in the 60 mpg mark.
I still stand by my statement, with all the improvements in technology, the crap the makers are stradled with are no excuse for the crap MPG we have here.
With that said, people buy what they want most of the time based on either image {I.E., I want a hummer, 1 ton dualie to take the kids to soccer practice and go to starbucks} or because they need a vehicle for said task {Hi, I’m Joe the Plumber, I need the E350 van to come fix the pipe problem your wife called about}
Myself, I drive a 30 year old truck because cheap to own, cheap to fix, and yeah it’d be nice to have a new 1/2 ton 4×4, but for a daily driver, I don’t need it.
By Eliteman76. April 1st, 2009 at 9:06 amIf I had the option, I’d probably pick up a midsize type car and keep my truck around till the end of time.
It’s all about control. The administration now controls GM, next the energy companies (which will make gas prices skyrocket), then healthcare. They want to control you and force you to be dependent on the government for everything.
By David W. Allison. April 1st, 2009 at 6:47 amF the government, All they want is for everybody to driving around in little pos hondas and toyotas
By nick j. March 29th, 2009 at 7:25 pmRemember, The reason they wont let us choose for ourselves is that we don’t know what we want. The government must choose for us. Right???
By 71hotrodpinto. March 28th, 2009 at 11:32 amWhat ? “no” you say?
We need to take control over this crap and now before the government turns socialist,which is happening fast.
The only way you are going to get 24 mpg out of a truck is w/ a small diesel. However, I don’t see what the government is doing to make that an option (maybe they should lower the diesel tax). For cars, the goal is reachable, however, that means they need to be smaller. Problem w/ that is they need to get European small, which means family vacations will be tight or require two cars. I don’t understand why is it so hard to just let Americans decide for themselves. If they want fuel efficiency, automakers would respond to that cash cow. However, they want room instead. In addition, I don’t know about you but you’re not gong to find me chancing my life in a smart car.
By bassman97. March 28th, 2009 at 5:23 am“The Detroit News reports that the proposal may anger some environmentalists, because the 2011 proposal doesn’t go as far as what the Bush administration proposed in April 2008.
The Free Press says the Bush administration decided not to issue its plan because of the high cost to automakers at a time of economic difficulties”
What the hell do enviromentalists care about millions of auto workers and the US economy? All they care about is themselves and thier own agendas. IE:”kill the car”
By 71hotrodpinto. March 27th, 2009 at 5:43 pm