Fuel efficiency rules to spur advanced vehicles

[Robb]

Source: AP

WASHINGTON — Automakers are being pushed to build a more fuel-efficient generation of gas-electric hybrids, turbocharged engines and advanced vehicles powered by electricity under tough new standards from the Obama administration.

Final rules to be signed Thursday by the Transportation Department and the Environmental Protection Agency come after carmakers posted modest gains in the distance a car can travel on a gallon of gas.

The rules require 2016 model year vehicles to meet fuel efficiency targets of 35.5 miles per gallon combined for cars and trucks, an increase of nearly 10 mpg over current standards set by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. The EPA, issuing the first rules ever on vehicle greenhouse gas emissions, will set a tailpipe emissions standard of 250 grams of carbon dioxide per mile for vehicles sold in 2016, or the equivalent of what would be emitted by vehicles meeting the mileage standard.

"After decades in which we have done little to increase auto efficiency, those new standards will be completed, which will reduce our dependence on oil while helping folks spend a little less at the pump," President Barack Obama said Wednesday.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jveDqQOxnAnlUh_DxIXEz3RNjZjQD9EPR2G00

---

Change-a-licious.

[flamin lib]

1. It can be done and it can even be done with internal combustion

engines.

I had a 1998 Lincoln Mark VIII that got 28.8 mpg at 90 mph. No shit, it really happened with a 5000 pound car that went 0-60 in five seconds and topped out at 155mph. My Nissan Sentra gets 38 mpg on the hwy. Ford has announced that the next Mustang will deliver 300 hp and get 31 mpg highway.

I'd like my next vehicle to be a crew cab PU but there are none that get more than 19 mpg. Makes no difference if it's a 4 cyl compact or an 8 cyl full size. They all get 19 mpg. That's just wrong.

It'll be a lot easier with hybrids but it can be done plus electric is sooooo much better at moving cars than gas.

[SkyDaddy7]

2. Moving in correct direction!

Yes! "Change-a-licious"

[dipsydoodle]

3. We're already down to

c. 100g/km in Europe.

[ConcernedCanuk]

4. Oh bullshit - an extra 10 miles per gallon means squat in the big picture.

.
.
.

We've heard this before - like 20 years ago?

then they exempted trucks

SO

Trucks and SUVs made the big sales.

And the most powerful nation in the world is herding around the oil sources on the other side of the globe

SO

Do I believe what I hear and read?

or believe what I see . . .

:freak:

[Robb]

10. 200 million tons of CO2 not in the air?

I'm sorry you think that's bullshit. :(

[Go2Peace]

21. This is good but only mass transit options actually will get us where we need to be

a network of fast and efficient railroads following major highways. China is doing it and they have more landmass. So can we.

[ConcernedCanuk]

23. I agree regarding mass transit - but we sorta screwed ourselves that way

.
.
.

Back when the railroads were being built in Canada, our governments made a deal with the financiers of Canadian Pacific Railway

one wee phrase pooched our ability to force CP Rail to carry passengers.

"to be operated efficiently"

CP Rail wizards figured out there was much more money in transporting goods than passengers

so guess what

CP Rail does NOT provide passenger service

and they own most of our rail lands

(sigh)

[yurbud]

5. what about diesel? It gets much better mileage than gas.

[Honeycombe8]

7. I think diesel costs more, and it's more damaging to the environment.

I think that's what I've read.

[Turborama]

8. Diesel cars: 7 worries, 7 answers

From CNN's Money site, I posted it here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4509092&mesg_id=4512448

IDemo posted an article about the Volkswagen Jetta TDI winning "Green Car of the Year", here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4509092&mesg_id=4509509

Something I wrote about Algae diesel replacing fossil derived diesel: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4509092&mesg_id=4510016

Also worth a read: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=4509092&mesg_id=4514899">"A cleaner diesel has foreign car makers revved up for US"

[yurbud]

18. the price doesn't flutuate as much as gas, so sometimes it's more, sometimes less

with proper emission controls, it could do less damage, and less than that with biodiesel, which they can run without any modifications to the engine or fuel system.

[DissedByBush]

27. New diesels are extremely clean

Diesel should be cheaper than gas since it's easier to refine.

Right now we get a little gasoline out of a barrel, then have to crack the heavier diesel-type stuff down to gasoline in order to get the about 20 gallons of gas per barrel. Diesel is actually cheaper and quicker to refine.

The pricing has more to do with crappy government regulations making it hard to build new refineries. We just don't have enough capacity targeted to diesel.

Also if more cars were diesel, existing refining capacity would be diverted to diesel production, making it cheaper.

It's also cheaper in the summer since people aren't buying heating oil.

[Turborama]

6. Uh-hum

OPs I started about this in 2008:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4510556">The top ten most fuel efficient cars in the UK do over 60 MPG (the top three over 70 MPG) US=28 MPG

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x4509092">"The 65 MPG Ford the U.S. Can't Have" - Congress needs to CHANGE anomalies like this, NOW!

-

[One_Life_To_Give]

12. One can barely pull 7000lb trailer up 15% grade

Where is the comparison? One is designed to perform a certain level of work. While the other is designed to transport a few passengers.

[Turborama]

19. How many 25/42 MPG Fords are on sale in America?

Remember, that pic is from 2007, too. Also, they were both the same price but the US one is twice the weight and horsepower.

Ford have been making much more efficient cars for the rest of the world for years.

Ford http://www.mpgomatic.com/2008/03/15/35-mpg-why-wait-until-2020">and Chrysler have had the capability for years to sell much more efficient cars in the US .

Here's another comparison, the http://www.fordvehicles.com/cars/focussedan/specifications/engine/">Ford Focus that's on sale now in the US does 35 MPG on the highway, compared to the 2007 European Focus in that picture which could do 42 MPG.

[One_Life_To_Give]

20. 42 Miles to an Imperial Gallon

Looking at the 2010 Ford UK Specs
UK Focus 2.0L petrol Engine 21MPG(US) Urban, 38MPG(US) Exurban
US Focus 2.0L petrol Engine 24MPG City, 35MPG Highway

Since the standardized tests used to set these numbers differ between the US and UK. Best we can say is they look roughly equivalent.


Now for a similar price you can also buy this baby. That burns slightly more fuel.
$29,995.00
2010 CHEVROLET EXPRESS CUTAWAY 3500 Truck

Make: CHEVROLET
Model: EXPRESS CUTAWA
Location: Wakefield, MA
Mileage: 390
Type: CLASS 6 (GVW 19501 - 26000)
Category: Truck

[rkennedy_68]

9. hope this marks the end of huge gas guzzlers

[One_Life_To_Give]

13. Many buy small, few buy bigger

Those who don't have a real need for larger vehicles will likely downsize. Those who need certain capabilities found only in such vehicles will purchase whatever it takes to do the job. Including upsizing to Medium Duty vehicles if necessary.

[harun]

11. Need to get off dinosaur oil and move to electrics.

[ConcernedCanuk]

14. "spend a little less at the pump" - right - VERY little

.
.
.

And all due respect to Robb's response

I cannot apologize for not believing what the USA Administration says.

The possible savings of consumption will just help the USA build up their oil reserves so they can wage more war.

War-Machine won't run without oil.

Don't USA citizens get it yet? - USA is all about WAR!

No other nation,

most likely all other nations combined do not interfere in other nations' business with a war-machine . . .

USA without oil is impotent.

And the USA will invade, occupy, coerce any nation that threatens the gawddamm war-machine's supply of oil.

That's how I see it, and dozens of other nations see it the same way.

USA just WON'T mind it's own business - take care of its own veterans(I've seen it), homeless, and those with health problems.

USA is a reflection of Hitler's Germany in the 40's IMO - fear of their own police/government/etc.,

Think "homeland security" - - -

:freak:

[flvegan]

15. Does anyone have a clear and concise article on why we're not going the hydrogen route?

Serious question, here.

While I certainly don't disagree that plug ins are definitely a plus, it seemed like hydrogen power was a cure all. Call me uneducated on it.

[One_Life_To_Give]

16. No Article but

Currently Hydrogen is produced from Natural Gas. It can be made by Electrolysis, but that is extremely inefficient. So the only time it made sense was when it was thought Nukes would make electricity Too Cheap to Meter.

[SpartanDem]

22. In addition to production issues

you have a major lack of infrastructure in being able transport and sell hydrogen

[jmowreader]

28. I think it's because of the NATURE of hydrogen

It's a highly reactive gas that corrodes a lot of things (the term is hydrogen embrittlement) and has to be stored at 5000 psi. And it leaks out of storage through the connections in the gas system.

[Hekate]

17. Big kick for big news WaPo article link here

WaPo article
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/01/AR2010040101412.html

[wpsedgwick]

24. Obama administration cracks down on vehicle emissions standards

Source: Examiner

U.S. passenger vehicles will emit fewer greenhouse gasses and consume less fuel under new national standards finalized Thursday in what environmentalists are hailing as the biggest step the federal government has taken yet to address climate change and oil dependence.

The new standards are part of President Obama's goal by 2020 to cut emissions by about 17 percent under 2005 levels of the gases blamed for warming the planet.

According to the Administration, the new national standards could potentially save the average buyer of a 2016 model year car $3,000 over the life of the vehicle and, nationally, will conserve about 1.8 billion barrels of oil and reduce nearly a billion tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the lives of the vehicles covered.

Read more: http://www.examiner.com/x-42287-Chicago-Green-Technology-Examiner~y2010m4d2-Obama-administration-cracks-down-on-vehicle-emissions-standards

[ClarkUSA]

25. Great news! The Obama Administration is firing on all cylinders...

no pun intended. :evilgrin:

[DissedByBush]

26. blah blah greenhouse gas blah blah

I don't care.

But I do like that this scare is pushing for more conservative technology.

I love gas sipping cars. Wish I could get the original 80 mpg 600cc turbodiesel of this here