http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/auto...ws/4218266.html Let's hope the momentum behind an article like this grows and that the buying public puts pressure on automakers to make real progress rather than just stay the same and pay lip service to progress. IMHO, 35 MPG is a paltry goal that the automakers should be able to achieve in their sleep. If the automakers' complaints about cost were history, I think we would be much further along. "Its too expensive" should be a long dead auto industry mantra, IMHO. Detroit is paying for this mantra whether Detroit realizes it or not. Thanks to this site.
Here's one example. Our 2002 Camry (which applies all the way to the 2006 model) is more expensive than the equivalent Accord, Altima, 6, Taurus, Malibu etc not only because of the higher equipment level but also the use of aluminium. The hood and trunklid are ridiculously light for their size. If you wanna do a comparison, check out the weight of an 06 Camry and then compare it to the Caliber R/T or Nitro R/T. Both cars are smaller than the Camry yet weigh a smidge more. Our Camry XLE 4 cylinder model tipped in at 1,500kg. That's lighter than the TSX with automatic transmission! But of course most people don't care about that. They just look at the price and wonder why the hell the Camry XLE is so expensive compared to its competitors.
Here's how the article starts: "After contentious debate on Capitol Hill and lobbying from the industry, new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards will jump to 35 mpg for all cars and SUVs by 2020, up from the current 27.5 mpg for cars and 22.5 mpg for trucks. Here are four keys for automakers to bolster their fuel economy. One thing is for certain: This is going to be expensive for everyone." —Chuck Tannert And here's how the article ends: "There’s no question that Detroit can build cars and trucks that meet the new CAFÉ standard. And Congress is determined to make them do it. But has anybody calculated the costs? Raising fleet standards to these levels would add thousands of dollars to the cost of the average vehicle—carbon fiber and polycarbonate don’t come cheap, folks! We appreciate Congress’s effort to grapple with this issue, and automakers need to respond. But raising CAFE standards is a pretty blunt instrument to encourage complex technological change. We suspect that consumers—and voters—may experience something like sticker shock when they realize they’re the ones paying the bill." So, basically, after they suggest these ways for automakers to raise mileage, they refute them by saying that CAFE is "a blunt instrument" that will lead to something "...like sticker shock when [consumers] realize they're the ones paying the bill." I fear that, if anything, this article is *impeding* momentum. It's basically making the car buying public scared that they'll have to pay more for their vehicles...right? It's also not suggesting that the CAFE standards are even a good idea to begin with. Honestly, consumers are the ones buying the fuel and burning it (and polluting the environment/depleting oil reserves/forcing our armed services to go overseas to fight for oil in the process)...they should also foot the bill for the consequences of their actions. Call me naive, but I don't think it's our God-given right to consume whatever we can afford.
Increased price of fossil fuels is linked to increased interest in reducing the amount of fossil CO2 being returned to the atmosphere. Because of these the global market for vehicles is interested in higher fuel efficiency. The US market may not be leading the way there, but I consider this overall trend inevitable. CAFE legislation will make the US manufacturers (kicking and screaming) more globally competitive. More stringent standards would be even better IMHO, but legislation is the art of compromise.
History repeats itself. The Energy Policy Conservation Act of 1975 established CAFE standards as a reaction to the oil embargo of 1973. At the time CAFE standards were implemented the U.S. was importing 30 percent of its oil. Today, over 50 percent of U.S. oil is imported. While CAFE did create more fuel-efficient cars, it also increased the public’s incentive to drive because of the cheaper fuel costs. One other problem was the CAFE actually made cars less safe, as the domestic automakers made their cars more fuel efficient by making them smaller and lighter. Of course, cars are much safer today with air bags and crumple zones, but one can only wonder what shortcuts automakers will take this time around in order to meet the new MPG standards.
