TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Obama call for more Ms per G

Discussion in 'Energy, Environment, and Policy' started by mpt, May 18, 2009.

  1. mpt

    mpt Electrics are back

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,629
    Location:
    Warren, New Jersey, United States
    Ahead of an official announcement expected next Tuesday and under condition of anonymity, administration officials spoke of a 30% improvement mandate starting in 2011 and reaching a deadline in 2016.

    Full story at MSNBC : U.S. to require new cars get 42 mpg - Climate Change - MSNBC.com

    Top news; it's 2000 again but this time the auto companies are on their knees and can litigate out of it :)

    MPT
     
  2. TEG

    TEG TMC Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2006
    Messages:
    17,252
    Location:
    Silicon Valley
    Will they "rise to the challenge" or "throw in the towel"?

    It seems like everyone will have to start making PHEVs to meet those MPG numbers. With PHEV pricing high, wiill a $7500 government incentive be enough to get people to buy enough of them to get the established auto industry back to profitability?

    Sounds like sink or swim time.
     
  3. Kevin Harney

    Kevin Harney Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    2,052
    Location:
    Herndon, VA
    They can't even raise to the towel ..... LOL who are you kidding :smile:
     
  4. vfx

    vfx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    14,792
    Location:
    CA CA
    The stated requirement difference between “cars” and “light trucks” is waaaay too big. Manufacturers will jump through a thousand hoops to make every family car into a Crossover making things even worse.

    Fix the loophole in car/truck definition.
     
  5. bobw

    bobw Tesla Reader

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    316
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #5 bobw, May 18, 2009
    Last edited: May 19, 2009
    Joy.

    CAFE created the SUV. Then the Bush administration raised the standard, under pressure. Now this administration is re-compounding the mistake.

    If you want people to use less gasoline, tax it. Raise it gradually over a period of years, so people can adjust.

    Only, that would be unpopular! Can't have that. Might lose a congressional majority in 2010!

    The effective IQ in D.C. is the average IQ divided by the number of days since the last election.
     
  6. mpt

    mpt Electrics are back

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2008
    Messages:
    1,629
    Location:
    Warren, New Jersey, United States
    I think that the big difference this time is that the car industry is on its knees asking for help and Obama knows that; there'll be provisions in the bill to ensure no worm-out escape, plus, I think that there has been much published on the previous debacle; the public is more wary this time around, or so I’d like to think anyway.

    bobw: totally agreed, tax, phase it in; I think that (would like to think that) Americans are ready to take more responsibility for the environment and would be less resistant to a tax if they understood how it was going to impact the environment.
     
  7. bobw

    bobw Tesla Reader

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Messages:
    316
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    MPT:

    I'm afraid I don't share your confidence.

    I think that CAFE ruined the big three.
     
  8. vfx

    vfx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    14,792
    Location:
    CA CA
    Make sure the gas tax goes overtly and obviously to BEV causes.

    Have a sticker required on the gasoline pump that says where the tax per gallon goes.

    Have the gasoline receipt read it out. "60 cents of this purchase went to further the electrification of automobiles for a cleaner, safer USA"
     
  9. doug

    doug Administrator / Head Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2006
    Messages:
    15,914
    Location:
    Stanford, California
    Somehow I think that might have a more negative effect than good, and would cause a backlash. People already get pissed off about prime parking spots that are marked EVs only.

    The tax idea is fine, but rubbing people's faces in it probably isn't.
     
  10. vfx

    vfx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    14,792
    Location:
    CA CA
    In Germany where Feed In Tariff laws benefit home owners but cost extra for apartment dwellers, they also braced for a similar backlash. Turns out that by-enlarge renters support paying more for power since the country has been conditioned to realize the good that is coming from elimination pollution.
    Getting everyone on board is key.
     
  11. Kevin Harney

    Kevin Harney Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2008
    Messages:
    2,052
    Location:
    Herndon, VA
    Does that make Michelle a "Obahama Mama" LOL :biggrin:
     
  12. Brent

    Brent Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    242
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I was astounded at how quickly we changed habits during last summer's gasoline price swings. People sold their SUVs (gasp!) and bought bicycles. Metro ridership soared. Maybe the most certain and quickest way to force a change in car use is to make it more expensive. It's like the bit of advice I heard from a ski lift operator: if you want people to do the right thing, you gotta make it easier than the wrong thing.

    To be workable, a gas tax would probably have to be a phased in, like ten percent per year for each of ten years. Business and consumers alike want predictability, they want to know how to allocate resources. If you know for sure that in ten years your gasoline is going to be double the price, you're going to make different decisions than if you're relying on uncertain forecasts and predictions.

    I think the tax receipts ought largely to go to public transport projects. As much as I love my car, perhaps car use (even electric car use) should become the exception and not the norm, especially for commuting and small trips. The electric car will solve problems with emissions and global warming, but the issue of urban livability looms large long-term. In Los Angeles, we have engineered humans out of the landscape. I don't see that as a sustainable model.
     
  13. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    Obama's Fuel Fantasy - Forbes.com

    Not a HORRIBLE article, but he does go on tangents at times. He also mentions EVs:

     
  14. Brent

    Brent Member

    Joined:
    Apr 18, 2007
    Messages:
    242
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    Bob Lutz's quip to David Letterman about CAFE standards was pretty funny (here in paraphrase):

    Trying to reduce fuel demand by raising MPG standards is like trying reduce obesity by mandating smaller dress sizes.
     
  15. johnr

    johnr Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2009
    Messages:
    255
    And Letterman responded, "That would probably work!" LOL So, let's get some max-clothing-size laws on the books already and get rid of those fatsos :tongue:
     
  16. Arnold Panz

    Arnold Panz Model Sig 304, VIN 542

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2009
    Messages:
    1,341
    Location:
    Miami, Florida
    As much as I dislike Lutz, he has a point. Until/unless we make high mpg cars desireable (as they were when gas was over $4/gal last summer), simply moving the CAFE numbers isn't going to cut it. In fact, if I understand Econ 101, as fuel efficiency improves and demand for oil decreases, theoretically gas will become even cheaper, making gas guzzlers even more tempting for the average car buyer. A gas tax that creates a floor (say, $3.50/gallon or something like that) would give certainty to the marketplace and carmakers that they would know that their highly efficient cars of the future will be coveted and not ignored.
     

Share This Page