Obama ready to set 35.5 mpg national average

[dcmorrison12]

http://freep.com/article/20090518/NE...a+game-changer


This is great news! It's not nearly enough, but it's definitely a great start and a fantastic turnaround from the Bush administration. I understand this puts another strain on the auto industry, but accountability for the environment is a must, and needs to be top priority - without a healthy environment, then we have nothing at all, so what's more important?

I'm excited to see the affects of this taking place, I'm constantly dissappointed with the mpg which the cars that are being released recently have. Plus, less of the nasty gasoline smell I have to smell when I'm walking around the city.

My only concern is that once 2016 hits, they won't have the next level which we need to reach, I'm worried that the politicians will become fat and happy once again and not enact even stricter regulations. 35.5 is a great short term goal, but it's certainly not the end.

[Ray1936]

Well, just don't plan on taking some 4x8 sheets of plywood home in that 35 mpg roller skate.

Besides, ain't gonna happen.

[Bearinabox]

The problem with this strategy is, the average American considers fuel consumption in terms of dollars and cents, not in terms of saving the world. Give Joe Schmoe a 35 mpg F-150, he'll just move further from his job and go on vacation more often. When gas was $4 a gallon, that made a real difference in how people lived and how often they drove. This likely won't.

[Angry Dad]

CAFE is a failure.

By the time this nonsense is "law", there will be all sorts of loopholes and provisions that will do the same thing that current legislation has done.

Basically it forces manufacturers to build vehicles into different classes to avoid the rules.

Do you know how many politicians are engineers? I dare say none. From their spending habits I doubt any of them have accounting backgrounds. Yet you want them to make financial and engineering decisions for you?

Yet come "re"-election time they will all be there taking credit for the advances made. If there are any.

[EMG]

http://freep.com/article/20090518/NE...a+game-changer


This is great news! It's not nearly enough, but it's definitely a great start and a fantastic turnaround from the Bush administration. I understand this puts another strain on the auto industry,....

It takes a lot of courage to make a statement like that in Detroit [[get ready to get bashed by those who belong to the auto industry) but I agree with you. I know people who whine and moan about how this sort of thing just further clobbers the auto industry and makes it harder for them to succeed...but frankly, it's the only way to spur improvements, whether gas mileage or safety or anything. If it weren't for CAFE we would still be getting 12 miles per gallon like we did in '73, and if it weren't for Ralph Nader auto fatalities would probably be ten times what they are today.

Necessity is the mother of invention, and cry and whine as they might, when the auto manufacturers are given mandates, they can and do manage to achieve previously unbelievable improvements. Consumer demand, on the other hand, ensures that it won't be done simply by building motorized egg carts.

It might take some executive overtime meetings and hard work, to be sure. But that's why they're paid the big bucks.

[rid0617]

I have no intention of buying one. The vehicles will have to be smaller, even more unsafe and I honestly do not believe the man made global warming argument. I was around in the early 70s when all this same BS was being done for the pending disaster called global cooling.

So they will raise the mileage, that will result in less gas being purchased, that will result in higher gas taxes and God knows what other new tax because the highways won't be getting funded. And as for selling this mini econo boxes, he'd better hope the economy is doing better than it currently is.

[reddog289]

I would like to see 35+ mpg, But I don,t want to see myself in a golf cart with doors either. I just checked the milage on my 91 Buick. 22mpg city mainly with trips to the hills of AnnArbor. What does not make sense to me is that the cars seem to get smaller while the media keeps saying everyone is bigger. Who knows.

[wolverine]

I agree with bearinabox. Altering mpg won't help the environment, but make traveling more efficient, and thus cheaper.

If we ignore global warming, cheap travel has allowed populations to disperse and thus cause other environmental problems associated with decentralized living such as congestion, intensification of highway infrastructure, consumption of natural land, etc. If saving the environment is the issue, adjust mpg, but find a way to charge per mile driven to encourage people to use their cars less and live closer to where they work.

I'm not sure whether I'd ever advocate for this, but I think it is one way to reach a solution from an environmental standpoint.

I honestly believe too much blame is put on the automakers. There are so many contributers to the problem that cause people to drive more such as free parking, our way of zoning, and extra wide freeways.

[R8RBOB]

A President must bold and I respect that this president is prepared to kick-off a new standard. Detroit has to wake up and accept the fact that there is a race to produce the "car of the future." GM, Chrysler and Ford no longer dominate the auto market. The mistake the automakers made was that they thought they were the only dogs in the doghouse and they didn't have to change.

China, India, South Korea and Japan are "in it to win it." They are going out of their way to produce energy-efficient automoblies and the last thing we don't want is the Big Three is be left in the dust.

[redvetred]

The only near-term methodology available to comply with these CAFE numbers is to integrate alternative fuel vehicles, especially hybrids and electric vehicles, into the national fleet in huge numbers. Or does anyone have a "flux capacitor" for my Delorean?

[hudkina]

I think a better solution would be to take the European approach and significantly raise the gasoline tax. If gasoline prices are high, consumers will naturally gravitate towards smaller, more fuel efficent vehicles. In the meantime, the government can use the increased tax revenue to help fix the road infrastructure and invest in mass transit.

Though, to be honest, a car doesn't have to by a subcompact to have great mileage. The new Chevy Equinox gets 30 MPG highway. The Malibu gets 33 MPG. The new compact [[though it will be the largest compact on the market) Chevy coming out next year will get 40 MPG. Even the Impala gets up to 30 MPG highway.

[PeachLaser]

If Detroit could of done this on its own, we wouldn't have a dying U.S. auto industry right now. Efficiency, quality, performance and styling... other countries figured out how to do it, that's why they sold cars and still are selling cars. The chest beaters will keep beating their chest until the last vestige of the U.S, auto industry disappears.

[DetroitPlanner]

A better way to have done this would be to decentivize horsepower. Back in the 80's there were lots of cars that were way crappier than today's cars, but got great milage. SInce the 90's there has been a steady increase in horsepower. Today we have almost too much power in our vehicles and it results in inefficiencies. For example my last two cars have been a Taurus and a Sable, both have been smoking fast, a lot more power than what I need.

California is an exception, it is a state where everyone is impacted by smog inversions because they live in valleys. Its hyper population concentrations must drive from valley to valley, therefore there are very few direct roads making commutes much longer than they are in the midwest, hence more cars, travelling longer distances = more congestion. It is hardly a model to emulate.

What concerns me the most however is the fact that the US has spent billions to bail out auto manufacturers, and now the auto manufacturers are moving their jobs overseas instead of retooling here to meet these new standards. Should not american taxpayer's money be spent on keeping american's employed?

Pelosi was elected to head the US house of Representatives and instantly, long standing congressmen such as Dingell and Conyers were thrown away and replaced with people such as Waxman. Both Waxman and Pelosi are from CA, and don't understand much outside of their own realm. The world does not revolve around CA, nor should it.

[oladub]

A large gas tax increase, as hudkina suggests, would modify behavior and purchasing choices without creating huge new bureaucracies. It does seem like the least expensive way to cut gas use. However, I would reduce income taxes by an equal amount to make additional gas taxes revenue neutral. If more mass transit and roadbuilding were desired, the decision should be made to take those costs from the general revenue in a deliberative fashion and in competition with other needs such as health care. Otherwise, the additional gas taxes would largely go into a new government black hole of spending whimsy.

Since so much of our fuel is imported, a gas tax would largely amount to an import tax. It could be a back door way of expanding import taxes while reducing income taxes and/or debt that foreigners wouldn't howl about since they already do it themselves.

[Supersport]

What else does Obama have up his sleeve in an effort to effectivly kill the auto industry?!?!?! Right now I'm sure he's wishing he could have somehow gained control of Ford too, as they are now the wildcard.

Seriously, the only way they are going to achieve these number in that sort of time span is by shrinking the size of vehicles. The same government that requires crash standards that have pushed most vehicles over 4,000 lbs. The government is going to try and force small ass cars down our throats. Guess what? MOST OF US DON'T WANT THEM!!!!

I drive 4 miles each way to work. I really don't care what mileage my car gets, as the price of gasoline does not dictate my life. Regardless of the amount of emissions my car gives off, it doesn't pose a serious impact on the environment, because it's driven less than the average person.

Instead of demand increased mileage/lower emissions, why not offer significant incentives/tax rebates for people to live close to work? Effectively lowering both fuel consumption and emissions. THAT game plan would make a lot more sense.

In order to achieve these new standards, cars will shrink, prices will go up, and more cars will be built over seas with cheaper labor, costing more jobs in the United States. It's as if the government is looking for that final dagger to effectively kill manufacturing in this country. Seems FORCING Chrysler to give itself to an Italian company wasn't enough to please this guy. Perhaps through bancrupcy our president can tell GM to either join with Toyota or go outta business. Would be par for the course at this rate. All expectations for this president have disappeared and I'd be surprised if he gets another 4 years. I'm sure all the auto workers who "Didn't see this coming" will think twice come next election when they are either out of work, or working a minimum wage job.

[ghettopalmetto]

What else does Obama have up his sleeve in an effort to effectivly kill the auto industry?!?!?! Right now I'm sure he's wishing he could have somehow gained control of Ford too, as they are now the wildcard.

It's only going to kill the auto industry if it continues to choose to sit on its ass like it historically has.

You don't want a small car? Don't buy one.

[rb336]

It's only going to kill the auto industry if it continues to choose to sit on its ass like it historically has.

You don't want a small car? Don't buy one.

under this mandate, you will essentially have no choice. family-size cars will be history or so underpowered getting on the freeway would be suicide

[ghettopalmetto]

under this mandate, you will essentially have no choice. family-size cars will be history or so underpowered getting on the freeway would be suicide

You all know we're talking about FLEET averages, right? Yeah, didn't think so.

Can we dispense with the fear-mongering? The automakers aren't exactly in any kind of shape to be dictating policy. They can't even run their own businesses, yet suddenly we *know* that improved fuel economy is a bad idea? The automakers already make higher mpg European models. This isn't brand new, folks.

Man, look at all those European and Japanese automakers and how poorly they're doing with their higher mpgs. It's a wonder they're able to remain in business, what with all the crashes and people dying they have all the time.

[East Detroit]

Man, look at that Ford Fusion Hybrid, getting 41mpg city TODAY and totally beating the Camry Hybrid by what 8 MPG?

Man, look at my Ford Focus, already getting more than 35.5 mpg average every day... today.

35.5? Peanuts. Bring it on.

[DetroitPlanner]

I drive 4 miles each way to work. I really don't care what mileage my car gets, as the price of gasoline does not dictate my life. Regardless of the amount of emissions my car gives off, it doesn't pose a serious impact on the environment, because it's driven less than the average person.

Instead of demand increased mileage/lower emissions, why not offer significant incentives/tax rebates for people to live close to work? Effectively lowering both fuel consumption and emissions. THAT game plan would make a lot more sense.

How dare you think outside of the narrowly defined California way of doing things! You must drive drive drive over long distances, causing massive congestion and smog! We must fight smog, not sound the irrational land use decisions that have led them to their smog. You are clearly the kind of person Pelosi and Waxman will put on their Commie Witch Hunt list!

[ndavies]

under this mandate, you will essentially have no choice. family-size cars will be history or so underpowered getting on the freeway would be suicide

This is exactly what pushed so many people into SUV's in the first place. Family cars in the 80's could no longer do the the tasks many americans require from their vehicles. So they upsized into trucks.

People still buy vehicles for their biggest percieved need. If they have to tow a boat once a year they want a vehicle that's able to do that everyday of the year. If they have to pick up their children and grandkids at the airport once a year they buy a fully loaded stretch minivan they drive around empty for the other 363 days a year. That home improvement hobbiest drives his 3/4 ton pickup around empty 350 days a year.

[ghettopalmetto]

This is exactly what pushed so many people into SUV's in the first place. Family cars in the 80's could no longer do the the tasks many americans require from their vehicles. So they upsized into trucks.

I presume you're referring to tasks such as:

*going to the mall
*sitting in traffic
*driving the kids to soccer practice.

Yeah, I can definitely see why people need enormous trucks.

[DetroitPlanner]

If Detroit could of done this on its own, we wouldn't have a dying U.S. auto industry right now. Efficiency, quality, performance and styling... other countries figured out how to do it, that's why they sold cars and still are selling cars. The chest beaters will keep beating their chest until the last vestige of the U.S, auto industry disappears.

I suppose this is why Toyota and Mitsubshi as well as every euro auto company is in the same boat as the US industry? Toyota lost more money last quarter than GM. If GM is on its last legs, what does this say about its chief competitor in the world market?

[ndavies]

I presume you're referring to tasks such as:

*going to the mall
*sitting in traffic
*driving the kids to soccer practice.

Yeah, I can definitely see why people need enormous trucks.

You completely ignored the rest of my note. People buy for thier percieved maximum usage. Not their typical usage. If they bought for their typical usage they would all be driving around in small cars already.

[Supersport]

ghettopalmeto

Toyota had it's largest loss in it's 72 year history, Ford outsold Toyota in April, and Prius sales are down about 31%. The fact that Ford outsold Toyota in April would lead me to believe they ARE doing poorly with their higher mpg cars. I'd love to see the survival rate of drivers of SMART cars.