Fuel Economy expectation hiked for 2025

[pixy0stix]

Obama administration hikes CAFE fuel economy standard to 54.5 mpg

news.yahoo.com/blogs/technology-blog/obama-administration-hikes-cafe-fuel-economy-standard-54-163257022.html

Between the Chevy Volt and the 2011 World Car of the Year Nissan Leaf, the United States has been making huge strides in increasing the average fuel economy of vehicles on the road. The Obama administration doesn't want the progress to stop there: After a year of negotiation, it finally reached a formal agreement with automakers and unions to raise the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) to a minimum 54.5 mpg by 2025.

Currently, CAFE standards require automakers to average 35.5 mpg in the next four years, a target that's easily within reach. By raising the minimum fuel economy standards, car makers will be forced to push electric vehicles that dramatically raise a company's CAFE number. The United States will also be able to reduce OPEC oil imports by 50%.

[NitaX]

So, I have a question that will be related to the housing market. If people were moving back into the cities because gas prices were higher than a giraffe's butt, then will making the MPG higher re-create the housing boom? Hmmmm. Things I wonder.

[pixy0stix]

I have mixed feelings about this. If it's strictly to wean us off oil dependency, then yay!

However, if we're talking about total environmental impact, I'm not sure just how this is going to work. The factors going into the total life cycle of a car that has a limited life span which is probably shorter than the average car now... I'm thinking it's probably a wash between the new technology and the old.

[basilosaurus]

Aug 29, 2012 14:52:29 GMT -5 @majorwife said:

I can't understand why the mechanics arent in place to have a 54 MPG gas car now. Unless there is and there is political motivation to kill it.

Keep in mind that the 54 is not a real world measure. I can't remember the specifics of it how they measure it differently, though.

A Romney spokesperson responded to this yesterday basically saying that it was another sign of big government taking away your choices. Sigh. Even the car manufacturers apparently support it.

[pixy0stix]

Aug 29, 2012 14:52:29 GMT -5 @majorwife said:

I can't understand why the mechanics arent in place to have a 54 MPG gas car now. Unless there is and there is political motivation to kill it.

Isn't the working theory that the technology for water powered cars has been out there forever, it was just killed by the oil companies?

Also, the corn conglomeration is why ethanol started a surge. Unfortunately (fortunately?) ethanol has quickly proven to not be a viable renewable resource.

[OscarQ]

Two things.

1. As a city dweller who is underwater I really hope it drives people back to the cities and drives up my property value.
2. To follow onto Sibil's point - according to a report I heard on NPR the manufacturers are supporting it because California was threatening them with even higher standards (so TYVM Cali).

[marie427]

Aug 29, 2012 14:50:17 GMT -5 NitaX said:

So, I have a question that will be related to the housing market. If people were moving back into the cities because gas prices were higher than a giraffe's butt, then will making the MPG higher re-create the housing boom? Hmmmm. Things I wonder.

I don't know if that would be enough though since people have been moving back into cities for a variety of reasons. Maybe in some areas it might.

[NitaX]

Aug 29, 2012 15:18:53 GMT -5 marie427 said:

Aug 29, 2012 14:50:17 GMT -5 NitaX said:

So, I have a question that will be related to the housing market. If people were moving back into the cities because gas prices were higher than a giraffe's butt, then will making the MPG higher re-create the housing boom? Hmmmm. Things I wonder.

I don't know if that would be enough though since people have been moving back into cities for a variety of reasons. Maybe in some areas it might.

Here, it would probably fuel the increase again. But, we also have the school merger issue that would drive a suburban housing boom again. If someone could move 40 miles out from the city and get decent gas mileage, it could certainly give homeowners a reason to move out to a neighboring county.

[basilosaurus]

By water fueled cars, are you talking about hydrogen fuel cells? The technology is there, and there are functional prototypes, but apparently it's still crazy expensive, so much so that it's not commercially viable at the moment.

We did see over the weekend that Mitsubishi now has an electric vehicle. I want to say it was around 30k, so quite a bit less than the leaf. But it's a very Japanese looking car that I don't see a lot of Americans wanting. Of course, I love that style.

[wawa]

Aug 29, 2012 14:51:19 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

I have mixed feelings about this. If it's strictly to wean us off oil dependency, then yay!

However, if we're talking about total environmental impact, I'm not sure just how this is going to work. The factors going into the total life cycle of a car that has a limited life span which is probably shorter than the average car now... I'm thinking it's probably a wash between the new technology and the old.

batteries are a bitch in life-cycle assessment. Manufacture and disposal of those things is awful.

personally I love small diesel as a current-tech solution, but I do see the point in encouraging moving foward with the electrics. There are some really cool things going on right now in battery research, and if we can get them cheap and clean and easy it opens up a lot of other possibilities. (like making home or neighborhood based generation more feasible, be that solar, wind or water)

[pixy0stix]

Aug 29, 2012 15:22:33 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

By water fueled cars, are you talking about hydrogen fuel cells? The technology is there, and there are functional prototypes, but apparently it's still crazy expensive, so much so that it's not commercially viable at the moment.

Yes, correct. They were on the path to making them more commercially viable and had to stop when funding was pulled.

There are other, far more sweeping, innovations that in the long run would drastically help with fuel consumption and traffic congestion, but are impractical at this time. Think magnetized/electrified lines that pull cars along until they can get to a stop and then they disengage and go on their own power. This would require a complete overhaul of our infrastructure, though, which we're already struggling to just maintain.

[wawa]

Aug 29, 2012 15:22:33 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

By water fueled cars, are you talking about hydrogen fuel cells? The technology is there, and there are functional prototypes, but apparently it's still crazy expensive, so much so that it's not commercially viable at the moment.

We did see over the weekend that Mitsubishi now has an electric vehicle. I want to say it was around 30k, so quite a bit less than the leaf. But it's a very Japanese looking car that I don't see a lot of Americans wanting. Of course, I love that style.

I'd drive that.
Hydrogen fuel cells also suffer from a refueling infrastructure issue. Plug-in electrics are relatively simple. We've got power everywhere, it's just a matter of having the right shaped outlet. (not that it's not a challenge, but it's not a huge obstacle.) Hydrogen distribution is starting from scratch.

[ddi741]

Lurker with a question because I know less than nothing on this subject.
Does this mean all cars they manufacture will have to hit this standard or just that each manufacturer has to offer atleast one car that hits 54.5mpg?

[wawa]

Aug 29, 2012 15:26:04 GMT -5 pixy0stix said:

Aug 29, 2012 15:22:33 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

By water fueled cars, are you talking about hydrogen fuel cells? The technology is there, and there are functional prototypes, but apparently it's still crazy expensive, so much so that it's not commercially viable at the moment.

Yes, correct. They were on the path to making them more commercially viable and had to stop when funding was pulled.

There are other, far more sweeping, innovations that in the long run would drastically help with fuel consumption and traffic congestion, but are impractical at this time. Think magnetized/electrified lines that pull cars along until they can get to a stop and then they disengage and go on their own power. This would require a complete overhaul of our infrastructure, though, which we're already struggling to just maintain.

and congress is highly disinclined to fund anything except traditional highways and bridges - so...yeah.

[Deleted]

Aug 29, 2012 15:18:53 GMT -5 marie427 said:

Aug 29, 2012 14:50:17 GMT -5 NitaX said:

So, I have a question that will be related to the housing market. If people were moving back into the cities because gas prices were higher than a giraffe's butt, then will making the MPG higher re-create the housing boom? Hmmmm. Things I wonder.

I don't know if that would be enough though since people have been moving back into cities for a variety of reasons. Maybe in some areas it might.

Putting aside the issue of whether it's in cities or suburbs, I think the student loan issue is going to contribute to the housing market staying down. Today's 22-year-olds are not going to be buying houses as young as generations past.

I'm sort of scared of what things are going to look like in 10 years - a lot of the Boomers will start to be looking toward retirement communities, but those young families who in generations past would have purchased the houses are going to be hanging out in their rentals since they'll still have 10 years to pay on their student loans.

God I hope I'm wrong.

[wawa]

Aug 29, 2012 15:26:51 GMT -5 ddi741 said:

Lurker with a question because I know less than nothing on this subject.
Does this mean all cars they manufacture will have to hit this standard or just that each manufacturer has to offer atleast one car that hits 54.5mpg?

I believe it's more like an average of their entire fleet...but I'm sure somebody else knows more.

ETA: the googles tell me it's a weighted average that looks complicated.

[marie427]

Aug 29, 2012 15:28:29 GMT -5 @angryharpy said:

Aug 29, 2012 15:18:53 GMT -5 marie427 said:

I don't know if that would be enough though since people have been moving back into cities for a variety of reasons. Maybe in some areas it might.

Putting aside the issue of whether it's in cities or suburbs, I think the student loan issue is going to contribute to the housing market staying down. Today's 22-year-olds are not going to be buying houses as young as generations past.

I'm sort of scared of what things are going to look like in 10 years - a lot of the Boomers will start to be looking toward retirement communities, but those young families who in generations past would have purchased the houses are going to be hanging out in their rentals since they'll still have 10 years to pay on their student loans.

God I hope I'm wrong.

That's a factor, but I also get the sense that there's less interest in owning a home among the younger generation anyway. Aren't we more mobile than ever before? Mobile in the sense that we're moving around a lot, that is. Especially when jobs aren't plentiful and a lot of people are willing to move anywhere for a decent one.

[basilosaurus]

I feel no desire to own a home, marie. It's partly b/c I'm mobile whether I want to be or not, but even without the military, I think I'd probably still be making huge moves regularly. I managed to live in 3 states and 2 non-US countries in a period of 5 years. I cannot wrap my brain around living in one place for something as long as 5 years, let alone a lifetime.

But, even if I did, I'm the type that would prefer urban living, so I wouldn't be your target suburban mcmansion buyer anyway.

[gault]

Who killed the electric car?

[IIOY]

I know next to nothing about this issue aside from the fact that "light trucks," or whatever the code is for SUVs, are exempt. The reason for the pre-recession SUV boom was because SUVs were exempt from something similar (or something) so I question the overall effectiveness if manufacturers can simply emphasize SUVs and dodge this by selling loads of SUVs. Or something.

I'm just saying, Caden needs to help a girl out here.

[smock]

I have a question about electric cars. I would love to own an electric car but I live in an apartment building with street parking. Am I going to have to hang an extension cord out my window to charge my future electric car? Are there efforts to make recharging stations available in cities?

(Note: when I lived in Florence I was a block from a centrally-located electric car charging station. It was awesome to walk past the row of electric cars every morning.)

[pixy0stix]

Aug 29, 2012 16:40:18 GMT -5 IIOY said:

The reason for the pre-recession SUV boom was because SUVs were exempt from something similar (or something)

::reaching into recesses of mind:: The tax break for business owners for vehicles above a certain weight limit? Enacted mostly for farmers to be able to buy equipment, but used by others elsewhere?

[pixy0stix]

Aug 29, 2012 16:47:11 GMT -5 smock said:

I have a question about electric cars. I would love to own an electric car but I live in an apartment building with street parking. Am I going to have to hang an extension cord out my window to charge my future electric car? Are there efforts to make recharging stations available in cities?

First question I don't know.

The second question is that yes, the car companies are working with cities to implement charging stations. I know there are a few in concept with the city where I live that will be implemented in a few spots this year or next.

[basilosaurus]

Aug 29, 2012 16:47:11 GMT -5 smock said:

I have a question about electric cars. I would love to own an electric car but I live in an apartment building with street parking. Am I going to have to hang an extension cord out my window to charge my future electric car? Are there efforts to make recharging stations available in cities?

(Note: when I lived in Florence I was a block from a centrally-located electric car charging station. It was awesome to walk past the row of electric cars every morning.)

In Honolulu there was a big initiative to get charging stations all around the island. If you bought an electric car by a certain cutoff you could charge up for free. Theoretically there's one fairly close to me, but this post reminded me I've never noticed it.

For us, though, it's not that big a difference in terms of oil dependence since the vast majority of our electricity comes from importing and burning fuel. see: my crazy electric bill.

[pixy0stix]

Aug 29, 2012 16:52:31 GMT -5 basilosaurus said:

For us, though, it's not that big a difference in terms of oil dependence since the vast majority of our electricity comes from importing and burning fuel. see: my crazy electric bill.

Yeah, and I think this is where the electric car conversation gets bogged down. Until we can figure out cleaner/better sources of electricity for the majority of the power grid, we're just chasing our tails.

[EllieArroway]

Aug 29, 2012 16:40:18 GMT -5 IIOY said:

I know next to nothing about this issue aside from the fact that "light trucks," or whatever the code is for SUVs, are exempt. The reason for the pre-recession SUV boom was because SUVs were exempt from something similar (or something) so I question the overall effectiveness if manufacturers can simply emphasize SUVs and dodge this by selling loads of SUVs. Or something.

I'm just saying, Caden needs to help a girl out here.

I don't know a lot about this either but I think I know what you are talking about and I'm pretty sure they changed it so that SUVs are no longer exempt.

eta: I found it. In 2006 the CAFE standards for light trucks were reformed, but they didn't fully go into effect until 2011.

georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060428-9.html

[IIOY]

Aug 29, 2012 16:58:14 GMT -5 EllieArroway said:

Aug 29, 2012 16:40:18 GMT -5 IIOY said:

I know next to nothing about this issue aside from the fact that "light trucks," or whatever the code is for SUVs, are exempt. The reason for the pre-recession SUV boom was because SUVs were exempt from something similar (or something) so I question the overall effectiveness if manufacturers can simply emphasize SUVs and dodge this by selling loads of SUVs. Or something.

I'm just saying, Caden needs to help a girl out here.

I don't know a lot about this either but I think I know what you are talking about and I'm pretty sure they changed it so that SUVs are no longer exempt.

eta: I found it. In 2006 the CAFE standards for light trucks were reformed, but they didn't fully go into effect until 2011.

georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060428-9.html

Thanks!

Hmmm, though. I could have sworn I read just the other day of some sort of continued exemption, but it's entirely possible I misunderstood. There have been a few recent articles about GM possibly being driven into bankruptcy because of government standards so I will try to find it.

[EllieArroway]

Aug 29, 2012 17:14:45 GMT -5 IIOY said:

Aug 29, 2012 16:58:14 GMT -5 EllieArroway said:

I don't know a lot about this either but I think I know what you are talking about and I'm pretty sure they changed it so that SUVs are no longer exempt.

eta: I found it. In 2006 the CAFE standards for light trucks were reformed, but they didn't fully go into effect until 2011.

georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2006/04/20060428-9.html

Thanks!

Hmmm, though. I could have sworn I read just the other day of some sort of continued exemption, but it's entirely possible I misunderstood. There have been a few recent articles about GM possibly being driven into bankruptcy because of government standards so I will try to find it.

You could be right. This is definitely something I don't know enough about.

[pixy0stix]

LOL, I was way off.

[thebulldog]

Here is a link to the final rule:

www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Press+Releases/2012/Obama+Administration+Finalizes+Historic+54.5+mpg+Fuel+Efficiency+Standards