backtop


Print 118 comment(s) - last by mindless1.. on Jun 17 at 11:09 PM


Automakers claim new fuel economy ratings will put hundreds of thousands out of work  (Source: Business Week)
Supporters of increased efficiency standards claim the numbers are inflated

The battle between the auto industry and the federal government over changes to fuel economy regulations is exploding. Lawmakers in Washington want to impose much more efficient standards on future vehicles that could see a fleet wide fuel economy average of 62 mpg in effect by 2025.

Some in the automotive industry argue that the costs to reach the lofty 62 mpg fleet wide average will be much higher than the cost of burning more fuel in less efficient vehicles for consumers. Automakers have previously claimed that the costs would have a dire impact on the industry.

new study by the Center for Automotive Research has been published and the study claims that the rise in efficiency standards by 2025 to 62 mpg could add up to $9,790 to the cost of a new vehicle and will reduce sales by 5.5 million units. The report also claims that the resultant price increase would force a reduction of 260,000 automotive industry jobs due to reduced demand for vehicles by consumers.

On the other side of the battle, those pushing for the increased efficiency standards claim that the tech needed to meet the efficiency standards would only add $770 to $3,500 to the price of a new vehicle.

David Friedman, deputy director of the Union of Concerned Scientists' Clean Vehicles program and supporter of the new efficiency mandate, said, "The Obama administration should ignore this industry-advocate propaganda piece and focus on setting the strongest vehicle efficiency and global warming pollution standards based on credible scientific analysis."

President and CEO of the Union, Jay Baron, says that the main difference in cost between the industry and government studies depends on how much the price of the technology will come down over the next 15 years.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Because who knows better
By dgingeri on 6/15/2011 3:26:55 PM , Rating: 1
you're right about it being political, but not for the reasons you think.

1. Diesel fuel in the US is targeted for extra taxes so that the politicians can tax corporations heavier in hidden ways. This drives up the cost of diesel to the point that, even with better gas mileage, it costs more to operate diesel cars than gasoline cars. Shortly after bio diesel started getting into mass production, the government decided that it was included as a diesel fuel, increasing the cost so that it costs more than regular diesel.

The politicians won't let go of this tax because they like having more money. once taxes go up, they are almost impossible to bring back down, even when the majority wants it to happen. They get addicted to that extra cash and spend it to gain political favor. (Like Obama bringing in many GE upper management types as government employees and GE getting government contracts in exchange for the company helping him raise more campaign funds.)

Even better is that the uneducated masses do whatever the politicians, mass media, and Hollywood activists say. Never mind that these people don't have any clue what they're talking about and have no credentials to back up their authority or facts to back up their claims.

2. Diesel has a bad rep, as well, and few people are willing to make that rep go away. Someone says diesel and the uneducated masses think about the black smoke belching from big-rig and construction equipment pipes. It stinks and is ugly. Never mind the fact that today's diesel cars have less of an emissions problem than gasoline engines now that there's 15% ethanol in what's available at the pump now. The morons see one thing and connect it to anything remotely similar. (This is the same reason so many people fell for the 9/11 conspiracy crap. they see buildings blown up by Hollywood, see the clouds of crushed concrete from the WTC buildings, and think it's all smoke. Never mind the fact that real explosives used for demolition don't produce nearly as much fire and smoke as the Hollywood garbage.)

Of course, the politicians play to the masses, and the masses don't know a darned thing, so they go with what people think rather than reality. So they keep to what people stupidly believe and let them continue thinking it. They aren't going to tell people they're too stupid to know what's really for their own good.


RE: Because who knows better
By mcnabney on 6/15/11, Rating: -1
"What would I do? I'd shut it down and give the money back to the shareholders." -- Michael Dell, after being asked what to do with Apple Computer in 1997














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki