backtop


Print 43 comment(s) - last by Qapa.. on Feb 19 at 11:12 AM


  (Source: dougburson.com)
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers asked that some credits be given to automakers that improve technology to meet 2012-2016 requirements

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers approached the Obama Administration earlier this week to request the use of credits to meet the proposed fuel efficiency standards.

Last year, major automakers, the state of California, and the White House agreed on the new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) proposal that would boost fleet wide fuel economy to 54.5 mpg by 2025. The effort aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and lessen the country's dependency on foreign oil. The new rules also included a mid-term review to make sure that the 2021-2025 requirements are probable, which the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers also addressed this week.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, which represents Toyota Motor Corp., Detroit's Big Three automakers and eight other automakers, has requested that carmakers obtain some credits for improving technology to meet 2012-2016 requirements set by the new fuel efficiency standards proposal instead of automakers only receiving credits if they are "in use in a minimum percentage of its overall fleet."

"Providing this program feature in the earlier years improves the usefulness of the credit program and encourages manufacturers to introduce the listed technologies sooner," said the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

More specifically, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers would like automakers to obtain some credits for improving active grill shutters, start-stop technology, air conditioning and high efficiency lights for the 2012-2016 technology requirements.

The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers also asked that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) explain the mid-term evaluation process as well as the specifics that will be reviewed. In addition, automakers want to know that the "timeline and procedures for assuring that the studies relied upon by the agencies are appropriately peer reviewed."

Automakers added that they shouldn't be held responsible for emissions from electricity generation from EVs.

"Automakers may now be called on to not only make an unprecedented investment into vehicles with lower emissions, but to also fill the void between this rulemaking and a comprehensive national energy policy," said the automakers.

The new rules are expected to save drivers $1.7 trillion at the pump, but the National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) said last month that the new proposal could add as much as $5,000 to the sticker price of a new vehicle in 2025.

Source: The Detroit News



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: consumer choice
By jRaskell on 2/14/2012 1:22:55 PM , Rating: 2
I have yet to see the evidence supporting that claim.

You can currently still buy a high horsepower V8 sports car.
You can currently still buy a large/fullsize V8 SUV.

So long as a significant portion of the consumer market are interested in purchasing those vehicles, manufacturers will continue to build and sell them.

And while you'll likely never see either of those categories of vehicles obtaining 50+mpg, they'll both benefit from improved fuel mileage as a result of these mandates.

Of course, it's also true, as noted in the articles, that all these vehicles are going to come with significantly increased sticker prices as well.


RE: consumer choice
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/12, Rating: 0
RE: consumer choice
By Keeir on 2/14/2012 3:41:57 PM , Rating: 1
You have an interesting viewpoint.

On one hand, you assert that the Free Market will fulfill customer desires, but in the same point you say the Free Market needs to be guided to fulfill customer desires. (And assert that its being correctly guided)

Interesting contradiction.


RE: consumer choice
By retrospooty on 2/14/2012 4:48:39 PM , Rating: 1
Seems pretty clear to me. He is saying that as long as people are buying the V8 SUV's etc. , the Auto makers will keep making them. At the same time, the smaller cars can be pushed to get better mileage.

There isnt an either/or mandate. Both can exist.


RE: consumer choice
By Keeir on 2/14/2012 5:01:13 PM , Rating: 2
Errr.. you seem to have the same problem.

See if you can follow.

The consumers want more fuel efficient technologies, therefore the government must intervene and push smaller more fuel efficient cars by mandate. But if consumers want larger less efficient cars, the free market will fight against a government mandate to provide them. WAH.

In one situation, the poster is trusting the free market.

In another situation, the poster is praising government intervention into the free market.

There doesn't seem to be a monoploy or externality (at least not shared by both) so having a different viewpoint on the same situation seems... well... hard to follow.

Now there may be other reasons like "Its socially responsible to drive smaller cars, so its perfectly alright for the government to force people to buy smaller/more fuel efficient cars than they actual want to purchase". I am fine with that as a position, its at least internally consistent. But it must be acknowledged as fundamental that the government is biasing people away from their normal choices and thus limited their choice. I am not sure how it could be described any other way.


RE: consumer choice
By retrospooty on 2/14/2012 5:25:44 PM , Rating: 1
Just breath man. it will all be OK.

I see it like this. At some point the endless spihon of gas will run short. it will likely be political, or possibly supply based, but at some point, demand will outdo supply and when it happens, prices will skyrocket, and the ecomony of the entire planet will crash, and crash hard.

If we aren't pushing these technologies, when it happens, we will be screwed. Not might be screwed, we will be screwed, all of us.

The free market cant/wont see that. The free market will buy V8 SUV's until a crisis happens. When the crisis happens, its way too late to start develpoing alternative tech. We need to develop now. So why not develop and live at the same time simultaneously?


RE: consumer choice
By Keeir on 2/14/2012 5:35:46 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
I see it like this. At some point the endless spihon of gas will run short. it will likely be political, or possibly supply based, but at some point, demand will outdo supply and when it happens, prices will skyrocket, and the ecomony of the entire planet will crash, and crash hard.


Any idea when this is going to occur? I mean, I am fairly sure we have seen predicted dates for "peak" oil come and go.

quote:
The free market cant/wont see that. The free market will buy V8 SUV's until a crisis happens.


No. The free market will purchase vechile capacites whoose understood long term cost is less than the long term value placed on the cars.

Believe it or not, the "Free" market responds very well to raising prices without CAFE interference.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CAFEStandard2.pn...

And the entire time your assuming I think CAFE is wrong (which I do, but that's beside the point). Even if you support CAFE, you absolutely have to admit that it interferes with consumer choice. That's the basis of CAFE! To force manufacturers to force consumers to choose certain models of cars. That was my original point and it remains such. It is dishonest to support CAFE and claim it doesn't interfer with consumer choice.

quote:
If we aren't pushing these technologies, when it happens, we will be screwed. Not might be screwed, we will be screwed, all of us.


So you can see the future? I've always had difficulty with arguement. More so today than at times in the past. There exists significant technologies that are just barely economically worse than current oil technologies. Oil Sands, Biofuels, EVs, PHEVs, and gasp Public Transportation come to mind. Not sure why hobbling ourselves today to potentially avoid a crises of which we don't know the magnitude is the appropriate response.


RE: consumer choice
By retrospooty on 2/14/2012 6:01:31 PM , Rating: 2
meh


RE: consumer choice
By Schrag4 on 2/14/2012 5:57:43 PM , Rating: 2
If by "crash hard" you mean we see it coming more than just a couple of decades away, then I'd agree with you. And of course if we have several decades to transition, the "skyrocket" in price that takes several decades to unfold will provide ample time for the free market to get us onto electric cars or whatever tech happens to shake out by then (we'll probably all be dead from old age by the time this happens after all).

Just breath man.


RE: consumer choice
By Spuke on 2/14/2012 7:00:18 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
So why not develop and live at the same time simultaneously?
You tell Keeir to breathe and then proceed to paint a doomsday scenario. LOL! Free market will see this because prices will continue to rise (like they have been) to the point where other technologies and pricing structures become feasible. This has ben happening. Nothing new here. When I was a kid I would not have guessed that the AVERAGE price of a new car would be nearly $30,000 in my lifetime AND we'd all be ok with it. LOL! I expected prices to rise, but not like that. Example: in 1984 a brand new Porsche 911 Carrera cost $30,000. Now it costs $80,000. How many people were removed from the new car market because of those increases? How many more will be removed because of future increases?


RE: consumer choice
By retrospooty on 2/14/2012 7:13:17 PM , Rating: 2
Its not a doomsday scenario. Its called planning. We know it wont last forever and we need to build better efficiency into our cars, as well as alternatives to gas entirely.

If we do nothing but build V8 SUV's and Hummers until it happens, its too late. Its quite simple really.

Whatever though. I really don't give a crap. I am not in favor of CAFE specifically, but at least can see why to try and that is all my post meant. Of course the govt. screws up anything it touches.


RE: consumer choice
By Keeir on 2/14/2012 7:27:37 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
If we do nothing but build V8 SUV's and Hummers until it happens, its too late. Its quite simple really.


But we don't. V8's are now the least produced engine (I4, V6, V8)

http://www.autoobserver.com/2011/10/four-cylinder-...

Consumers are constantly reacting to higher prices. GASP! And we didn't have to have the government force the manufacturers to artificially raise prices further on those nasty V8s!

quote:
Its called planning.


Not really. You made a bunch of random statements in support of sweeping policy actions. I am pretty sure its called rabble rousing.

quote:
I am not in favor of CAFE specifically, but at least can see why to try and that is all my post meant.


That is called being in favor of something, to think that it should be "tried" over available alternatives.


RE: consumer choice
By retrospooty on 2/14/2012 9:25:32 PM , Rating: 2
You need to get laid really badly dont you?


RE: consumer choice
By Spuke on 2/15/2012 12:21:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
You need to get laid really badly dont you?
You really need a brain, don't you?


RE: consumer choice
By Keeir on 2/15/2012 1:31:39 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
by retrospooty on February 14, 2012 at 9:25 PM


quote:
You need to get laid really badly dont you?


HI-LAR-IOUS


RE: consumer choice
By Spuke on 2/14/2012 5:32:30 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Errr.. you seem to have the same problem.
Yes and their problem is they're ok with forcing the population into more fuel efficient cars whether or not the population wants them. They state you can still buy a large vehicle but fail to see that the automakers MUST meet the CAFE requirements. These requirements do NOT make it easy (and maybe not even possible) for the automakers to build these larger vehicles. But what if people want larger vehicles and there are little to none available due to government regulations, what happens then (other than used car prices for these vehicles skyrocketing)?

I will guess that these people will insist that large vehicles will continue to be made despite CAFE regs, even though their presence reduces the automakers CAFE average. How do you do both?

My opinion, large vehicles will be made but will be extremely expensive and only the wealthy will be able to afford them. If the general population wants one they'll have to fight each other over the used one's, driving the prices up to where only the wealthy (again) can afford them. So, no regular person will own a large vehicle and depending on how stubborn we are, we won't buy a new smaller car either. Automakers lose money, GM gets another bailout. Wash, rinse, repeat.


"Mac OS X is like living in a farmhouse in the country with no locks, and Windows is living in a house with bars on the windows in the bad part of town." -- Charlie Miller














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