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 Keeir on 2/14/2012 3:49:22 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
CAFE is an illegal and unconstitutional mandate. It needs to be stopped. The Federal Government has no right, whatsoever, to involve itself in matters of consumer choice.


You left out ineffective, inefficient and political chicanery.

Fuel prices are far more effective than CAFE in promoting fuel efficient technologies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CAFEStandard2.pn...

The government gets to "take" credit without the "blame" of additional costs. The government is given a new toy to play with to promote adgendas obscured from public view (read about how CAFE is calculated at the EPA if you wonder)


RE: consumer choice
By Spuke on 2/14/2012 5:15:17 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Fuel prices are far more effective than CAFE in promoting fuel efficient technologies.
Bingo! What's funny is that todays fuel efficiency has nothing to do with CAFE and is all demand driven.


RE: consumer choice
By Reclaimer77 on 2/14/2012 9:50:32 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
You left out ineffective, inefficient and political chicanery.


Hey you know me. I'm right there with you on that.

I believe that the Constitution authorizes only two federal mandates ---

1. The federal government may require a state to nationalize its militia.

2. The federal government must require the states to have republican forms of government.

Compare that to the thousands and thousands of federal mandates placed on the States. Who are supposed to be sovereign.

I'm convinced this is our biggest problem. The mandates and the centralizing power effect they cause.


RE: consumer choice
By superstition on 2/15/2012 5:17:34 PM , Rating: 2
The Articles of Confederation sailed.

You're out of time.


RE: consumer choice
By JediJeb on 2/15/2012 5:59:58 PM , Rating: 2
Look at any governments over the centuries and you will definitely see that when each large empire began to centralize all of its power into one place under a small number of people, that empire began its decline from a relatively high peak.

Roman Empire, Colonial Brittan, Babylonian Empire, Persian Empire, Ancient Egypt, Soviet Union, and many others. Most began with a period of expansion under a popular leader, where the conquered territories were governed by local leaders. Then as time progressed the central government, usually by then in the hands of other leaders, begins to want more power and takes away the autonomy of the local leaders. Once the mandates of the central government no longer coincide with the beliefs and ideals of the citizens of the local governments unrest begins to rise. At this point the decline begins and almost always ends in the destruction of that empire. If the US keeps going the way it has, things don't look so good for our future.


RE: consumer choice
By Qapa on 2/19/2012 11:12:35 AM , Rating: 2
I understand that fuel prices is the easiest way to motivate consumer's demand for lower fuel consumption.

But it is also a complex matter, since people who can't afford that much, and may have gotten a car recently would have it's car value plummet, might have difficulties in maintaining it, and probably wouldn't be able to buy another... The same people, in the scenario where companies are improving the products, can keep their cars along with their expectations of cost of ownership...


"A lot of people pay zero for the cellphone ... That's what it's worth." -- Apple Chief Operating Officer Timothy Cook














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