backtop


Print 83 comment(s) - last by protosv.. on May 11 at 9:49 PM


Volkswagen Jetta Sportwagen TDI
The majority of vehicle shopper support increased fuel efficiency standards

The Consumer Federation of America recently released a report that it calls the first progress report on the 54.5 mpg fuel efficiency standard. According to the CFA, consumers are demanding more fuel-efficient vehicles. According to the poll, the majority of Americans support federal government requirements increasing fuel economy for new cars.

“Looking at current market offerings, consumer purchasing trends and our surveys of consumer demand, there is no doubt that the federal effort to significantly raise fuel economy is benefiting, consumers, car companies, autoworkers and the environment”, said Jack Gillis, report co-author who is CFA’s Director of Public Affairs and author of The Car Book.

Those federal regulations stipulate that new cars achieve 35 mpg fleetwide average by 2017 and an average of 55 mpg by 2025. 85% of respondents to the survey said that they support these requirements with 54% saying they strongly support the standards.

Fuel efficiency is highly sought after when it comes to purchasing new vehicles with 88% respondents to the survey saying that in their next vehicle purchase, fuel economy will be an important factor and 59% say fuel economy will be a very important factor influencing the purchase.

Survey respondents who say fuel economy is very important to them expect their next vehicle to get 12 mpg more than the current vehicle. Consumers who already have a relatively efficient vehicle getting at least 24 mpg the intended purchase a new vehicle in the future want at least a seven mpg increase putting their desires at approximately 31 mpg.

The survey also found that 50% of respondents who said they intend to purchase an SUV want fuel efficiency of at least 25 mpg.

“These results should lay to rest any concerns that some car dealers had about consumer demand for more fuel efficient vehicles,” said Gillis.  In spite of the support of car companies, unions, consumer and environmental groups, the National Automobile Dealers Association was the only major entity opposed to the new requirements.

Source: ConsumerFed



Comments     Threshold


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

RE: Well...
By Philippine Mango on 5/8/2013 3:31:50 PM , Rating: 2
Oh please, this is one of the few cases where everybody benefits. If the automakers want to make a gas guzzling car they can, but you'll just pay penalties for it.


RE: Well...
By Spuke on 5/8/2013 7:12:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
If the automakers want to make a gas guzzling car they can, but you'll just pay penalties for it.
Sorry but this is a retarded statement. You already pay the higher "penalty" for driving a not so fuel efficient car. It's called <drum roll> higher gas prices!! LOL! So you DO have to pay more now. And what does us paying more have to do with the automakers producing "gas guzzlers"? Another thing, if automakers are producing "gas guzzlers" then people must be buying them or it wouldn't benefit (ie profit) the automakers to continue producing them, would it now?


RE: Well...
By Philippine Mango on 5/9/2013 1:33:15 PM , Rating: 1
They have penalties so that the automakers are incentivized into making cars more efficient. It's either spend $1K+ on penalties or spend $1k+ on fuel efficiency technology. I know many poor people who can't afford to buy a new vehicle so when rich or dumb ass poor people buy a vehicle then resell it, all the poor people are left with are gas guzzling vehicles to drive to and from work.

The point of CAFE isn't just to increase fuel economy, high gas prices might do that alone, the idea behind the CAFE is to increase fuel economy while keeping fuel prices low so that consumers SAVE money. Most people think CAFE is retarded to work in that way but I think it's the best way because saving fuel isn't the only goal, but also to help people save money as well. The first owner may no benefit from fuel sipping technologies but the succeeding owners will which is why it's difficult to understand that market forces alone don't drive fuel economy as much as it should. Gas prices apparently need to be much higher than they currently are for dumbasses to get out of their guzzlers but that would negate any economic savings to the consumer the fuel sipping technologies would provide, therefore hurting the poor disproportionately.

I like CAFE because it's a different kind of tax. It's an impulse, waste tax. The automakers and therefore the consumer pays a penalty if they buy a gas guzzling vehicle, therefore are disincentivized from buying gas guzzlers. However it does not tax fuel so those who continue to drive the vehicles that they do don't have to be so heavily tax nor those who drive fuel sipping vehicles.

If you can't wrap your head around CAFE, think of it this way: CAFE IS A GAS GUZZLER VEHICLE TAX THAT IS THE ALTERNATIVE TO A GASOLINE TAX.


RE: Well...
By Mint on 5/10/2013 8:48:02 AM , Rating: 2
The problem is that if they buy a gas guzzler, they likely can afford it, that penalty is usually only paid for for 3-5 years.

After that, the car is put on the used market and somebody is going to buy it. It may depreciate faster, but it will be bought and driven for its remaining life. There is no net consumer choice in the used car market because it's a fixed, predetermined supply of goods. The individual choice merely has a substitutional effect, i.e. who gets which car.


"Spreading the rumors, it's very easy because the people who write about Apple want that story, and you can claim its credible because you spoke to someone at Apple." -- Investment guru Jim Cramer














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