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 Dr. Kenneth Noisewater on 5/8/2013 3:36:17 PM , Rating: 2
Indeed, raising the gas tax to reduce consumption makes a lot more thermodynamic and libertarian sense than forcing automakers to comply with a MPG mandate or (by trickle-down thuggery) forcing buyers to buy them.


RE: Well...
By Mint on 5/8/2013 3:55:36 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is that it's political suicide, even if you use the revenues to give people tax breaks.

Even in supposedly tree-hugging Canada, the Liberal Party leader concocted a carbon tax scheme paired with lower income taxes that would result in net savings for most families, and that formerly ruling party got absolutely hammered with its worst result in decades.


RE: Well...
By Philippine Mango on 5/9/2013 1:42:22 PM , Rating: 2
Why do you think that a gas tax is better than a gas guzzler tax? That makes no sense unless you think it's better because it's a tax on everybody instead of a tax on idiots.


RE: Well...
By rountad on 5/9/2013 1:51:13 PM , Rating: 2
I don't know about him, but I would rather see a higher gas tax than the increased CAFE standards.

The increased tax will incentivize the creation of more efficient cars and make people spend more money.

The CAFE increase will limit choice of vehicles, force auto manufacturers to make certain types of vehicles, and make people spend more money.

Both involve increased costs, but one limits choice and freedom less.

Even better would be to let the free market come to an equilibrium.

We are exporting large quantities of gasoline. We aren't hurting for it. Not even close.


RE: Well...
By Philippine Mango on 5/9/2013 2:05:12 PM , Rating: 1
quote:

The CAFE increase will limit choice of vehicles, force auto manufacturers to make certain types of vehicles, and make people spend more money.

Both involve increased costs, but one limits choice and freedom less.

Even better would be to let the free market come to an equilibrium.

We are exporting large quantities of gasoline. We aren't hurting for it. Not even close.


How does having a high gas tax not limit vehicle choice but the CAFE tax limits vehicle choice? That doesn't make any sense. The automakers can and do make vehicles that violate the MPG rating needed to not get penalties so the idea that raising it will limit vehicle choice but a gas tax won't is just ridiculous. If people are dumb enough to buy a gas guzzler price be damned, then they'll continue to do so and automakers will continue to make those vehicles. Fact of the matter is, vehicle choice is already limited by the auto manufacturers because they build what is most profitable at the cost of choice so it's all a wash. You want a gas guzzling vehicle I want a fuel sipping pickup truck, as it currently stands, I'm not getting what I want and you're apparently not getting what you want either so who gives a shit.


RE: Well...
By rountad on 5/9/2013 5:07:10 PM , Rating: 2
It limits vehicle choice at the automaker level.

If they want to avoid penalties
If they are willing to pay penalties but the car in question isn't cost effective with the penalties
The opportunity cost of producing cars that the automakers don't want to produce, but feel like they are forced to to comply with regulation

Didn't one of the Italian automakers, Fiat or Maserati, just say that hybrids were crap but they'd soon have to be making them?

Anyway, my point is that CAFE will stop many high HP cars from seeing the light of day, but you'll get more and more fuel efficient trucks either way.


RE: Well...
By Nutzo on 5/9/2013 6:40:07 PM , Rating: 2
So someone's an idiot because they need a large car?

We currently have a mini van so the wife can carpool the kids.

Before that I and a SUV because I was hauling alot of contruction stuff.

I guess we would have been smarter to buy a Pruis and made 2-3 seperate trips everytime we needed to haul several people or lots of stuff.


"We don't know how to make a $500 computer that's not a piece of junk." -- Apple CEO Steve Jobs














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