Mandated Mischief: Obama’s 54.5 MPG Standard
We’re often assured that the reformed CAFE program established via the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) fixed the problem (often by the same folks who denied there was a trade-off between fuel economy and safety under the original CAFE program). However, even under the reformed program, which supposedly constrains down-sizing in favor of technological innovation, EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) estimate that achieving fuel economy standards of 47 to 62 mpg will require weight reductions of 15% to 30% (Interim Joint Technical Report, p. 3-8).
Automakers will undoubtedly incorporate new technology to meet the 54.5 mpg standard. Nonetheless, Kazman explains, “No matter what fuel-saving technologies we put into the car of the future, adding weight to the car will both lower its fuel efficiency and increase its safety.” Inevitably, fuel economy standards prevent people from buying all the vehicle safety they’re willing to pay for.
Why did automakers agree to the deal? “Government Motors” has to be careful about defying a White House that props them up financially. Auto companies also feared ending up with something even worse: a 62 mpg standard enforced via a “patchwork” of state-by-state fuel economy regimes spearheaded by the California Air Resources Board (CARB).
Auto industry analyst Henry Payne notes another reason:
“We’ll agree to anything that’s 15 years out,” a highly-placed auto industry insider told me today about the fairy tale 54.5 mpg-by-2025 mandate for America’s auto fleet that Barack Obama and Big Auto execs finally — officially — announced Friday in Washington.
The rule has no grounding in reality. An engineering rule of thumb is that gas engine efficiency improves by 1.5 percent a year (a gain that, in the cheap gas U.S. market, has traditionally gone to power upgrades rather than mpg improvements). The EPA’s rule will mandate that light trucks gain 3.5 percent a year and cars, 5 percent. Really.
Environmental groups claim there’s no problem because automakers could comply even with a 56 mpg standard just by selling lots of hybrids. But according to the Center for Automotive Research (CAR), the market share for hybrids would have to increase from less than 3% in 2011 to 76% by 2025 — almost eight times higher than the projected market share. And mass reductions of at least 15% would also be required, reducing vehicle safety in crashes.
CAR estimates that a 56 mpg standard would impose on consumers a net loss (sticker price increase minus fuel savings) of $2,858 over five years if gasoline prices average $3.50/gallon. The 62 mpg that CARB, green groups, and (very likely) Obama preferred would impose a net loss of $6,525. Without regulatory coercion limiting our options, most consumers would avoid this “bargain.”
Fuel economy standards compel automakers to please government planners rather than satisfy consumers. That’s a recipe for an auto industry with lower sales, reduced profits, and fewer jobs.
Team Obama and their green allies undoubtedly think it is great fun to gamble with other people’s assets and livelihoods, even if it means imposing safety risks on motorists. If we were living under a constitution of liberty, that sort of mischief would not be allowed.
“Partly as a consequence of CAFE, the U.S. market share of foreign-designed vehicles increased from 18% in 1975 to 29% in 1980 and 41% in 2000 ”
Partly as a consequence of CAFE?
No way, what a cop-out.
The US car industry was caught napping. They became complacent and were beaten.
The US needs to take the initiative again.
The US used to thrive on competition.
Wake up!
“They became complacent and were beaten.”
Because working with the so flexible UAW allowed management ample freedom to make the changes necessary to stay competitive..
Don’t go “New York Times” on us here…
There are a LOT of stupid people who buy big trucks, then go broke buying gas for it.
Consider the unemployed, toothless, 2-pack-a-day smokin’, tattoo’d dude, buying a 12-pack of Miller Lite at the gas station after filling his chromed-up F-150.
What’s Obama gonna have HIM driving/smoking/drinking in 2025?
C’mon now, tattoo’d dudes who smoke and drive big trucks do not drink lite beer. If we are going to disparage a stereotype (and some of my kin folk), please get the beer right.
In 2025, Obama is going to have about as much influence as he does now on the people who never voted for him and don’t listen to the drama, er BS, pouring from the ‘prompter. When he leaves office, let’s hope the economic recovery exceeds our wildest dreams and and tattoo’d guy has a job and an American-made truck he can easily afford.
The people you disparage use big trucks on bad roads. They also carry loads of firewood, metal for recycling, lawn clippings and tree trimmings from work, ATV’s and personal water craft, canoes and kayaks (yes, okies use kayaks), bulk foods (either family or for market), and other purposes yuppymobiles are hopeless for. Being a redneck does not make people blind to economic realities.
The people /you/ see are probably city people who can afford the gas for their ego-mobiles.
What about the rancher driving a Dodge Ram with big steer horns on the front. He has all of his teeth and fills it with diesel. You do know that Cummins is a diesel?
But I thought the Chevy Volt was going to save the world, making conventionally powered cars obsolete and unnecessary? By doing this, is Obama admitting that we will not all be using electric cars by 2025? Given how horrible the sales for electric cars have been over the last year or so, no wonder we are going back to fuel mileage regulations. Or maybe these impossible fuel mileage standards are designed to get rid of conventionally powered cars, knowing that the manufacturers can never achieve them? Either way, it’s the government slapping on even more regulations on our dying car industry. Just what it “needs.”
Poof! We have magically raised fuel economy in the new utopia. Much as J. Foxworthy’s line of ‘a check, you’ll take a check, why I’ll just pay the whole thing off then’. Caught a glimpse of all the media and other accolites genuflecting and high-fiving on the way to the off button.
Every so often I pass a car on the way to work. It looks like a four x four tin box scooting along. That is what this is about and exactly where they intend to put us all.
1) Obama doesn’t intend to ever reach that 54.5 figure: it’s a MSM soundbite.
2) The auto companies never intend to comply: they got a hidden short-term perk for “agreeing”.
3) Our republic is in such bad shape that, by 2025, we will be embroiled in a vicious civil war: none of these peacetime issues will matter anyway.
Once again Obama sells us a bill of goods. He claims we will save money based on what?? That gas prices will remain at todays prices? More likely will be fee’s and or fines to auto manufacturers who do not meet the mandate or for consumers who wish to drive cars that achieve less mileage. Better gas mileage will simply allow the govt to levy more taxes on fuel without the usual outcry. We are losing our freedoms for supposed security.
Yah ,when the civil war breaks out and the violent ghetto hordes are chasing you down good luck outrunning them!
Iowahawk predicted this years ago
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rAqPMJFaEdY
and good luck running over the hordes in a chevy dolt versus a modified f-250 apocalypse vehicle
Try and find a legit picture of a Smart Car in an actual accident (not the test wreck video by Smart Car). You will find it difficult to find. I was a firefighter for 34 years and responded to many auto accidents over the years. Without a doubt the smaller the car the worse your chances of survival are in an accident with a bigger vehicle. I tried to find pictures of the Smart Car in accidents as a training tool to figure out how to remove people from these auto when involved in accidents. All I was able to find are other similar cars and almost all of the wrecks were fatal when they were involved with bigger vehicles. It appears that pictures of the Smart car in wrecks gets removed for the internet almost as soon as they are posted. Maybe someone doesn’t want you to know how dangerous they are. Where is Ralph Nader now (remember his book Unsafe At Any Speed)?
In searching for the same photos, I’ve noticed that almost all photos of “Smart cars” in accidents, like the following:
http://media.photobucket.com/image/smart%20car%20crash/dhb2/POLITICS/image0022.jpg
are not actually Smart cars. Smart cars are easily identified by their 3-bolt wheels. And in the photos that are labeled “Smart car”, even a Hummer wouldn’t survive those accidents. So the whole small-is-dangerous thing sounds a bit exaggerated.
Nope – lighter cars are inherently more dangerous – it’s simple physics:
Momentum is conserved in the collision. Thus if two vehicles of equal weight and opposite equal velocity run into each other, the result is both cars being stationary. But if one vehicle is heavier than the other, that vehicle will decelerate to less than 0 velocity, and the other will decelerate by more the its own velocity. So a light vehicle running into a heavy vehicle head on is worse than running into a wall (equal weight is the same as running into a wall).
Big vehicles win in this situation. The more deceleration, the greater the probability and magnitude of injury to the occupants, all other things being equal.
Engineers do their best to make cars “crashworthy” – but the same measures applied to a larger vehicle as to a smaller vehicle will result in fewer casualties in the larger vehicle compared to the smaller.
Weight means a whole lot in collisions.
Nope, it’s not physics. It’s probabilities. If you get rear-ended in your Hummer by a Kenworth, you’ll be just as dead as the Smart guy. In fact, pick-up trucks are the most dangerous mode of transport in terms of roll-overs:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/cars/rules/rulings/tread/MileStones/66FRpg35179.htm
The Smart is 50% less likely that a pickup to roll over and eject its occupants. Not saying that I’m going to rush out and buy a Smart. They’re basically weird to start with, unless they’ve got a Hayabusa powerplant under the back seat. Either way, they’re not as dangerous as you’re trying to make out.
let me t-bone your prius with my F150, and afterwards, in your hospital room, we’ll discuss small= dangerous
As I said, you’re living a fantasy. The probability is that it won’t happen, in spite of you dreaming that it will. This argument is about probabilities, not fantasies.
Oh man, why could have not seen this last week. I saw was driving along one night last week and passed by an smart car in an accident. The police and ambulance had already arrived. It looked like it sidewipped a telephone pole. I would taken taken a picture with my cell phone had I known this.
I’m not saying that you’re dreaming, but in fact you didn’t see this happen. Nice try, though.
There’s another piece to this puzzle – the phony, unphysical MPG numbers that the EPA uses for hybrids and electrics. For example, they ignore all losses in the system, both thermal and electrical, and calculate 99 MPG “equivalent” for the Nissan Leaf. Phony as a three dollar bill. But perfectly legal. Using this magic math, it actually doesn’t take that many electrics and plug-ins to average a fleet out to 56.
Last time I checked, the EPA and GM were claiming that the Volt gets 230 MPG in plug-in mode using a method that doesn’t account for the electricity at all. Again, physically completed phoney, but legally, if the regs say you can use that number, you can use that number.
And the consumers are being played like fiddles.
And the consumers are being played like fiddles.
Nope. GM shipped 493 volts in May 2011. Shipped isn’t the same thing as what people bought; it means “sent to dealers.” GM can’t claim that the problem is production or pipeline issues as they did on Feb since this has since been fixed (assuming that the claim was reality.) The upshot is that the buying public is ignoring the volt.
Not directed at you, but for others —
Re popularity of imports etc being the result of the UAW… nonsense. In the 80′s I was buying honda and toyota etc because I knew I could get 250k miles on an engine and not worry about it. The domestic cars broke down faster. Today Detroit apologists claim that domestic engines last as long as import engines but this is a joke; it took them over 20 years to figure out how to get a buick engine to last as long as an 80′s era toyota. They (domestic brands) still haven’t learned how to make a comfy and functional interior, so toyota is still light years ahead.
To be certain the UAW has a negative impact but as others point out they don’t design cars. Without the UAW what you’d have is cheaper cars that are still crap compared to what toyota makes. As a consumer I’m willing to pay extra for that which isn’t crap. Detroit loses regardless.
As a consumer if Detroit closed up every dealership I probably wouldn’t even notice; I don’t buy detroit cars, never have, never will.
While you were buying your 80′s era Hondas, etc, I bought a 1983 Ford F-100. Nearly 29 years and over 250,000 miles later, I’m still driving it and wondering when it will ever wear out. The engine and transmission have never been touched. Oil consumption is less than a quart/1,000 miles. Granted, it is not likely that you have your 29 year old car, few people do. But, do you think it even exists anymore? Hondas in particular has nasty rust problems in important structural areas. Crashworthiness was abysmal back then, but since people were merely crushed instead of fried as in Pintos, few took notice. Even the much-loved VW Beetle had a higher rear end fatality rate than the Pinto. But those people died cleanly of a broken neck when the seats tore loose.
You may keep your Japanese cars. I have no use for them.
you bring up a fantastic point
america was once the place for quality goods– maybe a little pricier but would last forever and was reliable
it seems every product i purchase (regardless of origin)is designed to break the moment my warranty expires– thus, the “newer and cheaper” eventually becomes “troublesome and expensive”
unleash this economy; get rid of arbitrary/convoluted regulations (like cafe standards)and let this country get back to what it is good at
My 1994 Suburban has 212,000 miles with original engine and transmission. I live in FL so no rust to worry about (though the paint is faded).
I may only get 14 MPG but I don’t have a car payment and live only 10 miles from work. So my monthly cost including insurance is about $200 a month.
What’s a car payment cost on the prius? Then add insurance cost. Maybe $700 a month?
I guess I’ll be keeping my ‘burb for years to come – even if I have to rebuild the engine.
Also, If everyone is driving an electric car where is the money going to come from to pay for road construction and repair? Hint – gas tax pays for that now. Some states are already considering a special tax on electric and hybrid cars because they are using the roads without paying “their fair share”.
Robert F
Toyota and honda pretty much own the US passenger car market and have done so for at least a couple of decades, yet your perception is that they rust? Seriously? Hoo haw. You’re not paying much attention, sparky. Perhaps the notion of reliability and resale value is wholly made up by commie rags like Consumer Reports and corroborated by Edmunds and Kelly blue book who gets a kickback from an umamerican insurance industry? If you have a point to make about japanese cars then this would be easily fact checked with real numbers. Show us how wrong consumer reports is, or show us that Toyota and Honda *don’t* own the passenger car market.
Daxypoo —
america was once the place for quality goods– maybe a little pricier but would last forever and was reliable
Nonsense. American goods in the 1950′s that were better than goods from elsewhere was due primarily to the same geographical happenstance that kept it from being invaded in WWII, to wit: American manufacturing wasn’t decimated with destruction. By the 1970′s most of the tv sets and radios were being made by Japanese companies and were more reliable than ever. We put a man on the moon with German rocket technology directed by the Germans who created it. And so on. Nostalgia sucks.
Snork —
I’m just appalled at the chutzpah of the EPA and the automakers to make these outrageous and false claims, which are clearly consumer fraud.
I don’t see this as consumer fraud so much as the assumption that the average consumer is an idiot. And the assumption probably holds. For example the total end to end energy budget for building and operating a hybrid exceeds that of a conventional high MPG engine (and do note that BMW has a european diesel that gets 60-70 mpg or so.) The hybrid offers somewhat lower daily use cost for the consumer, but the energy used by the manufacturing and recycling processes more than offsets any gain in daily use efficiency.
The only fraud I can see is the EPA’s notion of pollution control. Surely the same europeans who invented radar and gave us einstein and moon rockets are capable of understanding enough science to grasp the notion of pollution, yet they toodle about all day long in vehicles we aren’t allowed to buy.
Oh, and given that the BMW diesel that gets great mpg is a lot cheaper to make than a hybrid, it’s doubtful the automakers are “in” on anything. Interestingly GM and Ford overseas vehicles get far better mpg than they are allowed here in the USA. As a result I’d be suspicious of claims that automakers want these draconian CAFE rules.
I’m not going to trash your old F-150 for personal reasons. I was a passenger in an F-150 of a very similar vintage when we were rear-ended by a guy who fell asleep at the wheel and hit us at full highway speed while we were stopped to turn into a gas station. The impact pushed us across a lane of oncoming traffic and down into a ditch. We were on our way back out of the ditch and heading straight for a very large light standard when one of the leaf springs broke and turned, acting a lot like an anchor and bringing us to a stop just short of that big light standard. The F-150 was a writeoff but we weren’t; just a few stitches for me and the driver. So I have a special fondness for the F-150.
However, I do have to say that many Fords from the early 80s were awful. I still remember seeing nearly-new early 80s Fords that were covered in rust, even though they were only a year or two old. It was positively disgraceful. I think that this horrific problem led a lot of people who were previously buying domestics to finally switch to imports, particularly Japanese imports, for their perceived better quality.
It also led to major increases in warranties for domestic cars. While many domestic models still had very short warranties – 90 days was typical – the mass change to foreign cars had many of the domestic car companies increasing their warranties to several years. At least that’s how I remember it.
Are domestic cars comparable in quality with foreign cars even now? I don’t truly know. I gave up on domestics after very bad experiences with a nearly new Mustang about 20 years ago. Worst piece of junk I’ve ever owned and DANGEROUS in the extreme. Any car that fishtails as you drive straight on a dry road is just not a car anyone should want to have.
This hasn’t kicked in yet, either. I’m just appalled at the chutzpah of the EPA and the automakers to make these outrageous and false claims, which are clearly consumer fraud. And while the public hasn’t exactly embraced these cars, they should be righteously angry at the deception.
This will eventually come to govern the market, if this isn’t repealed. The day will come when CAFE will severely limit the number of conventional cars that can be sold by any given automaker, and supply-and-demand will cause the price to rise dramatically, to parity with plugins and electrics. This is the real game; the MPG number itself is just a tool. It doesn’t actually mean anything physical, and was never intended to.
The CAFE rules also gave us, in each of our new cars, safety devices which explode (airbags), sometimes 10 to a car or more.
Now, even a minor collision can render a car which is several years old a write-off due to the cost of replacing the safety bombs inside the vehicle.
With regard to any accidents involving a “Smart” car, the fire/rescue personnel’s job is rendered incredibly easy in cleaning up the aftermath. Simply load the wrecked “Smart” car on the back of a flatbed and truck immediately to the cemetery. There is no need to buy a separate casket if you are already driving a “Smart” car.
Why this “agreement?” Easy! It will allow the criminal democrats to sell “waivers.” As benchmark years begin to approach (and if there are still democrats in the federal government) we’ll see very quiet notices and buried deep in the seventeenth paragraph, the fact that the impending deadline for a specific company has been waived and extended by many years. Back checking will demonstrate that Maxine Waters son-in-law was named “Vice President- Community Affairs” for that same Company only two months ago. Of course, maybe it’s not Waters, but sshe works well in explaining how this will work.
Hey, why mot mandate 545 mpg? Or 545 million? And while they’re at it, why doesn’t Obama change the gravitational constatnt and repeal the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics?
He’s too busy with that pesky 2nd Amendment.
There are a lot of things wrong with this article.
I was an adult in the 1970s, and I got to see firsthand how Detroit lost market share to foreign imports.
Honda and Toyota never had trouble meeting fuel economy standards. In fact, they had planned years before to develop cars with excellent fuel economy. Detroit did not do that.
Detroit was caught short by the OPEC oil embargo of 1973, which first sent consumers scurrying to buy fuel-efficient cars (which meant imports back then). But they had no excuse for what happened after. After the oil embargo was lifted, and fuel prices declined for a while, Detroit went right back to designing the type of vehicles they had designed for years: Gas-guzzling lemons with poor fit and finish and with built-in metal fatigue, rusting out after 6 years.
So when the next big oil price spike happened in the late 1970s, Detroit got caught short again.
Somehow, Honda and Toyota never had trouble meeting those fuel-economy standards. They flooded the U.S. market with efficient and reliable cars of high quality. They have marketed trucks and more recently, SUVs as well.
I don’t blame the UAW for this either. They don’t decide what mix of big and small cars and trucks their employer is going to market. Those decisions are made in the corporate boardrooms. And they don’t design the cars either. That’s done by the engineering staff, who came up with such disasters as the Chevy Vega with body panels that rusted out in just a few years, and with an engine that was highly prone to failure. I’m willing to bet you that disgusted Vega owners didn’t rush to buy another GM car as a replacement. They started looking seriously at the Honda and Toyota.
There are a lot of disasters the Federal Government really is responsible for, from the 55 mph speed limit to the “too big to fail” mentality that resulted in government-guaranteed loans to Chrysler under Lee Iacocca, and now the outright nationalization of GM by Obama.
But failure to improve fuel economy and quality is Detroit’s fault alone. For too long, they just didn’t care.
“I don’t blame the UAW for this either. They don’t decide what mix of big and small cars and trucks their employer is going to market. Those decisions are made in the corporate boardrooms. ”
===
Small cars don’t make big profits.. Big profits are needed to keep paying the extortionists.. Hence the need for the UAW buddies of Obama to have small cars cost more.. Obama obliges..
Thank you vangrungy for your insight.
UPS got stimulis money and FedEx did not. Care to guess what company is unionized ? Stock and bondholders got screwed on GM but the Union pension was bailed out. Look at the Union tactics in Wisconsin – thugs pure thugs.
They act more like the Brownshits in Germany that anything else.
Unions have killed the public school system. And DC continues to trot out the line “it’s for the children” NO ITS FOR THE TEACHER UNION VOTES !!
And finally you have the career politicians who’ve made millions with platinum benefits telling John Q Public whats good for him.
I’d like to buy a shot for all you Union supporters – a Bin Laden: Two shots and a splash of water. Look for the Union label so you can choose another product. Too bad they stopped with Jimmy Hoffa………
I would stick up for the Chrysler bailout, as a general exception. Lee Iacocca was an exceptional businessman who knew automobiles like few else – if any. I think the gov. knew they had a winner who really would turn things around and get Chrysler into a going venture again. Perhaps as a precedent, not so good. But considered by itself- solid gold.
The Chevy joke is a prime example of what this administration stands for; dictating or eliminating choice. Next is the smart grid to penalize you on utilities. After that carbon capture – junk science designed th fleece the public. Obama is a another profit fear version of Al Gore. They believe in the sacrafice by others in the name of their benefit. But you can’t say profit so they hide behind green. Mercury filled lights; tiny cars, giant windmills, higher taxes being “patriotic”. What we have is a goverrnment subsidized Union that owns a car company, subsidized windfarms that kill thousands of birds daily and bulbs that endanger small children and pregnant women. Good thing we have Obamacare to look after the crash victims and deformed babies from mercury exposure. All based on the EPA and CAFE standards that are never voted on and have no appeal process. SIEG HEIL MR PRESIDENT !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
The biggest impact I can see from this is the rising vehicle prices. What consumers will find, and many already have, is that the days of getting a “great deal” on a car are long gone. I am a salesman at a Ford dealership in Texas and see this first hand. Many of my customers have had a very time believing that cars no longer have 7-10k in mark-up. In fact, on our newer fuel efficient cars, it’s about $400. That’s right. Your days of buying a car far below MSRP are quickly drawing to a close. The technology for these high MPG cars is incredibly expensive and at some point in the near future will cause vehicle prices to rise above a level that consumers are willing to pay. In the long run this will cripple auto manufacturers and make the auto industry collapse of 2008-09 look like child’s play.
You won’t be having that problem much longer. It’s only a matter of time before the first automaker starts selling cars on the internet, and there won’t be any more dealers.
You might be able to make Capt. Kirk an offer on Priceline.
A friend did that for a decade before he retired.
This will drive up used car prices at some point. When the government begins to loose revenue because of better MPG you can bet another tax hike is coming. Look at fuel prices in Europe already. Lets be honest; it’s not efficency we have to look forward to but smaller everything. Smaller cars smaller houses larger electric bills and smaller choices.
If you’ve swithched to the cork screw macaroni light bulbs you know they burn out quicker than the old style. They were designed to be left on but not on and off multiple times. Keep your receipts as they do have a warranty; and at these prices you will want a refund. We’ll all burn the extra gas savings running back and forth to the stores to replace them….kinda like a hampster on a wheel just like the people in charge think of us anyway
It must be nice to be a messiah, you can just decree things to be without having to worry about laws of physics. Of course it’s possible to build itty-bitty cars with barely enough room for two adults and two bags of groceries and with a fuel economy of more than 50 mpg provided they are always driving on level roads in ideal weather conditions.
The problem automotive engineers run up against is getting that kind of mileage from vehicles that “work.” Not work in the sense of running OK, but work in the sense of carrying loads, driving up steep hills, driving through snow and heavy enough to stay firmly planted on the pavement in high winds. In other words the kind of vehicle that most normal people find useful and feel comfortable driving.
I think the messiah should stop messing around with these silly mpg rules and simply decree that by 2025 all vehicles must be powered by perpetual motion machines.
“We’ll agree to anything that’s 15 years out.”
Just like the debt we are running on…why should Obama and the democrats (and Republicans, come to think of it, after seeing Boehner’s Folly pass with support of so-called conservatives who know full well that the balanced budget amendment will never come up)behave responsibly today, when the debt can be put off for another 15 years…
At some point the laws of physics come into play here. Aren’t there a lot of motorcycles that don’t even get this kind of mileage?
Not to worry…in Obama’s second term, he’ll negotiate for gallons per mile automobiles…when there are no automobiles, comrade,the mileage is unbelievable.
Next up…a declaration that no US citizen will be allowed to have over 34 inches per waistline.
Ah, Obama needed a distraction, he was getting his a$$ kicked in the debt debate. He probably instructed his team to find something he could take credit for, a way he could show real leadership. If he were a real messiah, he could do what Bohemond suggested above.
Until then, yawn, he’s a twit on the sidelines. Or, is that a tweeter?
Mazda can do it all day long with their new SkyActive system with out the deaths and high costs.
So, like the station wagon, pickup trucks with gun racks driven by cowboys are gone with the wind. I guess the east and west coast patricians are planning on the plebs going vegetarian, and we’ll all be eating Solyent Green and speaking Chimerica. What will Hollywood do next?
Good piece.
One has to understand that in the minds of these people, anything the least bit beneficial for the environment, no matter how slight, or even anything simply THOUGHT to be the least bit beneficial for the environment, is worth more people’s deaths.
Fifteen years from now I see many of us launching from our homes in our personal aircraft(flying machine,ha)to our work. Imagine the fuel economy with much shorter distance and time duration. Weeds will be growing on the freeway.
Today the aircraft are available. What will it take to move it along? The greater congestion that keeps growing. The innovation will perhaps come from China where the congestion is already overwhelming. We,in the USA will be held back by our government’s regulations and tax burden on income of the entrepreneur.
What is it about these threads that brings out all the junior Trekkies?
We heard this flying car stuff when I was a Kid also the personal aircraft bit by the time I grew up I am 62 now and these people are still pipe dreaming
Exactly what I was thinking, AndyZ. I’ve heard these little Nike dorks talk for 20 years about the coming wave of individual flying machines, but we’re still driving cars and buying gasoline. I wonder who would do all the air traffic controlling in that magical world they envision and how we’re ever gonna be able to text our friends with both hands on the flying control sticks? And where would the gals find a service station to ask directions from? How would the robocops ever figure out whose fault it was when a crash took place? Would they take pictures of the air swirls around where it happened or what?
All this is baloney. Like a previous poster said, Obama needed to distract people from the debt debate. Hopefully, after 2012 he will just fade away into the smoke he keeps blowing up liberals’ a$$es.
When I see an “average” American car at the local mall, something like a “Navigator”, I’m astounded at the size of the thing! I don’t quite get how America can be having problems if they’re still driving on cheap gas and buying monsters like the Navigator or Ram 6 passenger pickups. Even the American Toyotas are enormous! At least the new CAFE regs might give the rest of us working stiffs a chance to buy a small pickup truck like a B1800, the kind of normal pickup that’s been banned in America for decades. It’s time the rest of us got a break from being forced into monster trucks.
54.4 miles per gallon…but, gallon of what? Real gasoline, or this ethanolated crap they force us to use? My experience is a loss of at least 6% gas milage per gallon with “gasahol” blend than with real gasoline.
BTW, back in the ’80s my Honda 400cc twin got about 55 MPG on the highway, weighed just under 300 pounds, and produced all of 25 HP. What kind of “car” is going to match that?
>BTW, back in the ’80s my Honda 400cc twin got about 55 MPG on the highway, weighed just under 300 pounds, and produced all of 25 HP. What kind of “car” is going to match that?
the 2025 Deathtrap, available at your local Government Motors dealer
Where did he get the figure 54.5 MPG? Why not just 54 or 55?
Well over here in flyover country I see hordes of Jeeps, P/U trucks, SUV’s and even a few station wagons some of which admittedly are European imports. What I don’t see are hybrids, electric cars, smart cars or any of that nonsense. Oh yeah sure there are a few of them scattered here and there and I’ll bet if you took a poll you’d find that the owners of those silly vehicles are California transplants. But for us regular folk, why I guess I’ll just be holding on to my Jeep for a bit longer then anticipated. I cannot begin to tell you how sick and tired I am of Barry and his merry band of do gooders who are trying to tell me how to live my life.
When are the Libtards going to force us into the Fred Flintstone car-cycle? Surely our fat asses could use the exercise, right Michelle big ass 0bama?
The real question here is: by what authority does Barack Obama or the EPA have to dictate fuel economy standards to auto makers?? Last time I checked, I thought only congress had the authority to pass legislation. Not only has Barack Obama lost all touch with reality, but he is trying to assume dictatorial authority also.
Those pencil-necks will have us all peddling bicycles by the time they’re through. Time to legislate them all out of existence. As for California, they can walk. If they need to meet the CA standards the only way that is going to happen is if they push their cars.
you people are douchebags!!! i’m appalled a your existence. it disgusts me. please go kill yourselves and do the rest of the world a favor. thanks.
Take a deep breath, Lauren.
Sober up. I can’t read your drunken gibberish.
you first
We should all mandate the impeachment of obama and his closes adviser`s!
I heard that the automakers were balking at the new standards until the White House suggested that they would make sure the UAW would be more agreeable in their upcoming contract negotiations if the car makers didn’t fight the new standards. Isn’t that criminal extortion? Talk about a Gangster Government!
Yep. I think I can haul a lot of firewood in that tin foil car. It’ll just take about 30 trips to complete what I can now do in one trip (well as long as I can stick my head out of the tinfoil sunroof, since I’m 6’6″ and 250 lbs)…
Just think how many jobs Obummer will “save” when U-Haul goes out of business because these plastic and tinfoil cars won’t have enough power to pull one of their trailers…
One final thought: we might as well drop the idea of exporting cars anywhere. Europe won’t want them. Japan won’t want them. Germany won’t want them. Maybe we could give some to the Chinese in exchange for some of the massive debt we owe them.
This topic is full of important information. Human Growth Hormone is good antiaging product.