Posted on 12/02/2007 5:45:43 AM PST by libstripper
WASHINGTON (Dec. 1) - An agreement among congressional Democrats - including those from auto industry states - to support a 40 percent increase in vehicle fuel efficiency is likely to be the tonic needed to push energy legislation through Congress before Christmas.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., a longtime protector of the auto industry, settled their differences in an agreement late Friday on the fuel economy, or CAFE, issue, clearing the way for a House vote on a broader energy bill, probably on Wednesday.
Automakers would be required to meet an industrywide average of 35 miles per gallon for cars and light trucks, including SUVs, by 2020, the first increase by Congress in car fuel efficiency in 32 years.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada called the compromise "good news" and said he hoped to take up the legislation quickly after the House acts.
Dingell said the tougher standards are "both aggressive and attainable" and include provisions that give manufacturers the needed flexibility to bring SUVs and small trucks under compliance and to avoid job losses.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.aol.com ...
OK, this covers the US companies. What about the imports?
Will this give foreign firms another advantage?
A lot of people will soon be buying and driving “heavy trucks” that look a lot like SUVs.
Some similar headlines: “deal reached to boost CPU speeds”, “deal reached to discover new energy sources”, “deal reached to boost entrepreneurship”
-—full of sound and fury, signifying idiocy-—( sorry, Shakespeare)—
They’ll be forced to adhere to the same CAFE requirements, but their technology usually lets them do it somewhat more effectively than the U.S. companies. The really bad thing, from the standpoint of U.S. companies and consumers is what it will do to the large SUVs and other light trucks. Full disclosure: I’m on my second Navigator (an ‘04), think it’s the best vehicle I’ve ever owned, and plan to buy an even spiffier one in the next few years.
Anything Harry Reid considers good news must be bad news.
And while they're at it, how about outlawing hurricanes, tornadoes and earthquakes.
Where do these people get the authority to meddle in these matters?
15 percent of their power from wind or solar energy?
Do they expect companies to wave a magic wand and make it happen?
To reach that percent, companies will have to charge vastly more money for utilities service since wind and solar power are vastly less efficient to produce
What about public utilities?
You're joking right?
35 mpg CAFE will require lighter weight, less frontal area and/or slower speeds. Into this mix put increasingly tighter crash standards and traditional expectations of passenger room and baggage space.
BMW is working on an add-on steam engine to use waste heat energy going out the exhaust. Since more energy goes out the exhaust than into the transmission, this will be a great help, but will cost $$$.
‘Taint no free lunch, especially in physics!
Mandating that SUVs get 35 MPG will simply cause the auto manufacturers to make smaller SUVs and force those who want a "good old fashioned and safe" real SUV to buy the next vehicle in line that is exempt from the regulations. That is exactly how the SUV became popular and this time it will lead to more people buying very fancy and large Pickup Trucks with a back seat, a small bed that has a very fancy cover that you never take off with access from the cabin. They will give them a nifty name that will infer dual use (haul those heavy loads but give your family a safe, comfortable ride) and they will sell like hotcakes.
I would think that imports would be covered but vehicles made by those companies and sold outside the United States would not be included in the calculation.
They must be joking, right??
Anyone want to guess what 2020 car prices will be averaging? Possibly $40K to $50K or higher?
When is someone going to use the “N” word... Nuclear power?
No “carbon footprint”, no fossil fuel, no dependency on Chavez, sheiks or worry about tanker oil spills.
Congress can just mandate that Greenpeace et al shut-up. That is much more realistic than passing decrees concerning the laws of physics.
Democrats have the ability to defy the physical laws of the universe. All they have to do is snap their fingers. Ask one to show you sometime. Teddy Kennedy has been doing it his entire life (except for that gravity thing over the bridge in Chappaquiddick... his fingers got wet.)
They should put a wind turbine in front of Teddy Kennedy’s mouth.
Liberal
What good things should be done?
Make available resources preform these good things
Conservative
What available resources can be used for good?
Make good works fit available resources
Liberals engage in wish fulfillment
Conservatives look at reality
Well, they're always trying to repeal the Law of Supply and Demand. But what I want to know is when they'll repeal the Law of Gravity? And I hate the fact that nothing can go faster than the speed of light, when are they going to do something about that?
No. I try to read the Constitution and all amendments periodically. I also try to revisit the Federalist Papers regularly.
I find no authority for Congress to engage in matters like these.
The politician that has the backbone to stand up and say:
"We need a Manhattan type project in dealing with our energy policy. Today, right now, we need to start drilling for oil in every place possible, no area is off limits and also start building Nuclear plants across the fruited plains for the objective to be energy independent in 10 years".
That person would get my vote
Everybody missed the biggest giveaway in this bill.
Tax incentives will be given to manufacture fuel efficient vehicles in the US as a concession to the UAW.
The UAW is afraid that if the auto manufacturers are pushed to build more fuel efficient vehicles, they would conduct that manufacture offshore where labor costs are less, hence offsetting the price of the technology required to achieve the higher CAFE standards.
So, the bottom line is this:
Your car will cost thousands more so you can save a few hundred dollars on gas.
The UAW will get job protection in form of taxpayer money that will be used to fund Democrat candidates.
Trucks and SUVs will slowly evaporate while our cars will look more like those driven in Europe.
Relax, folks, I’m not advocating nuclear powered cars.
However, if you have nuclear generated electricity, then electric cars make a bit more sense.
I as well, am well versed in all the founding documents.
I certainly agree with your premise, but we are a looong way off from what the founders envisioned
"We the People" seem to continue to elect representatives whom think they have authority in all matters of our lives regardless of what is in the Constitution.
By the simple fact we continue to put these bastards in power, we in effect have given them the authority to engage in these matters.
Why do liberals feel that simply by government saying something “must” be done, that it makes it so?
Might as well say humans “must be able to live without oxygen.”
I really miss my Honda CRX I had for years. It was a 1991 model (the last year they were made) and got 55-60 mpg average. Sure it was a shoebox but for in town stuff it was perfect. Unfortunately, I sold it after being in a near head on collision because I looked around and saw that if I did ever get into an accident I’d probably die.
Pure idiocy. Congress thinks they can sign a document and *SHAZAM*, gas mileage goes up. This is lunacy.
“35 miles per gallon for cars and light trucks, including SUVs, by 2020”
Another case of Congress doing nothing. That’s 13 years away. By then, the industry average will be higher than that anyway. They are just trying to take credit for progress that the market will dictate, and which the market will actually be responsible for.
These target numbers can be reached, but American soccer moms will not buy the products. They will weigh less than half what the current SUVs weigh with tiny engines, possibly diesel. Accel times 0 to 60 in an afternoon.
These SUV-lights will do well in crash tests against similar sized vehicles, but will crumple like a tin can when they hit heavier vehicles.
All in all, think softly sprung, overgrown Citrions.
Absolutely.
Also the laws of economics: Question....In which alternative universe can the conservation of a commodity be increased, by making it cheaper to use?
The same people who want increased CAFE will also lobby for more subsidies for mass transit. CAFE will make mass transit's closest competitor, the motor vehicle, a stronger competitor. Ludicrous, the whole thing.
They should put a wind turbine in front of Teddy Kennedy’s mouth !! LOL
Reid, Dingell, Pelosi, Karl Lenin....oops, Levin, Feinstein all had plenty to say for public consumption in this article.
Even if the GOP leadership cowards are being shut out in the media, believe me there are ways to by-pass press blackouts, but the lazy, unmotivated or corrupted Republican senators will not make the effort.
We are in 1984, folks.
Leni
We have a similar situation, both of our AWD vehicles getting MAYBE 30 mpg on a flat, straight stretch of highway. We have gotten to the point where we prefer smaller cars, and if there was an AWD Yaris or Fit, we'd probably invest in one (my "wish" car would be an AWD Mini with a diesel engine.. that's how geeky I am).
But not everyone wants a Corolla-or-smaller vehicle, and I am repelled by the over-arching arrogance displayed by this gaggle of socialists who would collectively be hard pressed to change a set of spark plugs, let alone chart a revolution in automobile engineering.
Mr. niteowl77
Oh look! Congress is trying to do what the free market is already doing! By 2020 most people won’t be using gas. We’ll just be paying more for electricity to recharge our cars.
Full disclosure: My fleet already meets the standard
1948 Harley - 38mpg
2000 Yamaha Zuma - 75mpg
2000 HD Electra-Glide - 40mpg
2007 Suzuki V-Srom 1000 - 45mpg
2006 Stella Scooter - 75mpg
2006 Scion XA - 34mpg
2001 Ford Ranger 4x4 - 18mpg
Average mileage: 46.43
I can buy another gas guzzler and still meet the standard!
excellent point
Morons, all of them. Soon we will be seeing papier-mâché cars as the only method of meeting this lunatic standards...
Would someone please list all of the wonderful, marvelous, fantastic things Queen Pelosi accomplished for me in those critical “first 100 hours” of her reign?
Yeesh.
Reid and Pelosi are so smart ;they are smarter than Sir Isaac Newton !
No ! They are fools.
Pork-barrelers for labor unions.
Question for the ‘Rats: If this is such a great idea, why did Bubba refuse to do it...?
Back in the 50’s a Rambler (American Motors) dealer, after having to endure comments on how dangerous his small cars were in a collision, did a demo at the local rodeo where Cadillacs were pitted against Semis. Guess who won.
There is always a bigger egg.
That's sort of what this does. Repeals the first law of thermodynamics
Hey people - give the dhims a break! They have the best of intentions, don’t you know?
They’re going to conserve us right back to the Stone Age while outlawing the exploration and production of new sources of energy.
A forty percent increase in CAFE standards by 2020 will NOT yield a forty percent increase in mileage until 2032 at the earliest. Thats because most cars remain on the roads for 12 years (I think light trucks and SUV’s remain on the road for 13 or 14 years).
Meanwhile the vehicle miles driven goes up at 2.7% per year. Thats because our population grows at 1% per year and because most new homes are built in the suburbs requiring a longer commute to work. By 2032 we will be driving about 90% more miles.
If we will be driving 90% more miles by 2032 but the CAFE standards are 40% better then we will still consume more far more fuel in 2032 than we consume today. Unfortunately, there is nothing in the bill that allows the US to produce more domestic crude oil, so...this energy bill is a red herring. Its should be vetoed by the president. We need an energy bill that allows for more domestic oil production and even some encouragement for Coal-to-Liquids (CTL) plants.
I bought an old 1991 Buick LaSabre last spring which was only giving 10-17 mpg on lowest octain gasoline (85 where I live). But, she was cheap and she was pretty and in otherwise excellent condition. So, I took her home and put about $500.00 worth of ordinary maintanance into her which included all new clean new filters, oil change (using synthetic blend), brakes and a tune-up which I did myself.
When I finished, her milage had improved to 22-24 mpg but I used a hotter plug than the original.
Added some injector cleaner and high octain gas and suddenly she lept to 32-34mpg which she has consistantly maintained as long as I use the high octain gas. It might sound expensive at a few cents more per gallon than the lowest or even midgrade, but I get so much more milage on it that it’s cheaper to use! Not bad for a 16 year old car.
(she’s a 305v6)
So, with that in mind, I see no reason whatsoever for the auto industry not to improve on mpg’s with a few minor engine modifications. My car is a sedan, not a compact, very comfortable and roomy with lots of electrical gadgets..fancy. If I, a non-mechanic can improve an old vehical that much, surely folks who know what they’re doing can make a few hotrod changes in current engines without sacrificing comfort and appeal. They started the process back in the 80’s and here it is 20 years later with more/better technology.
I just don’t think it’s been financially cost effective for them to do so since gas and oil are secondary sales, much like vacume cleaner bags offer an ongoing source of revenue for vacume sales.
Yep. End of the line for SUVs. Or at least affordably priced SUVs.
But forcing everybody into a Prius is for the common good, Comrade.
Um, Poser, you really do need to apply a weighted average. If you leave the two-wheelers parked in your garage and only drive your Ranger, your weighted average is 18 mpg. If you joy ride one of the two wheelers on a weekend and use the Ranger as your daily cruiser, your weighted average goes up to maybe 20 or 22 mpg. Sorry to rain on your parade.
Mandating that SUVs get 35 MPG will simply cause the auto manufacturers to make smaller SUVs
**************************************
The auto manufacturers have been playing games with the CAFE standards for years ,,, why do you think Chrysler makes the PT Cruiser and Chevy the HHR ,, they are a Neon and a Cobalt with different bodywork but they are classified as trucks , same as that C2500 is...
35mpg isn’t out of the realm of the possible... Land Rovers Discovery gets 30+ mpg in europe with a 3.0L turbodiesel and you can say the same about the ISUZU Trooper with diesel engine (sold everywhere outside the US)...
US manufacturers are FINALLY getting on the direct injection bandwagon ,,, hey it’s only been 52 years since Chevy and Pontiac V8’s were first offered with fuel injection... I remember in 1974/75 when Chevy was arguing that the then current standards were “impossible” to meet and Honda (then new to cars and just selling their fist “600” model) took up the challenge and in 4 months took a full size Chevy and created new 4 valve heads for it and took the car from 12 mpg to 20+ AND increased power by the same percentage AND met emission standards with no catalyst.
If Honda tells you it’s not possible then I’d believe it ,,, Chevy/Ford/Dodge have always just played games with the politicians ,, no interest at all in building the best most advanced cars outside of “special” products such as the Corvette.
I’m buying a diesel Accord when they become available.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.