The EPA seeks comments on new test methods for fuel economy window stickers [Action Alert]

EPA ^ | January, 10, 2006 | John Millett, 202-564-4355

[TaxRelief]

To provide consumers with more real-world fuel economy information when shopping for cars, SUVs, and pick-up trucks, EPA is proposing new methods to determine the city and highway mpg estimates that appear on the window stickers. The new methods will take effect for model year 2008 vehicles, which will generally be available for sale in fall of 2007.

"With President Bush encouraging energy conservation, EPA is ensuring American motorists can be confident that the fuel economy estimates more closely reflect today's real world driving experiences," said EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson. "Consumers weigh a variety of factors when shopping for a new vehicle. By considering fuel economy, consumers save money at the pump and help protect our environment."

The EPA's new fuel economy estimates will include vehicle-specific data from tests designed to replicate three factors that can greatly affect fuel economy: high speed/rapid acceleration, use of air conditioning, and cold temperature operation.

The EPA is also proposing an across-the-board-adjustment to better account for other conditions that can affect fuel economy but that aren't included in the tests, such as road grade, wind, tire pressure, load, and the effects of different fuel properties.

Under the new methods, the city mpg estimates for most vehicles would drop 10 percent to 20 percent from today's labels, depending on the vehicle. The highway mpg estimates would generally drop 5 percent to 15 percent.

Even with improved estimates, actual fuel economy will vary since no test can ever account for all individual driving styles, vehicle maintenance practices, and road conditions.

Changes were last made in 1985. The proposed changes announced today will improve the estimates to better reflect real-world driving conditions, such as higher speed limits, greater traffic congestion and more use of power-hungry accessories, such as air conditioning.

To more clearly convey fuel economy information to consumers, the EPA is also proposing to change the design and text of the window sticker itself. Four options are under consideration.

None of the changes proposed today affect the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) program [YET] , which is administered by the Department of Transportation. There are separate requirements for the test methods and procedures for determining fuel economy values under CAFE. [Until a Dem gets elected president, that is.]

EPA is providing a 60 day public comment period on the proposal. The proposal and information about how to submit comments are at: http://www.epa.gov/fueleconomy

[TaxRelief]

The new tests will make it harder, if not impossible to achieve fuel efficiency standards of 21 mpg that were proposed in August for SUVs and Pickups (to be decided in April). Anyone with a vehicle with a tow capacity of 10,000 pounds knows they will have trouble hauling that equipment if this goes through.

http://tinyurl.com/avzpd (nhtsa.gov portal for August press release.)

[enviros_kill]

Disband the EPA and move it to China. They are a bunch of watermelons that need a new Commie home. Like every other greenie group they must continually ratchet meaningless enviro standards to justify the waste of the taxpayer dollars that keeping them around signifies.

[Alberta's Child]

The EPA's new fuel economy estimates will include vehicle-specific data from tests designed to replicate three factors that can greatly affect fuel economy: high speed/rapid acceleration, use of air conditioning, and cold temperature operation.

Sounds like a good start, but the EPA's new fuel efficiency ratings will be absolutely meaningless unless they include two additional factors that have an enormous influence on a vehicle's fuel efficiency: a vehicle's transmission and the type of fuel that is used.

The gear ration in a vehicle's transmission has as much influence on its fuel efficiency as the displacement of the engine -- particularly at highway speeds. This explains why my friend's mid-sized SUV with a "performance" axle and a V-6 engine is about 40% less fuel efficient than his full-sized pickup truck with a V-8 and a "highway" gear ratio . . . even though the SUV has EPA fuel efficiency ratings slightly higher than the pickup.

And those of us who are unfortunate enough to live in areas where special fuel blends are required by law in the winter months for "air quality" reasons generally experience about a 10%-15% decline in fuel efficiency from November through March when these fuels are used.