Posted on 12/19/2007 5:42:22 PM PST by BenLurkin
If you're like me, the bluster and grandstanding associated with big congressional actions make you want to roll up the windows, crank up the radio, and tune out the whole circus. But the mammoth energy bill finally passed by Congress and signed by President Bush is something consumers should pay attention to. Among other things, the new law will directly affect the kinds of cars on the market in a few years--and what buyers pay for them. Some of the big changes that automakers and consumers will both have to contend with:
Surprisingly tough gas mileage standards. The requirement to raise corporate average fuel economy (the quaint-sounding "CAFE," in Beltway-speak) is an aggressive target that will force adjustments by automakers and consumers alike. Getting to a fleetwide average of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, from the current standard of 27.5 mpg, will require annual fuel-efficiency increases of about 3.3 percent. New technology and market competition always drive some gains in efficiency, but over the past couple of decades in the United States, it's amounted to less than 1.5 percent per year. Even in Europe and Japan, where gas costs more and cars get better mileage, annual gains have been 2 percent or less. Environmentalists are disheartened by other aspects of the energy law, such as its lack of support for renewable energy, but on gas mileage it has teeth. Our overall fuel economy numbers will still be lower than elsewhere, but the improvements will be dramatic.
More technology, sooner. One way to get better mileage is to build smaller engines--but in a market where buyers are used to performance, that's not going to win any new customers. So automakers will accelerate development of under-the-hood technologies that make engines more efficient and help improve mileage without a trade-off in performance. "This will unleash torrents of engineers all over the world," predicts one auto executive. Expect to see more hybrids, diesels, turbochargers, and other advanced gizmos that squeeze 1 or 2 additional horsepower from a gallon of gas. And get used to new automotive initials like CVT (continuously variable transmission), VVT (variable valve timing), and DOD (displacement on demand). One feature likely to become commonplace: The automatic start-stop technology--or "golf cart" effect--that's standard on hybrids. Shutting down the engine during stops and running accessories off a battery instead of the gas engine can boost mileage by 10 to 30 percent.
Bigger window stickers. Expect to pay more for that technology, too. People on all sides agree that meeting the new standards will make cars more expensive. But by how much? Estimates range from less than $1,000 per car (diehard environmentalists) to a catastrophic $6,000 or more (General Motors). Internally, many automakers anticipate price increases in the range of $2,000 to $2,500 per car by 2020, in today's dollars. Costs will be phased in gradually, beginning with model year 2011 cars (mostly introduced in 2010), so that will mitigate the sticker shock somewhat. And better gas mileage will offset the costs further. But the typical new-car buyer who purchases a fresh model every three to five years will still feel a pinch. If prices rise too much, one perverse outcome could be fewer new-car sales, with drivers holding on to older, less efficient cars longer.
More potential problems. Automakers prefer to roll out new technology gradually, by introducing it on one or two models, gauging consumer acceptance, making sure it works, and marketing it more broadly if it succeeds. But with greater pressure to improve gas mileage, manufacturers are likely to hurry technology onto the market with less real-world testing. That could cause unforeseen problems. Air bags were a genuine safety breakthrough in the '80s and '90s, for instance, but it took several years of real-world crash data for researchers to figure out that they could also be harmful to kids and small adults, and make modifications. Lab testing and computer simulations can help pinpoint many problems, but the broader and faster the rollout of unproven technology, the bigger the risk of unintended consequences.
An end to horsepower wars. A Hemi V-8 won't seem quite as appealing to mainstream buyers if it comes with a hefty price premium, which is probably what will happen. Automakers will effectively be penalized for building cars that get poor mileage (Jeep Grand Cherokee with 5.7-liter V-8 Hemi: 13 mpg/city), so they'll either have to charge a lot more to offset the added cost or they'll make fewer gas guzzlers. So expect fewer mass-market cars with a standard or optional V-8 and more four-cylinder engines in place of a V-6. Muscle cars won't go away, however, as long as there are enthusiasts willing to pay extra for them. And assuredly there will be, given that orders for the 425-horsepower Dodge Charger SRT8, which doesn't even arrive till next spring, have already driven the asking price from an MSRP of just under $40,000 up to nearly $60,000.
Fewer big SUVs, plenty of everything else. One scare tactic in the CAFE battle has been the automaker claim that Americans would all end up driving flimsy little econoboxes. Unlikely. One change that will probably happen is that GM, Ford, and Chrysler will build fewer big SUVs based on pickup truck frames, which are good for towing but heavy and inefficient. That's been happening anyway, as carlike crossovers such as the Toyota Highlander and GMC Acadia have become far more popular. But no other types of cars seem to be endangered, partly because automakers will each be assigned their own overall mileage target based on the mix of vehicles they already build: Manufacturers with a "heavy" mix, like the Detroit 3, will have to meet a lower standard, and those with a "lighter" mix, such as Honda, Volkswagen, and Nissan, will have to meet a higher standard. In other words, there will be incentives for automakers to keep building the kinds of cars they already produce--but to make them more efficient. Still, specific targets for each automaker and type of car won't be set until the spring of 2009, which means the circus isn't leaving town just yet. Turn up the volume.
actually ,there are several inventors who have developed ways to extract the hydrogen gas from water very cheaply. If you do any amount of research you will find that out. We have the brightest minds here in our country and it is just a matter of time before we are free of the oil monopolies. By the way, there is more stored energy in water than gasoline and for you to try and tell mr that there is not hydrogen energy in the water molecule is really nutty. You need to stop thinking so negatively. Take a look at fhu.com...they have a wonderful be still download for free which can open up your goodside.
Money cost is different than energy cost.
By the way, there is more stored energy in water than gasoline
So funny, so wrong.
You need to stop thinking so negatively.
You should read a book on physics. Read up on thermodynamics. It's obvious you never took a class, or slept through it.
really? there have been several inventors of late that have found inexpensive ways to split the h20 molecules and use the very powerfull hydrogen gas to run an engine. That gas is quite a bit more powerfull than gasoline and is more efficient and clean burning. Where am I wrong? It is well known that gasoline is an inferior fuel in power compared to hydrogen. And you seem to be overlooking all of the energy used in order to make that galllon of gasoline. You deny me my point that there is hydrogen energy in water and then ask me about what classes I have taken. Obviously the hydrogen energy I spoke of needs to be released by splitting the h20 molecule, but that doen’t deny my statement. The energy is dormant but ready to be released. I think it was obvious what I meant and you are just splitting hairs for some weird reason.
Truly.
That gas is quite a bit more powerfull than gasoline and is more efficient and clean burning. Where am I wrong?
It takes more energy to get the hydrogen than you get out of burning the hydrogen.
And you seem to be overlooking all of the energy used in order to make that galllon of gasoline.
Even if you used half the energy in the oil to make the gasoline, you still have more energy than you started with.
You deny me my point that there is hydrogen energy in water
Take 1 KWH of energy to make hydrogen. Burn the hydrogen. How much usable energy do you think you get?
and then ask me about what classes I have taken.
Yes, because your lack of understanding makes it obvious you haven't.
Obviously the hydrogen energy I spoke of needs to be released by splitting the h20 molecule,
That splitting takes more energy than you get back out. Sounds like a bad battery, not a source of energy.
The energy is dormant but ready to be released.
LOL!
I think it was obvious what I meant and you are just splitting hairs for some weird reason.
Yeah, the weird reason is my understanding of physics. And your lack.
I haven’t made any wrong statements and you are simply wrong that it takes more energy to get hydrogen than what we get from it. That is not the case anymore. You didn’t even bother to read my link of the very real inventor that found a way to use a cheap alloy to split the h202 molecule. There are others too but you seem so invested in the old way that you are not really interested in the new. Are you in the oil industry?
also, nuclear power could be used to make hydrogen fuel...extremely cheaply. The answers are right under our noses but the oil companies are big spoiled brats with alot of political influence.
I don’t think so. I think it only makes sense for people with lengthy stop and go commutes. The rest of us it won’t save enough to pay for itself.
LOL!
Where is the powerplant making the hydrogen and burning it for the excess energy?
You didn’t even bother to read my link of the very real inventor that found a way to use a cheap alloy to split the h202 molecule.
How much energy does it take to make the alloy? How much energy do you get out of the hydrogen?
There are others too but you seem so invested in the old way that you are not really interested in the new.
Yes, I'm invested in reality.
Are you in the oil industry?
Are you ever going to admit you never took Physics?
Sure, but it is a net energy loss, not a gain.
wrong...you don’t seem to understand the nature of hydrogen. I don’t even know why I am trying to get through to you when you seem blocked off and really uninformed and then think I am the dumb one. O boy...
Educate me. How much power does it take to split a water molecule? How much usable power do you get when you recombine the hydrogen with oxygen?
and then think I am the dumb one.
If the dunce cap fits.....
Perfectly stated!
uummm...in the case of the inventor who is using the inexpensive alloy to do the splitting it’s pennies to the gallon. That makes browns gas which runs the engine along with the air intake like any gasoline engine. You honestly don’t know what you are talking about because you haven’t reasearched the latest invetions concerning hydrogen fuel. you have a mind set that has been taught to you and you don’t seem to want to get out of it. That’s fine, but the electric and hydrogen cars are coming. Very cheap and clean cars will be made, setting our economy much more free and giving us total independence from foreign oil. You really should stop thinking you know so much and at least look into the link that I had provided of the alloy method of creating hydrogen.
Okay.
The amount of energy in the water molecule is thus vast, and has absolutely nothing to do with the amount of energy it takes to break down that molecule. This is an extremely important point, as so many people — even scientists — are unclear on this concept. And yet if we can find an economical means to break down the water molecule, our energy problems are over.
LOL! That's funny! Let's keep going.
The environment is experiencing tremendous problems at the moment, and one of the most serious of these is that we are losing our oxygen. The oxygen content of the air is becoming so low that it threatens our very existence in some areas. The normal oxygen content of our air is 21 percent. But in some places it is only a fraction of that! In Tokyo, Japan, for example, the oxygen content of the air has dipped to 6 or 7 percent. If it reaches 5 percent, people will begin to die. Tokyo has even put oxygen disbursement centers on its street corners, so that people can get emergency oxygen if they need it.
Maybe the place his head is stuck has 7 percent oxygen?
Maybe not in water, but take your fat wife with you and you can do this!
‘’’’’’’’
Eco-boat powered by human fat attempts round the world speed record
The fastest eco boat on the planet will attempt to break the round the world speed record using fuel made from human fat.
Pete Bethune, the New Zealand skipper of Earthrace, said the attempt to circumnavigate the globe would begin from Valencia in Spain on March 1 next year.
Bethune and his wife mortgaged their house and sold everything they own to help make the project happen, while continuing to seek support from sponsors.
all the more reason to switch to a hydrogen, electric economy.
you are sadly mistaken...lost in your negative thoughts.
Really?
You believe that you can get more energy out of the hydrogen than you put in?
Really?
You believe that you can electrolyze water, burn the hydrogen and release extra oxygen into the air?
Really?
RE: Design studios in California. If you were an automobile designer, where would you rather live, Detroit or Southern California (home of the little old lady from Pasadena).
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.