Study: No savings at 62 mpg (New CAFE Standards Adds $10,000 To Price, 260,000 Jobs lost)

CNET ^ | 6/13/11

[Libloather]

Study: No savings at 62 mpg
by Automotive News
June 13, 2011 10:17 AM PDT

Raising federal fuel economy standards to as high as 56 mpg in the 2025 model year would yield fuel savings to consumers that more than offset higher vehicle prices, a new study found.

But lifting corporate average fuel economy to 62 mpg would result in vehicle price increases that exceed fuel savings over a five-year period, according to the nonprofit Center for Automotive Research.

The report highlights room for compromise on the Obama administration's preliminary proposal to raise CAFE to between 47 mpg and 62 mpg from the 2017 to 2025 model years.

Environmental groups have pushed for 62 mpg, while automakers have called for more study.

Current rules require a 35.5 mpg CAFE by the 2016 model year.

The center in Ann Arbor, Mich., is partially financed by the auto industry but this study was internally funded, [Center for Automotive Research] President Jay Baron said.

The June 11 report revises an earlier study in response to criticism by an environmental group, the International Council on Clean Transportation.

Among the latest findings:

•Technology changes would drive up the average cost of a new vehicle by between $3,810 and $11,390, depending on CAFE targets, from 2008 to 2025.
•Fuel savings would range from $5,917 to $8,339, depending on CAFE requirements, over the first five years of a 2025 car.
•Under 47 mpg, 51 mpg and 56 mpg targets, fuel savings would exceed the increased cost of a new vehicle.

[Libloather]

Great News: New CAFE Standards To Add $10,000 To Price Of Vehicle, More Than The $3,000 Initially Estimated

Obama's Green Auto Decrees to Cost 260,000 Jobs

[headstamp 2]

You’ll be able to see through the rice paper bodies of the new vehicles and be waist deep in the carnage on our highways.

Hell, why not specify 500 MPG?

Idiot politicians.

[Brett66]

Why don’t they just raise it to 200,000 MPG, that way you would never have to pay for gas unless you own the car for over decade?

And don’t trouble me with physics......

[smokingfrog]

These people are insane.

[wayoverontheright]

The lesson we should have learned about CAFE is that you can’t expect to increase the conservation of a commodity by making it cheaper to use.

[NavyCanDo]

New cars are already way beyond what I would be willing to pay for a car. Even the smaller no frills models are now in the $16,000 range. Who wants to be stuck with big car payments for four or five years? I only go for late model used, and knock off 5 or 6 thousand.

[smokingfrog]

Ford Nucleon

[savedbygrace]

Have there been any studies that indicate such vehicles would even last 5 years, or that consumers would keep such a vehicle for 5 years? They would be pretty darned light and flimsy, wouldn’t they?

If there are no studies like that, then why match the cost to 5 years of savings? Two years seems more practical. One year seems more realistic, as volatile as fuel costs are.

[Hoodat]

The greatest shortcomings of marxism and fascism is that they fail to take into account human nature. Driving will become a luxury reserved for the ruling class.

[savedbygrace]

Also, I would think that for a vehicle to reach 62 MPG, batteries would be involved. Does the analysis include at least one cycle of replacing the batteries?

[Tanniker Smith]

When no one can survive a crash at 55 mph, then no one will be speeding anyone. Fuel economy.

For even better fuel economy, there's the horse and buggy, but then you have a whole different class of activists to worry about.

[Popman]

To obtain 62 MPG all cars will come equipped with the Fred Flintstone option.

These people are insane

[fini]

While gas mileage would be nice, repair costs would be rather annoying on the Ford nucleon.

[upchuck]

If you rear-end my Ford Nucleon, you’re gonna be in serious trouble. Hope your air bags are radiation proof :)

[Uri’el-2012]

Study: No savings at 62 mpg (New CAFE Standards Adds $10,000 To Price, 260,000 Jobs lost)

There seems to be a great deal of Magical Thinking

And a lack of understanding of Newtonian Physics.

[Wuli]

Europe, Japan and South Korea use more imported oil than we do, DO NOT HAVE “Cafe” standards, and manage to sell cars that average more miles per gallon than the U.S. market.

OMG fuel prices alone can actually induce the desire for and purchase of automobiles that, on average, get more miles per gallon!!!!!!!

Can the Cafe standards, can all the fuel subsidies, tax breaks and the like for fuel, and let the intersection of energy markets with automobile markets work - which it will.

Get the politicians economic micromanaging out - totally out.

[adorno]

There will never be “savings” of any kind from a high mpg vehicle, even if the mpg was to be 200mpg or 1000mpg.

If those kind of vehicles were to be manufactured, then the consumption of gasoline would go down. But, if the consumption were to go down, government at all levels would find themselves losing tax revenue. So, the government solution to decreased consumption would be to raise the taxes on whatever consumption remains. But, that’s not all. Government is already thinking of ways to charge the consumer on miles driven. So, it will be a double whammy, with higher gas prices and miles driven charges.

Big Government, and government intervention, is never about saving people money. Government always makes things more complicated and more costly.

[Nuc 1.1]

You will not be able to buy any car soon. And that is the point.

[LiveFree99]

How many of the presidential candidates have called for the complete repeal of the CAFE standards? Heck, how many elected officials have called for their complete repeal?

[Graybeard58]

You’ll be able to see through the rice paper bodies of the new vehicles and be waist deep in the carnage on our highways.

But a national speed limit of 5-10 mph would solve that problem and be certain, there's a democrat somewhere in congress stupid enough to propose just that.