Delighted. It is good policy. Thanks, BT

This is kinda lame. My car (Golf TDI) gets 47mpg…and that’s today. 2016? We’ll all have died of health care by then…

Definitely a step in the right direction.

Was beginning to think this Prez didn’t know what direction that was.

Glad to see that he does.

Now keep going in that direction.

Please.

Kudos to him for this. Still makes me wonder why he felt like he had to preface it by drilling for more oil.

The 65 mpg Ford the U.S. Can’t Have. This from 2008!

Ford’s 2009 Fiesta ECOnetic goes on sale in November. But here’s the catch: Despite the car’s potential to transform Ford’s image and help it compete with Toyota Motor (TM) and Honda Motor (HMC) in its home market, the company will sell the little fuel sipper only in Europe. “We know it’s an awesome vehicle,” says Ford America President Mark Fields. “But there are business reasons why we can’t sell it in the U.S.” The main one: The Fiesta ECOnetic runs on diesel.

35 MPG??? Is that the best they can do? All this doom and gloom about peak oil, and they want a piddly 35 MPG? So what is real, peak oil or we don’t really need to conserve any of it? Besides, the US military right now is blowing through fuel like it’s an unlimited supply.

I believe that we have become a nation ready to accept less that we deserve.

At least KBR, Halliburton and Koch will find their investment in Obama, Dems and Repubs a worthwhile return on investment.

And by 2020 or so, we’ll reap the reward of Obama’s Drill Baby Drill with about 2 weeks worth of new oil. I can hardly wait.

2 weeks IF there are no military “wars” going on. How many gallons of fuel does the military use per hour? Betcha it’s an astounding number! And in the event of a fuel shortage, who do you think will be forced to cut back first?

Hmmm, at face value it sounds like a grand thang.

The pessimist in me wonders:

1) I’m not an engineer, but haven’t fuel reduction methods that yield up to 65mpg+ already been public info for a decade or more?

2) Given the oil consumption issue and the emissions issue, why is the fed govt. even TALKING to the auto industry instead of simply DICTATING change?

Q: Does this new mandate have to be legislated and approved by Congress?

Summary: I’m not ready to trust this President, his admin and Congress on ANY issue as they have proven themselves loyal to corporate interests and needs FAR above and beyond any interests or needs of the masses.

So, I remain wary of hidden agenda’s with this one.

Just remember 35.5 mpg is only the average. Automakers will have to build lots of little tiny cars that nobody wants to offset the SUV’s that people actually buy.

Nah, they’ll just slap stickers on their vehicles that say “gets an ave of 35 MPG”. I had a Chev Monte Carlo in 1980 with a V8 in it that got better gas mileage than my NEW Chev Impala does now. Not kidding at all.

This is just Obama’s attempt to mollify the envirosheep who were angry with him for the hugely practical joke he pulled on them yesterday.

Drill, baby, drill!

Without restoring FAST, some 35-60 million jobs, ain’t no masses got the dough to BUY new cars, anyway. So the amount of new cars sold that’s so few greatly reduces the enviro and fuel usage impact overall.

Can any Pup tell me that by 2016 those 35mil+ jobs WILL be restored? At wages sufficient to BUY a $20K-$30K auto?

20-30K? Have you seen the prices they are talking about for “greener” vehicles? They are intentionally inflating them to stop everyone from buying them!

Wow. One more step then Goldman Sachs will get a twofer, taxpayer subsidies as they are allowed to create more pollution.

There is another great plan to outfox the Republicans. Allow more pollution, because that is the R’s plan. Let Cass Sunstein singlehandedly allow more coal ash pollution. Brilliant and good policy.

Protesters gathered at a Brookings Institution event on Wednesday, “The Power of Open Government,” where Cass Sunstein of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) was asked what the holdup to regulating coal ash disposal is all about.

One of the protesters told me that, while Sunstein could not talk specifically about the coal rule because it is currently under review, he did say that the question suggests the limits of openness.

The protest is part of a new campaign to expose Sunstein as the reason the EPA’s proposal to regulate coal ash as hazardous waste has not become law. It hit a dead end in his office, where Grist reports his staff has met with coal industry executives, lobbyists, and state highway administrators who want to use coal ash in road construction.

Fuel economy now, as a whole is less than it was even 5 years ago, so although this sounds great, it does nothing. Case in point?

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectEngine.jsp?year=2007&make=Toyota&model=Prius

Here is another one, sense a pattern?

http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/calculatorSelectEngine.jsp?year=2007&make=Toyota&model=Prius
Check out the Prius. Mileage has gone DOWN!

I guess I really need to start titling every post OBAMA SUX OPEN THREAD!11!1

Thank you.

Don’t these trolls ever get tired?

It is really tiresome, but thanks BT, for persevering through it.

Raising CAFE standards is a very good thing, especially when Green Technologies are already being included in automobile production.

This is great policy. We really needed this eight years ago, but the Carbon Lords would never let it happen under Cheney. Congrats to Obama and his EPA; I only hope it’s in time to save our planet.

Teddy !

What’s the news from the Prop8 trial ?

Mr. Cleveland is a Republican who has been here for years and not representative of our community.

No.

This has been another episode…

I think we have a President and Administration (Rahm) that is stuck in tactics and unable or unwilling to act as a visionary and strategically. Instead of pushing for a new energy revolution and new technologies, similar to Kennedy’s call for landing on the moon, Obama’s actions entrench us in the internal combustion engine into the 22nd century, while hoping for alternatives to petroleum generated fuels.

As Deep Throat said to Woodward “follow the money trail.” That’s why we have Drill Baby Drill and “new” CAFE standards instead of a call to action, new energy technologies and onshore industries

Yup. But thanks for this, BT.

Good news and good post. Thanks BT.

Barbara !

Ah, got it.

BT, sorry but I’ll stand by my #10 and #20 . . . don’t take it personally . . . ;-)

And wouldn’t you agree that there is PLENTY of past action already by Obama to be skeptical of anything he does?

To disavow that would be tantamount to wearing blinders, no?

So this President is instrumental is undermining the Copenhagen climate talks, assuring no meaningful agreement is reached, but we should give him props for putting a bandaid on the gaping chest wound that is our climate crisis? Pff

No. Ideologues will always be ideologues and things that don’t fit into their viewpoint will be somehow manipulated and worked into it. Then, when called out on it, we are all called names like Obamabot and so forth and are scornfully derided, regardless of our history of being heavily critical of this administration when it deserves it. I don’t see any difference between the ideologues who always defend Obama and those who always attack him. It’s old.

And wouldn’t you agree that there is PLENTY of past action already by Obama to be skeptical of anything he does?

No, I don’t think that’s sensible.

I wonder what this will mean for the Chevy Spark. As Marcy said last year, that was one of the trade-offs that auto manufacturers wanted for agreeing to this:

http://emptywheel.firedoglake.com/2009/05/18/the-advantages-and-pitfalls-of-auto-bailouts/

Exactly. The military are the ones burning the most fuel. As usual however the burden, of well everything, is shifting to the regular consumer, and those truly responsible for the most damage are left unscathed by our political corporate whores.

Raising CAFE standards IS always a good idea. How many people know the following:

“In 1981 Joan Claybrook, now the President of Public Citizen, was the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). As the administration of President Jimmy Carter was winding down, Claybrook advanced a NHTSA notice that called for fuel efficiency standards to reach 48 mpg by 1995.”

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0412-11.htm

GM decided against making the Cadillac version of the Chevy Volt, whereas all other Luxury brands are bringing Hybrids, PHEV, EV, etc. to market.

With Lutz leaving and Whitacre taking over, I don’t know which direction GM is going any more.

Well, I stand by my unpartisan posts. This is how many times fuel economy has been supposedly increased, but the reality is it has actually decreased. Check out my links BT. It’s to the government’s own website. We just bailed out the Big Ones, and now the government says they have to increase their mileage or else? Heard this song and dance before. Sure it’s great news if real.

A lot of really good energy initiatives that Carter began were abandoned under Reagan. If Carter had won re-election, the world would be a very different place, arguably a much better place.

I agree wholeheartedly! Carter was farther ahead in the green curve than any politician before or after.

I doubt I’ll ever buy a new car again anyway. There are so many great old classic cars and trucks available at a fraction of the price.

‘Bout time.

So how much money will be going into r&d for the automakers? This has to be a sweet deal for them…

This was passed by the Bush administration in 2007. I don’t know what BT is talking about, regarding credit due. It’s a Republican plan to allow dirty emissions whilst making a pretense about fuel economy which has led nowhere but backwards since the early 1970s.

Certainly, an increase in fleet standards is a good thing. This action is long overdue, increasing CAFE standards was a national debate topic in the 1990′s when the SUV boom was really taking off. While I am glad to see some action from the Feds (and anything at all even vaguely positive from Obama) on this issue finally, it seems clear that technological advances already being built into some cars make 35 mpg fleet standard quite obsolete. What really might be proved in this belated CAFE standard increase is that the Federal government tends to lag reality by 15-20 years.

For my part, I would have preferred to see CAFE standards raised to 35 mpg … this year, will expected 2-year increases leading up to 50+ mpg standard by 2015 or so. In other words, a phase-out of the SUV used as a primary commuter passenger car. Likewise, along with the CAFE standards, the Feds could provide incentives to consumers to buy much more efficient cars, the cars on the high end of the efficiency scale, and penalties to those who buy unjustifiable high-consumption vehicles. All of these things can be done, and I look at the 35 mpg CAFE standard as an improvement but a very mediocre one from overall a fairly bad presidential administration and party governance.

Thank you for your indulgence, Jane. I have been banned for life from Huff and Kos for much, much, much less than what you have tolerated. So I appreciate your willingness to let me tweak you guys once in a while (although I really wish I didn’t have to go through the moderation delay).

Long live FDL!

Fairly said.

OK, so I gather that the auto companies will go along because they now do not need expensive emission standards? Joining discussion late, must go back to read comments.

And wouldn’t you agree that there is PLENTY of past action already by Obama to be skeptical of anything he does?

I agree with you, Larue.

You aren’t clapping hard enough.

You certainly get much more tolerance here than any right wing blog that I’m aware of is willing to offer.

Good point and sound policy. The cars that are safe, clean, quiet, and high mileage are the most expensive to buy and beyond the reach of most.

That’s just the sound of one hand clapping.

Hey I wonder if they will use all that Archer Midland Danial Company corn they are going to grow down in the new slave republic of Haiti to make Ethinol to pump in our gastanks while people starve all across the world. I bet those agribusinesses just love this new legilsation too, huh?

If a progressive claps for all of the progressive policies Obama enacts….can anyone hear it?

Let’s put it this way: if it took opening up huge swaths of our coastline to oil drilling in order to get an outdated and un-ambitious, mediocre increase to 35 mpg fleet average, then on the balance we lost more than we gained.

We will need those fuel efficient cars by 2016 in order to drive back and forth to bankruptcy court (assuming we are still allowed to file).

Serious Question: Will the Republican Congress be able to roll back the new fuel mileage rate in November?

Please Do not tell me that Republicans would be too ashamed and embarrassed to do it for fear of political consequences. The media will help the R’s sell a roll back of fuel economy standards as economic good sense in a down economy.

That’s how they sell more drilling, mountaintop removal, poisoning the water table and the overall and general destruction of the planet.

We need to raise standards on new cars that we sell the kids so the old timers can keep polluting.

By 2016 my truck will be 25 years old and I’ll no longer be required to pass state emission control standards.

Nah, Obama could veto it.

I better get my hands on a Mustang GT with the new 5.0 liter V8 before the CAFE regs outlaw them, or anything with an engine that can pull a car over a hill.

I’m not liking this at all. Lamborghini, of all marques, was browbeated into taking the PC line about fuel economy, and I’m scared for the future of fun-to-drive.

Based upon past history (see article link above):

“After the original Congressional mandate of 27.5 mpg took effect in 1985, the Reagan Administration rolled the standard back to 26 mpg in 1986. Finally in 1989 the first Bush Administration moved the standard back to the 1985 level of 27.5 mpg. There was no improvement in the CAFE standards under the Clinton Administration.”

The fact that this administration did something here has to have some weight, right? As far as 50+ mpg as a national standard inside of two years, I don’t think that’s fair or feasible. Yes, the technology exists. But it’s not cheap and the increase in vehicle cost would be largely dispreportionate to inflation. As for someone like me, who is years away from being able to afford a new car, any increase in costs across the board only takes myself and my family farther out of the game.

What I mean is yeah, I’d drive a hybrid, if I could. But let’s just keep passing laws that put this goal even further out of reach for the masses, shall we?

The first indication that a person can feel “ashamed and embarrassed” will cause that person to be banned from the Republic Party.

Nah, Obama could veto it.

Like he vetoed the public-option-less health care bill?

[A]ny plan I sign must include an insurance exchange: a one-stop shopping marketplace where you can compare the benefits, cost and track records of a variety of plans – including a public option to increase competition and keep insurance companies honest – and choose what’s best for your family.

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/obama-demands-the-bill-i-sign-must-include-public-option.php

What is to stop automotive engineers from developing “fun to drive” hybrids or other fuel alternative cars? If enough engineers in the large automotive industry were ACTUALLY working to develop “fun to drive” cars with something other than JUST an internal combustion engine, it WOULD happen.

I guess I really need to start titling every post OBAMA SUX OPEN THREAD!11!1

If you did, statistically, you would be more on the money more often than not. Those of us who are sceptical of Obama, even cynical about him, are so because we look at the problem, look at Obama’s proposals, factor in his past record and approaches and our analysis is not as sanguine as yours.

You also have to ask yourself what constitutes the car and light truck category. Are SUVs and Ford 150s included or not? If say a fleet is comprised of ten models, then a manufacturer could make a couple of high mileage but low selling models and offset popular gas guzzling SUVs. The overall effect in terms of gas efficiency of cars on the road would be minimal. It could even get worse. This is the information that we need to assess these new CAFE standards. It still remains true that high taxes and surcharges on low mileage vehicles coupled with rebates on high mileage ones would be an effective means to steer consumers toward both greener and more fuel efficient cars.

Been there! Done that! It was called the Carter years, followed a decade later by the Clinton years.

And what actually happened in the years that followed? More fuel efficient American cars to rival Toyota and Honda?

Nope. Hummers! Complete with a tax-deduction for the earth fouling vulgarians who drive them and a Bush Doctrine that says “any nation with oil belongs to US” (or something like that….)

Can’t get on the bandwagon until I read the actual bill as I’m pretty sure there is a big, wet kiss to Wall Street buried in there somewhere. But I do know that historically, these types of good policies never see the light of day.

2016 huh? Good luck with that! We’ll see if the GOP thinks this is ‘good policy’ at that point.

Sorry, but I have NO confidence in this President or this party, there’s a FUTA in here somewhere. There always is!

YES.

They can, they have and they WILL!!!

You sound high! Been gunning that engine with the doors closed this morning?

“What is to stop automotive engineers from developing “fun to drive” hybrids or other fuel alternative cars?”

Honda CR-Z.

Your argument is invalid, and besides, nothing sounds better than the noise of a V8 at full throttle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwPcJMv7des

(If you don’t like the sounds of the new Mustang V8, you have no soul.)

we’re all just along for the corporate ride. just mirroring what the companies saying they can do anyways. drill yesterday; throw a bone today.

I’ll second that.

The 2 litre Volkswagen Turbodeisel gets 40 MPG. It makes over 140HP and 236 ft/lbs of torque.

Nobody in their right mind lusts after a Prius.

Thanks. Glad to see another gearhead up in this.

If you don’t like the sounds of the new Mustang V8, you have no soul.)

Or you may be emotionally maturer than a 13 year old.

Okay. But it sounds GOOD!

But they DO lust after these http://www.teslamotors.com/

Proving that fuel efficient cars don’t have to be “weeble” looking. If you can’t afford it, well hey you can LUST for one.

But for the record, making sure that every guy’s “CAR LUST” is taken into consideration is probably the weakest argument yet to keep gas guzzlers on the road.

The world is full of other things that offer dudes like yourself “compensation” you can simply transfer your LUST to those without killing off the planet.

PS: When did a car stop being a car and suddenly become one of the pillars of self esteem?

35 MPG??? Is that the best they can do?

I’m with ya beav, I’ve driven nothing but Honda’s since petrol hit $1.00/gal.

Had one in the ’80′s that consistently did 50mpg
and one in the early 90′s that was solid at 48mpg

The last two? 35 and 37. You have to wonder what the heck is going on.

It’s people like you who think they know what I want in a car that make me weep for the future of high performance.

News flash, not everyone wants a boring beige hybrid econobox that runs on unicorn farts, rainbows and happiness.

I’m not liking this at all. Lamborghini, of all marques, was browbeated into taking the PC line about fuel economy, and I’m scared for the future of fun-to-drive.

No worries, they’ll just have to re-discover that old concept: power to weight ratio. Lotus doesn’t have a problem achieving fun-to-drive, decent mileage and low emissions. But if you insist on driving a 3,800 pound tank then, yes, you need over 450 horsepower.

My motorcycle gets over 45 mpg and will give that Lamborghini a good spanking while doing it.

runs on unicorn farts, rainbows and happiness.

Got to have one of those. Sounds really cheap to drive.

Anybody have a Unicorn full of flatulence that you’re looking to sell?

WOW! My Prius can run on farts and happiness?

Damn, I got a better deal then I thought. And here I was driving to the gas station every couple of months.

No more of that!!!!

This is really only tangentially related to this topic but I think it is important to show. This quote comes from a post on Huffington talking about DNC Chairman Kaine’s view of Obama’s relationship with the base.

“They note that while health care reform was defined for months by howling over the sacrifice of a public option for insurance coverage,by the time the bill came to a vote there was near-Democratic unanimity behind its passage

‘My sense is that we are [OK with the base],’ Democratic National Committee Chair Tim Kaine told the Huffington Post shortly after health care’s passage.”

I think this proves that Obama believes Rahm was right.

Tesla, lol. They still haven’t built or bought a factory for the Model S yet, and it’s supposed to be out in 2012? I doubt it.

:facepalm:

I think what’s getting lost in this mustang/lambo/tesla conversation is that we’re talking about an average CAFE standard. No one’s saying you can’t still have a balls to the wall Corvette Z06. There will always be a market for them because boys (and some girls) will always want their toys.

What this standard says is that Chevy, in order to keep producing the Z06, needs to give the Aveo even better gas mileage, and to stop trying to pass off the “hybrid” Tahoe as a real hybrid.

:double facepalm:

Yes, by all means, let’s tailor our oil and transportation policies to your needs for toys.

:facepalm:

Thanks for taking it in good humor.

I grew up in the ’60′s. Had more than my share of Muscle.

****fanned**** I think coffee spray just clouded my monitor.

***fanned**** I think coffee spray just clouded my monitor.

:-)

Had a ’68 Chevelle once. 4mpg on the interstate @ 75mph(no I’m not making this up) Weighed 3200lbs fueled

Have a Suburban now that gets 22mpg at 75 mph. 4900lbs fueled.

There is a symbiotic relationship between mpg performance and hp/torque performance that can be defined.

I read that same article this morning and had to wonder if the ‘base’ even knows who Tim Kaine is?

Lest you forget, ‘OK’ is always good enough for the Democratic Party and as far as I can tell, good enough for the Democratic base as well.

Don’t kid yourselves here, Firedoglake is the exception, not the rule. Head over the the “liberal” strongholds and dare to post even mild disagreement with the Democratic Party and then see how long it takes you to either be attacked or banned.

Progressives are actually a small minority, and thanks to the Obama administration, a very marginalized one at that. The rabid response from the rest of the “Left” confirms this.

Okay, I take back that facepalm.

Okay, I take back that facepalm.

I don’t mind facepalms, really I don’t.

They’re much gentler on the soul than Rahm telling me to read between the lines (with hand gesture) or calling me a effing r****d …

[Mod Note: We do discourage the use of the "R" word, quoting Rahm notwithstanding

I think this proves that Obama believes Rahm was right.

How soon they forget about Teddy’s seat.

What is it that is said regarding history and forgetting …

“Credit where credit’s due, people. This is good policy.”

I disagree, this is only so-so policy. If they had made the conscious effort to quit using ‘fleet average’ and start using ‘fleet minimum’, then it would be a better, yet still leaving much to be desired policy. This only looks good if you compare it to the old days of Tom Delay passing exemptions for hummers and other suvs.

This is nothing to cheer if you care about fuel efficiency – the first clue that this isn’t something to cheer over is because the corporate auto industry lobbyists are cheering over this. This is in fact furthering Bush policy that the Feds pre-empt the states and is in fact setting into into stone that states can’t impose strict requirements. Rather than cheering over the supposed 35 MPG you should instead be questioning why California (where I’m from and who has considerable influence on vehicle design given the size of the state) is getting knifed by Obama explicitly agreeing to have California’s 43 MPG rules blocked when before Obama said he was going to support California’s emissions regulations. What Obama is done is given away 8 MPG to the lobbyists while also strangling states from imposing stricter efficiency standards by agreeing with the corporate lobbyists that states shouldn’t be imposing their own stricter emissions regulations. Read the news to see how the corporate lobbyists are thrilled that California’s stricter emissions regulations have been blocked by Obama – which this denial of the waiver is just one of an ever increasing continuation of Obama doing what Bush did (Bush did it in 2008 and now Obama is copying Bush in 2010). It is the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers who fought California and it is now the AAM who is cheering what Obama is doing with the AAM explicitly cites California being axed, so be careful that in cheering this that you aren’t in fact getting in bed with corporate lobbyists who are reducing fuel efficiency standards.

“Let’s put it this way: if it took opening up huge swaths of our coastline to oil drilling in order to get an outdated and un-ambitious, mediocre increase to 35 mpg fleet average, then on the balance we lost more than we gained.”
–

More whine with your cheese?

And if you understood a scintilla about the DOI proposal, you would know it does not authorize any drilling for exploration or for extraction. Nor does it even apply to the coastline. It only applies to the outer continental shelf. Consult a good globe to see the distinction. Nor does it, in any way, relieve any prospective oil co. from having to get permits (a) for any exploration and (b) for any actual extraction. Any permit applications will have to go through Endangered Species Act agency consultation. All will be vigorously litigated if there are any risks involved.

This is much ado about nothing. The rest of the “advanced” world is still laughing at us and our embarrassing politics. Last year, China spent #39 billion on alternative energy development. The US spent $4 billion.

35MPG = Bullshit

Guest on some public radio discussion today said having a floor of 35mpg would have a Big F&&king Deal. This is…eh.

But Obama has to come down somewhere he preceives to be the middle, so this is probably as good as it could get in an Obama presdiency.

I wonder how different it is that what a McCain administration would have done….

‘My sense is that we are [OK with the base],’ Democratic National Committee Chair Tim Kaine told the Huffington Post shortly after health care’s passage.”

This guy thought they were OK with the base in MA and we all see how that turned out. Apparently he didn’t get the memo the voters sent him…probably because he doesn’t want to get it.

this is only so-so policy

Agreed. I don’t see resistance in the general public to the CAFE as I did years ago in fact I think the general public would like to see it increased, substantially.

So, who benefits from us not raising the standard to say 40 or 45. From an engineering standpoint, those economies are not a problem as there have been numerous models in the last 25 years that have achieved those numbers.

Keeping the standard depressed doesn’t really help Detroit at this time either (at least I don’t see it – in fact it may hurt them)

“If you forget the lessons of history, you’ll fail your history test.” – Mark Twain.

Okay, not Twain. I made that one up.

That $39 Billion was the vig from our horseracing losses.

Apparently he didn’t get the memo the voters sent him

Due to the memo arriving as an email vs snail mail (see other post yesterday outlining ‘O’ Administration not reading emails, snail mail only)

Okay, not Twain. I made that one up.

but I like it

DRILL, BABY! DRILL! That’s what’s different.

Oh wait……crap!

nevermind

****fanned**** I think coffee spray just clouded my monitor.

“So, who benefits from us not raising the standard to say 40 or 45.”

The corporate lobbyists who are giddy over Obama blocking California’s 43 MPG standard. By the way the head of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers (the key lobbyists who have fought California’s rules and who are cheering on Obama’s rules) is run by a Billy Touzin-esque figure who is a co-founder of the DLC. So when you want to see why we not only don’t have the 40 to 45 MPG range that you mention but in fact had that range actively blocked, you don’t have to look very far to see the same cast of characters who brought us facism with healthcare reform.

This is much ado about nothing. The rest of the “advanced” world is still laughing at us and our embarrassing politics. Last year, China spent #39 billion on alternative energy development. The US spent $4 billion.

35MPG = Bullshit
—

It’s not bullshit, unless you don’t understand math at grade school level. A fleet average of 35 mpg is going to require an enormous increase in cars which get 50+ mpg. Outside of a hybrid, you cannot now find a car that gets above 50 mpg. That’s the whole point of raising CAFE standards.

So, who benefits from us not raising the standard to say 40 or 45.

There is something else that is troubling also. As I mentioned in a previous post, I’ve had several Honda Civics. (8 of them actually)

Here’s some performance for 4 of them:

85 3-door, 1200cc 50mpg avg, 52mpg (many times on long trips)
91 4-door, 1300cc 48mpg
97 4-door, 1400cc 37mpg
02 4-door, 1500cc 35mpg

So in 17 years I gave up 15mpg. That’s significant.
Ok, it’s not scientific. I do embedded systems engineering and am anal about watching my mpg, always have.

There’s an increase in engine size, but it’s minor. All four models were classified as ULEV.

In fact, the 85 didn’t even require a Catalytic Converter.
In looking at this model, the performance has been steadily decreasing.

My new one? 32mpg. I’m starting to look for an older model now…

unless you don’t understand math at grade school level.

Nice Doug, Very friggin Nice

The logic of CAFE standards is that they force automakers to raise the bar. If I am not mistaken there were a lot of mini-vans and SUVS in 2008 with Obama stickers. These Progressive Liberal mini-van and SUV drivers could have bought Mini Coopers or Geo Metros, but chose not to, despite the great diff. in fuel economy. So the enemy is us. Blaming Barack Obama for our personal transportation preferences over the past 20 years is weak tea.

The rest of the “advanced” world is still laughing at us and our embarrassing politics.

I am laughing at Rahm and his embarrassing politics and his criminal mind. Of course he is laughing at me.

By the way, have you ever heard of hydrogen fuel cells. Or is that above your pay grade?

So the enemy is us

You’re a shill, pure and simple. Who are you with Doug? DCCC, Unions, who? Time to disclose.

Consumers can only purchase that which is produced.

Second point, most families require a ‘short hauler’ such as a SUV or mini-van. And then use a ‘commuter’ for majority of travel. I have Civics and an SUV (have had Mini-Vans in the past – and it received 30mpg)

Mini-Coopers get crap for mileage as do Metros (and you have to LOVE the Metros 60,000 mile power train life – yea). Extremely poor choices for examples.

But there is a theme emerging lately, on HCR now CAFE …

It’s Our Fault – Excuse me while I fall down on the friggin floor laughing

You can take an asshole tone with me, but you still haven’t actually made a point (or responded to mine).

I think we are having people from the “Daily Kos” web site over. It has been several years since I loaded that web site – but I recognize the distinct scent of over-the-top arrogance and obnoxiousness coupled with a tendency to neither a) actually closely read the posts they make obnoxious replies to or b) make their own posts make needed points.

I really hated that site, because of the type of people who took it over – serious grating, abrasive assholes who were certain of their own superiority due to succumbing to party groupthink, but who did not necessarily think before typing asshole comments. I hope it doesn’t flood over here.

No doubt.

New CAFE credit trading provisions
CAFE changes enacted by the 110th Congress (The Energy Independence and Security Act P.L. 110-140, H.R. 6), instructed NHTSA to establish a credit trading and transferring scheme to allow manufacturers to transfer credits between categories, as well as sell them to other manufacturers or non-manufacturers. In addition, the period over which credits could be carried forward was extended from three years to five. Traded or transferred credits may not be used to meet the minimum standard in the domestic passenger car fleet, however they may be used to meet the `attribute standard’.[29] This latter allowance has drawn criticism from the UAW which fears it will lead manufacturers to increase the importation of small cars to offset shortfalls in the domestic market.
These new flexibilities were implemented by regulation on March 23, 2009 in the Final Rule for 2011 Model Year Passenger Cars and Light Trucks.
Calculations using official CAFE data, and the newly proposed credit trading flexibility contained in the September 28, 2009 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking[30] show that ninety-eight percent of the benefit derived from just the cross fleet credit trading provision flows to Toyota. According to these calculations 75% of the benefit from the two new CAFE credit trading provisions, cross fleet trading and 5-year carry-forward, falls to foreign manufacturers. Toyota can use the provision to avoid or reduce compliance on average by 0.69 mpg per year through 2020,
Hyundai (1.01 mpg),
Nissan (0.65),
Honda (0.83 mpg),
Mitsubishi (0.13 mpg),
Subaru (0.08),
Chrysler (0.14 mpg),
GM (0.09 mpg), and
Ford (0.18 mpg) also benefit.
No, it’s bullshit. Do your homework.

New CAFE credit trading provisions
CAFE changes enacted by the 110th Congress (The Energy Independence and Security Act P.L. 110-140, H.R. 6), instructed NHTSA to establish a credit trading and transferring scheme to allow manufacturers to transfer credits between categories, as well as sell them to other manufacturers or non-manufacturers. In addition, the period over which credits could be carried forward was extended from three years to five. Traded or transferred credits may not be used to meet the minimum standard in the domestic passenger car fleet, however they may be used to meet the `attribute standard’.[29] This latter allowance has drawn criticism from the UAW which fears it will lead manufacturers to increase the importation of small cars to offset shortfalls in the domestic market.
These new flexibilities were implemented by regulation on March 23, 2009 in the Final Rule for 2011 Model Year Passenger Cars and Light Trucks.
Calculations using official CAFE data, and the newly proposed credit trading flexibility contained in the September 28, 2009 Notice of Proposed Rulemaking[30] show that ninety-eight percent of the benefit derived from just the cross fleet credit trading provision flows to Toyota. According to these calculations 75% of the benefit from the two new CAFE credit trading provisions, cross fleet trading and 5-year carry-forward, falls to foreign manufacturers. Toyota can use the provision to avoid or reduce compliance on average by 0.69 mpg per year through 2020,
Hyundai (1.01 mpg),
Nissan (0.65),
Honda (0.83 mpg),
Mitsubishi (0.13 mpg),
Subaru (0.08),
Chrysler (0.14 mpg),
GM (0.09 mpg), and
Ford (0.18 mpg) also benefit.

has drawn criticism from the UAW which fears it will lead manufacturers to increase the importation of small cars

Thanks for the info TPAZ

The first Civic’s were imported in 1975, 35 years ago. That’s the same exact excuse that Detroit was making then. Incredulous that the UAW is still using it.

If it leads to the importation of more cars, so be it.

How Long Do We Have To Wait? (pun intended Doug …)

Do you remember how Congress recently stated that staff shouldn’t visit the Drudge Report due to a virus? There are people on staff from the White House and Congress who are actively trying to present false, misleading or inaccurate information. If you look at Doug Watts comments, he/she would fall into that category.

Yes, Thought Police next.

Spinsters, they make me Vomit

Yes to all and because Obama and his admin and now Congress have proven themselves in service to the corporate structure, not in service to the people who elected them.

Class warfare, that’s what it is and our electeds have chosen sides, the corporate side that fills their re-election troughs and the perks and goodies lobbyists throw their way.

First HCR then Drill Baby Drill, now CAFE and up next? Financial Reform

I’ll just hold my breath

Ahhhh, FISA, Iraq, AFPAK, HCR, Bank/finan reform . . . uh, see Hugh’s list.

If That’s Not Sufficient, I Submit You Ignore The Obvious And We Disagree, Greatly.

Agreed!

Thank you, as I said, the technology to get 65mpg+ has been there for decades or more.

Anything less is catering to a lobby group for a corporate industry that funnels money to the politicians.

How that’s not seen by anyone at FDL is beyond me, given the evidence at hand.

We always do, that’s class warfare, and how it works.

Still sticking pins in the doll to see if it reacts, are ya?

Your schtick is old.

The technology for 45-50mpg was rolling off assembly lines and sold by the thousands 25 years ago.

Since the technology is/was available, are they saying that Detroit is so utterly incompetent that they’re unable to reverse engineer technology from 25 years ago? (in that case we should have absolutely let them go bankrupt – stupid Administration) There has to be a different reason, maybe not.

Now we’re being told that the best they can do is what?

No serious person can defend C.A.F.E. standards.

You miss a point regarding the technology.

The auto/oil industry has bought up patents for decades that would easily modify vehicles so they could get a HUNDRED miles per gallon. That technology is not permitted to come to market. That’s how corporations work.

If the technologies that HAVE been designed and developed, were allowed to come to market we’d be driving vehicles at half the cost and ten fold the efficiency.

But that’s not how corporations work.

I hope you understand that, not trying to be snide . . . but that’s how it works.

No serious person can defend C.A.F.E. standards.

Agreed, if they have any personal ethical conviction, but I sense that we’re dealing with shills, pros that are attempting to influence the body politic.

Bingo.

If Obama had any balls he would have called for 50/20 50MPG by 2020. Look around at all the technology that is focused on the automotive industry. 50MPG can be achieved in the auto industry’s sleep by 2020.

The reality of CAFE Standards is they are a smoke screen to obscure the suppression of technology coming to market that would yield HUGE increases in fuel consumption efficiencies.

And CAFE Standards are a corporate/government joint effort to ensure the oil industry gets its fair share of high prices and high demand. When efficiency goes up, fuel demand goes down and so does the revenue stream for big oil.

It’s simple. Same game since corporations were granted their status.

And Wall Street began to bet on them, too.

If someone doesn’t understand, they should watch the documentary “Who Killed the Electric Car” and check out the following PBS information:

http://www.pbs.org/now/shows/223/

I’m outta this thread, Hugh laid it down, no need to engage anymore.

See Pups somewhere above for fresh meat!!!

*G*

Ok, ya hooked me into one last thought.

Love your comment, I’ll back it up with the efforts made by Ford and others long ago when they and others wiped out the small scale rail lines that served trolly inner city, inner urban, and INTER City and INTER County!!!

A perfectly great mass transit system was destroyed overnight by the emerging corporate auto industry.

And mass transit has been a joke in this country since, in terms of daily usage for commuting, shopping, and short hop travel. Ergo pollution, and more.

50MPG can be achieved in the auto industry’s sleep by 2020.

You won’t hear any argument out of me.

I had a Honda in 85 that did 50 and another in 91 that just about did 50.

I won’t say it’s criminal that we can’t buy any today that do 60, but I think it’s ridiculous that my little Civic’s can best a hybrid. In fact, I think it’s nuts.

We are being told that the automotive corporate lobbyists objected to California’s 43 MPG standard and didn’t want other states getting involved either so yet again Obama did what would make the corporate lobbyists happy and we are supposed to cheer for making the corporate lobbyists happy. The Obama administration considers it bad that states would dare impose stricter emissions regulations on the auto industry than the fed, so Obama has to crush whatever makes the corporate lobbyists unhappy.

I know. And I’m tired of hearing that Obama is playing some 11 dimensional game of chess. If he has to resort to chess to beat the GOP clowns he’s facing in a game of right-wing checkers, he’s not the man he thinks he is.

I’m Audi (I couldn’t resist).

I believe California should proceed and impose their own standards. Is someone in the Fed (EPA, Transportation or Nat Guard) actually going to make CA accept cars, title cars and license cars if CA has statutory language preventing low mpg cars in the state?

Call his bluff

California: Just Do the 43mpg

Oh yes, one last thing about the 2011 Mustang.

GT=412 HP=17/26 city/highway (MT)/18/25 (AT)
V6=305 HP=19/29 city/highway (MT)/20/31 (AT: first 300+ HP car to break 30 MPG highway)

See? Not all muscle cars guzzle gas!