Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
Thread Starter
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 1,398
From: Fairfax Station, VA. Formally Long Island :(
Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=20057
Glad to see the automakers taking a stand. Some of these goals do seem a bit rediculous.
"It's not impossible!"
Automakers say they're trying to meet fuel efficiency targets, but Americans like less efficient vehicles better. (Source: GM Inside News Forum) Automakers claim drivers don't want fuel efficient vehicles
Current fuel efficiency targets set by the Obama administration demand that average fuel efficiency of light passenger vehicles to increase to 34.1 mpg by 2016 -- an average increase of 40 percent. Last month the Obama administration's Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration rolled out a new proposal which called for much bigger improvements by 2025.
While not yet official, the proposal is to increase the fuel efficiency target to anywhere between 47 to 62 mpg by 2025, based on a 3 to 6 percent annual increase in efficiency.
Detroit's "Big Three" -- General Motor Company, Ford Motor Company, and Chrysler LLC -- along with Toyota Corp. have filed a series of objections with the U.S. government, calling that plan -- particularly the high end goal of 62 mpg "impossible". Eight other automakers also added commentary to the objection.
The consortium claims that the federal government is failing to accurately consider how fuel prices impact buyers decisions, is overstating consumer benefits of increased fuel efficiency, and is underestimating the cost of these increases to the industry. On top of that, they say, Americans' don't seem to be very interested in fuel efficient vehicles.
Writes the group, "The question not addressed by (EPA and NHTSA) is this: If the economics for high fuel economy vehicles is so overwhelming, why do so few consumers choose to buy high fuel economy vehicle?"
The EPA and NHTSA are reportedly reviewing the objections, which they will likely take into account in drafting a finalized set of efficiency targets, enforceable by law. According to the EPA's numbers the increase in fuel efficiency to 47 and 62 mpg would only cost $770 and $3,500, respectively per vehicle. Those costs would like be passed on to the consumers, which would pay $12B USD to $50B USD annually for the improvements. At least part of those increased costs, though, would be recouped over time by less frequent fill-ups.
Automakers claim the actual price of the improvements is 250 percent of the EPA's estimates. As for the source of these inaccuracies, the industry leaders say that the government is underestimating the cost of electric vehicle batteries and weight reductions.
Further, they warn that there could be safety implications for lighter vehicles -- implications which they argue the federal proposal fails to address.
On the other side of the board are environmental action groups and a coalition of eight states led by New York and California that want a hard target of 60 mpg by 2025. They believe that the industry is just whining about what can't be done, when they could in fact actually do it if they set their minds to it.
Automakers say they're trying to meet fuel efficiency targets, but Americans like less efficient vehicles better. (Source: GM Inside News Forum) Automakers claim drivers don't want fuel efficient vehicles
Current fuel efficiency targets set by the Obama administration demand that average fuel efficiency of light passenger vehicles to increase to 34.1 mpg by 2016 -- an average increase of 40 percent. Last month the Obama administration's Environmental Protection Agency and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration rolled out a new proposal which called for much bigger improvements by 2025.
While not yet official, the proposal is to increase the fuel efficiency target to anywhere between 47 to 62 mpg by 2025, based on a 3 to 6 percent annual increase in efficiency.
Detroit's "Big Three" -- General Motor Company, Ford Motor Company, and Chrysler LLC -- along with Toyota Corp. have filed a series of objections with the U.S. government, calling that plan -- particularly the high end goal of 62 mpg "impossible". Eight other automakers also added commentary to the objection.
The consortium claims that the federal government is failing to accurately consider how fuel prices impact buyers decisions, is overstating consumer benefits of increased fuel efficiency, and is underestimating the cost of these increases to the industry. On top of that, they say, Americans' don't seem to be very interested in fuel efficient vehicles.
Writes the group, "The question not addressed by (EPA and NHTSA) is this: If the economics for high fuel economy vehicles is so overwhelming, why do so few consumers choose to buy high fuel economy vehicle?"
The EPA and NHTSA are reportedly reviewing the objections, which they will likely take into account in drafting a finalized set of efficiency targets, enforceable by law. According to the EPA's numbers the increase in fuel efficiency to 47 and 62 mpg would only cost $770 and $3,500, respectively per vehicle. Those costs would like be passed on to the consumers, which would pay $12B USD to $50B USD annually for the improvements. At least part of those increased costs, though, would be recouped over time by less frequent fill-ups.
Automakers claim the actual price of the improvements is 250 percent of the EPA's estimates. As for the source of these inaccuracies, the industry leaders say that the government is underestimating the cost of electric vehicle batteries and weight reductions.
Further, they warn that there could be safety implications for lighter vehicles -- implications which they argue the federal proposal fails to address.
On the other side of the board are environmental action groups and a coalition of eight states led by New York and California that want a hard target of 60 mpg by 2025. They believe that the industry is just whining about what can't be done, when they could in fact actually do it if they set their minds to it.
Glad to see the automakers taking a stand. Some of these goals do seem a bit rediculous.
Registered User
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 825
From: Stamford, VT
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
It would seem that the only way the automakers feel that these coals could be met would be through a much increased usage of hybrid/electric technology, based on the battery comment above.
If that's the case, I wonder (sarcasm) if the EPA & federal government has given ANY consideration to the environmental impacts of battery manufacture & subsequent disposal at the volume necessary to reach these ridiculous goals.
If that's the case, I wonder (sarcasm) if the EPA & federal government has given ANY consideration to the environmental impacts of battery manufacture & subsequent disposal at the volume necessary to reach these ridiculous goals.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
Tesla is already at 244mpg.....in 2010....so I'm going to have to say that 47mpg by 2025 isn't going to be a problem.
Toyota will probably hit 47mpg CAFE in the next 5 years, and that is without the EPA telling them they have to. How is that going to look when the Big 3 say they can't do it yet Toyota is doing it. The sky isn't falling people. Because of electric cars this will be an easy target to hit.
It is all about getting off imported oil from non friendly nations. We need to get national oil consumption down to 12-15 million barrels a day in the next 5-10 years or there is going to be some serious economic and social problems.
Toyota will probably hit 47mpg CAFE in the next 5 years, and that is without the EPA telling them they have to. How is that going to look when the Big 3 say they can't do it yet Toyota is doing it. The sky isn't falling people. Because of electric cars this will be an easy target to hit.
It is all about getting off imported oil from non friendly nations. We need to get national oil consumption down to 12-15 million barrels a day in the next 5-10 years or there is going to be some serious economic and social problems.
Last edited by Z28x; Nov 3, 2010 at 02:55 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 3,650
From: Indianapolis, IN
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
Tesla is already at 244mpg.....in 2010....so I'm going to have to say that 47mpg by 2025 isn't going to be a problem.
Toyota will probably hit 47mpg CAFE in the next 5 years, and that is without the EPA telling them they have to. How is that going to look when the Big 3 say they can't do it yet Toyota is doing it. The sky isn't falling people. Because of electric cars this will be an easy target to hit.
It is all about getting off imported oil from non friendly nations. We need to get national oil consumption down to 12-15 million barrels a day in the next 5-10 years or there is going to be some serious economic and social problems.
Toyota will probably hit 47mpg CAFE in the next 5 years, and that is without the EPA telling them they have to. How is that going to look when the Big 3 say they can't do it yet Toyota is doing it. The sky isn't falling people. Because of electric cars this will be an easy target to hit.
It is all about getting off imported oil from non friendly nations. We need to get national oil consumption down to 12-15 million barrels a day in the next 5-10 years or there is going to be some serious economic and social problems.
Registered User
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 6,165
From: Sterling Heights, MI
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
It's funny that this article came out the day after the elections. It almost seems as though some people finally feel emboldened to speak up.
The question is not really whether automakers can meet these targets, it's can they meet them PROFITABLY. Because a car that gets 244 "mpg" is great and all, until you see that the business model only requires a few hundred copies to sell a year (at exotic prices).
I fully understand economies of scale, blah blah blah, but 2025 is ONLY 15 years away. That's only a couple of clean sheet product cycles for most vehicles.
The question is not really whether automakers can meet these targets, it's can they meet them PROFITABLY. Because a car that gets 244 "mpg" is great and all, until you see that the business model only requires a few hundred copies to sell a year (at exotic prices).
I fully understand economies of scale, blah blah blah, but 2025 is ONLY 15 years away. That's only a couple of clean sheet product cycles for most vehicles.
Last edited by Z28Wilson; Nov 3, 2010 at 03:25 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 609
From: Cornelius, NC
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
Tesla is already at 244mpg.....in 2010....so I'm going to have to say that 47mpg by 2025 isn't going to be a problem.
Toyota will probably hit 47mpg CAFE in the next 5 years, and that is without the EPA telling them they have to. How is that going to look when the Big 3 say they can't do it yet Toyota is doing it. The sky isn't falling people. Because of electric cars this will be an easy target to hit.
It is all about getting off imported oil from non friendly nations. We need to get national oil consumption down to 12-15 million barrels a day in the next 5-10 years or there is going to be some serious economic and social problems.
Toyota will probably hit 47mpg CAFE in the next 5 years, and that is without the EPA telling them they have to. How is that going to look when the Big 3 say they can't do it yet Toyota is doing it. The sky isn't falling people. Because of electric cars this will be an easy target to hit.
It is all about getting off imported oil from non friendly nations. We need to get national oil consumption down to 12-15 million barrels a day in the next 5-10 years or there is going to be some serious economic and social problems.
And like stated, Toyota is on the same bandwagon claiming that 62MPG by 2025 is impossible.
Super Moderator
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 9,507
From: Okemos, MI
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
They should just introduce a gas tax for Pete's sake. I know why they're not doing it (political suicide), but seriously, if they're not willing to apply the provably correct solution to the problem, then they should spend their time fixing other problems instead, rather than pulling legislation out of their asses. 
Tesla isn't a full-line vehicle manufacturer, so their figures are pretty irrelevant, unless you're suggesting that GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc. should all stop making vans, trucks, SUVs, full-size sedans, etc., and all should revise their line so that they only make two-seat compact sports cars and medium-size luxury sedans.
Tesla is already at 244mpg.....in 2010....so I'm going to have to say that 47mpg by 2025 isn't going to be a problem.
Last edited by JakeRobb; Nov 3, 2010 at 03:31 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
All these electric cars are going to blow manufacturers CAFE numbers though the roof. That is why CAFE is going to increase in 15 years to keep up with them. It is too soon to set mileage levels based on electric cars in the fleet mix but it is safe to say that 50mpg will probably be a piece of cake in 2025.
I think we are going to see huge advancements in battery technology in the next decade. The kWh/$ war is on.
Tesla isn't a full-line vehicle manufacturer, so their figures are pretty irrelevant, unless you're suggesting that GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota, Nissan, etc. should all stop making vans, trucks, SUVs, full-size sedans, etc., and all should revise their line so that they only make two-seat compact sports cars and medium-size luxury sedans.
I'd don't agree with every decision of theirs, but I do enjoy not having respiratory diseases or getting cancer from my ground water.
Smog is no fun either, I like to be able to see the sun on cloudless days.
Last edited by Z28x; Nov 3, 2010 at 03:46 PM.
Registered User
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,154
From: All around
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
Originally Posted by Z28x
Smog is no fun either, I like to be able to see the sun on cloudless days..
The problem is the 62mpg EPA mandate is based off what a group of analysts think the approximate improvement in battery density might be and what they think the approximate improvement in engine technology might be and what they think the approximate reduction in cost might be.
While on the opposite side, the other hand of the government is nearly guaranteed to change the way that mpg is calculated during that time, making the problem even worse because at this point their fleet calculations for electric, plug-in, etc are also based off of what a group of analysts thought the approximate effect of such vehicles on CAFE might be.
The EPA. Imposing huge legal penalties by basing laws on what a group of people think might possibly happen in the next 15 years.
Originally Posted by Z284ever
I vote to abolish the EPA...
Originally Posted by JakeRobb
I know why they're not doing it (political suicide)
Registered User
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 16,176
From: Chicagoland IL
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 681
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
The right way to reduce pollution is to reduce the amount of miles driven. The number of miles driven per year keeps going up.
Making cars more and more efficient and cleaner won't be able to keep up.
Instead of investing billions of dollars on technologies that can't keep up, we should be investing in public transportation, better roads to reduce congestion, and incentives for people to move closer to where they work.
Making cars more and more efficient and cleaner won't be able to keep up.
Instead of investing billions of dollars on technologies that can't keep up, we should be investing in public transportation, better roads to reduce congestion, and incentives for people to move closer to where they work.
Registered User
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 681
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
FYI, one of Tesla's major sources of income is selling emissions credits to other automakers...
Registered User
Joined: Jan 2000
Posts: 10,285
From: Albany, NY
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
And I'd rather not have giant holes in the ozone layer. But we have catalytic converters now and traded one evil for another.
The problem is the 62mpg EPA mandate is based off what a group of analysts think the approximate improvement in battery density might be and what they think the approximate improvement in engine technology might be and what they think the approximate reduction in cost might be.
While on the opposite side, the other hand of the government is nearly guaranteed to change the way that mpg is calculated during that time, making the problem even worse because at this point their fleet calculations for electric, plug-in, etc are also based off of what a group of analysts thought the approximate effect of such vehicles on CAFE might be.
The problem is the 62mpg EPA mandate is based off what a group of analysts think the approximate improvement in battery density might be and what they think the approximate improvement in engine technology might be and what they think the approximate reduction in cost might be.
While on the opposite side, the other hand of the government is nearly guaranteed to change the way that mpg is calculated during that time, making the problem even worse because at this point their fleet calculations for electric, plug-in, etc are also based off of what a group of analysts thought the approximate effect of such vehicles on CAFE might be.
Registered User
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 940
From: Southern Indiana
Re: Auto Industry Claims Obama's Fuel Efficiency Targets are Impossible
Tesla is already at 244mpg.....in 2010....so I'm going to have to say that 47mpg by 2025 isn't going to be a problem.
Toyota will probably hit 47mpg CAFE in the next 5 years, and that is without the EPA telling them they have to. How is that going to look when the Big 3 say they can't do it yet Toyota is doing it. The sky isn't falling people. Because of electric cars this will be an easy target to hit.
It is all about getting off imported oil from non friendly nations. We need to get national oil consumption down to 12-15 million barrels a day in the next 5-10 years or there is going to be some serious economic and social problems.
Toyota will probably hit 47mpg CAFE in the next 5 years, and that is without the EPA telling them they have to. How is that going to look when the Big 3 say they can't do it yet Toyota is doing it. The sky isn't falling people. Because of electric cars this will be an easy target to hit.
It is all about getting off imported oil from non friendly nations. We need to get national oil consumption down to 12-15 million barrels a day in the next 5-10 years or there is going to be some serious economic and social problems.
Come up with a single car that uses a gasoline engine that gets better mileage than a geo metro and would still get 5 star safety ratings today.
