U.S. to issue stricter fuel policy, end rift over California rules


May 18, 2009 - 2:00 pm ET
UPDATED: 5/18/09 5:58 p.m. ET


WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- The White House will unveil an auto fuel efficiency proposal on Tuesday to resolve a dispute between California and the U.S. government over emissions and accelerate the time frame for sharply improving mileage performance, industry and other sources said.



The proposal, if accepted by California and a dozen other states that want to more aggressively target greenhouse gasses, would effectively end legal and political battles with the struggling auto sector over the best way to cut fuel consumption and curtail tailpipe emissions.

It would also put more pressure on struggling U.S. automakers such as General Motors, Ford Motor Co. and bankrupt Chrysler LLC to accelerate development of more efficient gasoline engines, as well as new gasoline/electric hybrids and all-electric cars.

According to people briefed on the announcement, the plan in the works for months would harmonize California's preference for curtailing emissions with the federal program that sets fuel economy standards based on vehicle weight and other attributes.

Annual mileage goals would be set from 2012-16 and would top out at 42 miles per gallon for cars and just over 26 mpg for light trucks, which include pickups, SUVs and minivans. Those targets are more aggressive than the current average goal for the U.S. fleet of 35 mpg by 2020, stemming from a December 2007 energy law.

March mandate

In March, the government said fuel-economy standards for all U.S. light vehicles will rise 8 percent to an average of 27.3 mpg for the 2011 model year and will cost the industry $1.46 billion to make the change.

Under that timetable, cars will be required to travel an industry average of 30.2 miles on each gallon of fuel, up from 27.5 mpg, and light-truck standards will increase by 1 mpg, to 24.1 mpg. The combined fleet average will rise by 2 mpg.

Those rules were the first fuel-economy mandates set by the Obama administration. They were to use a new system that sets standards for individual models based on their size.

The new policy would give automakers flexibility to meet the standards and would weigh the impact on the environment of carbon-based fuels and other vehicle systems that emit emissions, like air conditioners.

"This could be the breakthrough we've been looking for on clean cars," said David Friedman, research director of the clean vehicle program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

The administration would not discuss the pending announcement other than to note that action on emissions and fuel economy was long overdue.

"I think you'll see tomorrow important, groundbreaking steps in that area," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs told reporters.

Paving the way

The administration in April opened the way to regulating emissions by declaring climate-warming pollution a danger to human health and welfare, in a sharp policy shift from the Bush administration.

The EPA declaration was seen as a strong signal to the international community that the United States intends to seriously combat climate change.

Moreover, Congress is considering legislation to cut carbon emissions emitted by cars, coal-fired power plants and oil refineries and other sources. The bill proposes a 17 percent reduction in emissions from 2005 levels by 2020.

The Obama White House in February reversed another Bush administration directive by ordering EPA to reconsider California's request for authority to regulate emissions from new cars and trucks under a law the state passed in 2006.

The agency said the Clean Air Act gives the EPA the authority to allow California to adopt its own emissions standards for motor vehicles due to the seriousness of the state's air pollution challenges.

More than a dozen other states supported California's plan, but the auto industry fought it in court, fearing a dual state and federal standards would result in a patchwork of regulations that would make vehicle planning and production more complex and expensive.

 

2mpg more for trucks should be no problem, just add direct injection and 6 speed automatics on everything.

As for cars Honda is already at 39.9mpg for imported cars, whats another 2mpg, just got to all 6 speed automatics.

This doesn't seem like that big of a deal considering the tech that will be out 7 years from now. HCCI, GDI and 6 speeds on everything. Car will probably get lighter too. Same performance better fuel economy.

http://www.cars.com/go/advice/Story....bject=fuelList

edit: here are the 2009 CAFE numbers/ratings http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/portal/nhts...9%20Report.pdf

Tesla is already at 244mpg

 

how many hondas get 39.9mpg?

 

Its due-able, nothing to worry about, we knew it was coming anyways

 

Well guess we better hold on to all the Trailblazer SS's, GTO's, Corvettes, and Camaro's that we can.

They're going to become collectors items...........

 

Toyota is almost there, and just about is there with trucks this year. Ford is only 1.3mpg away with trucks and will be well over once the Ecoboost Edge, Escape, and Explorers come out next year.

Toyota in 2009
Imported car = 38.1mpg
Domestic produced car = 35.9mpg
Light truck = 25.8mpg

Ford light truck = 24.7mpg
So you don't think they can get 2mpg more out of TrailBlazer SS??? A vehicle without a 6 speed, GDI, or AFM.

You don't think they can sell one 100mpg CAFE rated Volt for every six 30mpg rated Camaros or Corvettes?

 

I don't understand what you're saying. TBSS is rated at 12/16, how is that anywhere near 24, yet alone 42?

 

Thanks Obama. This should really help out automakers.

 

Keep in mind 3 things.

1. Those EPA mileage ratings are NOT what's being used to measure CAFE mileage.

2. Currently, cars are averaging 31 mpg CAFE, despite the law being only 27.5.

3. Trucks currently are averaging about 22 mpg.


This also leaves 2 conclusions:

1. Cars are ahead of the standards.

2. Trucks are going to be clearly more affected by the new standards than cars.


CAFE is sales based.

Anyone thinking Corvettes are doomed simply because of this needs to get a grip. 30,000 Corvettes (or based on current sales, 15-20,000) annually aren't going to dent GM's CAFE one way or another. Neither are Camaros. Again, lets get a grip before we start spreading fear through the herd mentality of the internet.

As a group, the overall fuel economy of cars will increase by 10 mpg in 11 years. Given the fact that fuel prices have increased 70% in the past few months and are likely headed back to $4 per gallon (although oil is more or less stable), again, the market will be ahead of the mandate and with 11 years to downsize and modernize (The new Ford Fusion hybrid alone exceeds the 2020 fuel economy standard). Performance cars are made in such small numbers, it's not even a factor.

Worse case scenario, we'll pay more for top performance models... which we've been doing progressively over the past decade for V8 cars over V6s. As long as there is a market, and money can be made on them, we'll certainly see them.

The new standards are a cakewalk compared with what we went through with CAFE from 1977 to 1987, going from 14 to 27.5 mpg.

Only difference is that there won't be trucks & SUVs to hide behind and push as a subsitute.

 

CAFE = Corporate AVERAGE Fuel Economy. So if the current 2009 average standard is 22mpg for trucks and the 2016 is 24mpg then every truck in GMs fleet would need to get 2mpg more to meet the average. If everything from the TB SS to the Equinox goes up 2mpg GM is all set. FWD Equinox is going up ~7mpg in 2010 alone.

50% since it is an average

 

50% of what?

 

Corvette may be okay. Expensive sports cars may be okay. Cheaper sports cars based on high volume RWD platforms (like Camaro) are probably in trouble, because those other cars needed for economies of scale may not exist.

 

 

Ford's 4.0L in the mustang...
GM's 4.3L "Vortec"
Jeep's 4.0L inline 6

For God's sake, the 2.8/3.1/3.4 which could barely eek out 25mpg in the Camaro on a good day...

Engine technology has come a LONG way. Growing up, did you ever think you'd see 270hp out of a 4-cylinder in an everyday production car that gets 29mpg? 29mpg out of a 304hp V6 displacing only 3.6L?

I think this is a nice way to tell auto manufacturers to get off their damn duffs and update ALL their engines. I don't foresee any kind of awful huge horsepower/performance drop. Maybe a slight increase in price, but so much of this technology is already available/under development.

I mean if Chrysler cleaned up their dang gas guzzling V8's, there's a huge piece of low-hanging fruit right there. Buddy of mine had a 2002 Dakota with the 4.7? Single-digit mpg in town. Maybe they've gotten better, but I'm guessing that motor is still around in some form.

 

Let me finish erecting my flame shield............

I'm for this legislature. I just bought a 2009 ford focus, and I'm totally digging the 35.5mpg in town, 36.1 hwy. If I could buy a small car with considerably better mileage, I would.

I'm also about to by a 2010 SS camaro. Currently, my focus mpg combined with the camaro mpg will be above CAFE standards. If, in 2016, I can buy a $15K American car with 42+mpg, I'm all for it.