Obama wants increased fuel efficiency, less smog (not my title)

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
From the BOHICA/Obama Motors department, via AP/Yahoo. And, no, it's not my title, check out the link and look for yourself.

Obama wants increased fuel efficiency, less smog

By Associated Press Writers Ken Thomas And Philip Elliott, Associated Press Writers ? 5 mins ago

WASHINGTON ? President Barack Obama outlined Tuesday the nation's first comprehensive effort to curb vehicle emissions while cutting dependence on imported oil, calling the plan an historic turning point toward a "clean-energy economy."

Joined in the White House Rose Garden by leaders of the auto industry, labor, government officials and key national and state political leaders, Obama said the agreement that once would have been "considered impossible" was what he termed a "harbinger of a change in the way business is done in Washington."

The two-pronged approach to problems that compound threats to the global environment marks the latest in a series of shifts by the Obama administration away from the policies of his conservative predecessor, former President George W. Bush.

"As a result of this agreement," Obama said, "we will save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold in the next five years. And at a time of historic crisis in our auto industry, this rule provides the clear certainty that will allow these companies to plan for a future in which they are building the cars of the 21st century."

He said the new rules amounted to removing 177 million cars from the roads over the next 6 1/2 years.

In that period, the savings in oil burned to fuel American cars, trucks and buses would amount to last year's combined U.S. imports from Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Libya and Nigeria.

While the new fuel and emission standards for cars and trucks will save billions of barrels of oil, they are expected to cost consumers an extra $1,300 per vehicle by the time the plan is complete in 2016. Obama said the fuel cost savings would offset the higher price of vehicles in three years.

While requiring that vehicle carbon dioxide emissions be reduced by about one-third by the target date, the plan requires the auto industry to be building vehicles that average 35.5 miles per gallon.

The plan also would effectively end a feud between automakers and statehouses over emission standards ? with the states coming out on top but the automakers getting the single national standard they've been seeking and more time to make the changes.

The plan, to be proposed in the Federal Register of pending rules and regulations, must still clear procedural hurdles at the Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department. Automakers expressed their support for the plan. "We're all agreeing to work together on a national program," said Dave McCurdy, president and CEO of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.

Administration officials said consumers were going to pay an extra $700, anyway, for mileage standards that had already been approved. The Obama plan adds another $600 to the price of a vehicle, a senior administration official said, bringing the total cost to $1,300 by 2016.

Under the changes, the overall fleet average would have to be 35.5 mpg by 2016, with passenger cars reaching 39 mpg and light trucks hitting 30 mpg under a system that develops standards for each vehicle class size. Manufacturers would also be required to hit individual mileage targets.

In a battle over emission standards, California, 13 other states and the District of Columbia have urged the federal government to let them enact more stringent standards than the federal government's requirements. The states' regulations would cut greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent in new cars and trucks by 2016 ? the benchmark Obama planned to unveil for vehicles built in model years 2012 and beyond.

The Obama plan gives the states essentially what they sought and more, although the buildup is slower than the states sought. In exchange, though, cash-strapped states such as California would not have to develop their own standards and enforcement plan. Instead, they can rely on federal tax dollars to monitor the environment.

The auto industry will be required to ramp up production of more fuel-efficient vehicles on a much tighter timeline than originally envisioned. It will be costly; the Transportation Department last year estimated that requiring the industry to meet 31.6 mpg by 2015 would cost nearly $47 billion.

But industry officials ? many of whom are running companies on emergency taxpayer dollars ? said Obama's plan would help them because they would not face multiple emissions requirements and would have more certainty as they develop their vehicles for the next decade.


We are so screwed - here's another case of mandating behavior that goes counter to reality. When Toyota, Honda and Nissan all say that they can't meet the prior 35mpg CAFE fleet standards, let alone this new accelerated timetable, there is something desperately wrong. Especially when you realize that the justification for this new timetable is the exact same justification given, by Carter, when implementing the original CAFE laws. Which, so far, don't seem to have weaned us off foreign oil.

The government just does not seem to understand that the laws of physics will not permit this short of some radical new breakthrough that nobody seems to be on the trail of; between the ever increasing weight of cars due to additional safety regulations and the stifling of performance via ever more ridiculous pollution controls in the name of "saving Mother Gaia", it's no wonder that fuel economy is difficult to increase.

Anyone want to bet that when they fail to meet the 35mpg CAFE standards (and they will fail), the Government/Obama Motors twins of GM and Chrysler will be given a free pass to ignore it?
 
Last edited:

WillDAQ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
2,725
Location
Ukania
Anyone know how the new regs compare to Euro 6? That's gonna be 2014 and there's a similar rush on to work out how the hell to meet it.

This plan really sucks. All the money spent on development of new cars, goes to meet these impossible regulations. Just let capitalism do its job!
From the perspective of the US this isn't necessarily a bad thing. These technologies are going to be developed somewhere, they may as well be in the US.
 
Last edited:

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
From the perspective of the US this isn't necessarily a bad thing. These technologies are going to be developed somewhere, they may as well be in the US.

Except for the fact that they won't be developed in the US because our enviro regs and business regs mean that it's not going to happen here.
 

Nabster

Has Slutty Mustangs
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Messages
4,583
Location
DFW
Car(s)
1969 Mustang Coupe, 2019 Mustang GT, 2011 F150
So when will the President be taking delivery of his fleet of 6 ton armored Cadillac limos, which get 40 mpg?
 

Spectre

The Deported
Joined
Feb 1, 2007
Messages
36,871
Location
Dallas, Texas
Car(s)
00 4Runner | 02 919 | 87 XJ6 | 86 CB700SC
So when will the President be taking delivery of his fleet of 6 ton armored Cadillac limos, which get 40 mpg?

Oh, didn't you know? Fuel economy, like paying taxes, is for the little people, not the important movers and shakers like Pelosi, Reid, and Obama! :p
 

BlaRo

Little Nudger
Joined
Aug 18, 2005
Messages
18,176
Location
Brooklyn
Car(s)
Moto Guzzi V7 Special, Saab 900 Turbo
So when will the President be taking delivery of his fleet of 6 ton armored Cadillac limos, which get 40 mpg?

Well he kind of needs those to, you know, not get his head blown off.

Still, the implications of this are pretty terrifying: the government can't legislate consumer behavior, no matter how hard it tries today, and this isn't helping out the Americans one bit. I used to think Obama had this part covered, but he's not making his job any easier for himself nor for the rest of America.

Welcome to Malaise II:

427rat.jpg

From my COLD, DEAD HANDS.
 

prizrak

Forum Addict
Joined
Apr 2, 2007
Messages
21,601
Location
No, sleep, till, BROOKLYN
Car(s)
11 Xterra Pro-4x, 12 'stang GT
Under this argument, IT workers should be exempt. We need fast (not MPG-conscious) cars to get to jobs quickly. The whole country grinds to a halt unless we can have big V8s. Literally.

I absolutely agree :)

But industry officials ? many of whom are running companies on emergency taxpayer dollars ? said Obama's plan would help them because they would not face multiple emissions requirements and would have more certainty as they develop their vehicles for the next decade.
Total BS. If the auto manufacturers had a problem with different standards all they need to do is follow the most stringent and that would automatically mean that they will meet any other standard.

Why would there be a need for CAFE? People are buying small and fuel efficient vehicles already and companies have been using fuel economy as a selling point even in premium brands. There is a poster in the Audi dealership that I come to from time to time comparing the A4's mileage to that of 3series and the C class.

UGGH this is same as retarded ass speed limits claiming that they save lives.....
 

MattD1zzl3

2 Slow 2 Noisy
Joined
May 6, 2007
Messages
3,736
Location
Miamishire
Car(s)
1996 & 2003 Mazda Miatas, 1995 Chevy Camaro Z28
Thats it, ill just have to maintain old cars under the "classic vehicle" 20 year plus laws for the rest of my life. I'd however gladly rock an electric car if they get the charging time down.
 

Eunos_Cosmo

Forum Addict
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
6,968
Location
Oakland
Car(s)
'84 Mazda RX7, '12 Mazda 2, '99 Porsche Boxster
I'm afraid this might just kill the Rotary engine in the US, unless the 16x can really produce some good numbers. Fuck you Obama.


EDIT: Woah woah, did anyone else notice this?
He said the new rules amounted to removing 177 million cars from the roads over the next 6 1/2 years.

And how do you suppose they are going to do that? It is unclear whether he meant that literally or metaphorically.
 
Last edited:

Nabster

Has Slutty Mustangs
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Messages
4,583
Location
DFW
Car(s)
1969 Mustang Coupe, 2019 Mustang GT, 2011 F150
I'm afraid this might just kill the Rotary engine in the US, unless the 16x can really produce some good numbers. Fuck you Obama.


EDIT: Woah woah, did anyone else notice this?


And how do you suppose they are going to do that?

As in, the savings in emissions from the increased economy would be equal to removing 177 million cars from the roads. They aren't actually going to remove them. This is a common and grossly misrepresented way of showing how things are kind to the planet.
 

Eunos_Cosmo

Forum Addict
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
6,968
Location
Oakland
Car(s)
'84 Mazda RX7, '12 Mazda 2, '99 Porsche Boxster
Well he kind of needs those to, you know, not get his head blown off.

Still, the implications of this are pretty terrifying: the government can't legislate consumer behavior, no matter how hard it tries today, and this isn't helping out the Americans one bit. I used to think Obama had this part covered, but he's not making his job any easier for himself nor for the rest of America.

Welcome to Malaise II:

427rat.jpg

From my COLD, DEAD HANDS.

I see your big block and raise you and even more dirty 3 rotor!!
20B_lg_blk1.jpg
 

argatoga

Can't Start His Wank
Joined
Oct 4, 2005
Messages
18,207
Location
Zagreb
Car(s)
'08 Pontiac Solstice GXP
I'm afraid this might just kill the Rotary engine in the US, unless the 16x can really produce some good numbers. Fuck you Obama.

It is average fuel economy. Mazda could still sell RXs as long as the other cars make up the difference.
 

DanRoM

Forum Addict
Joined
Feb 27, 2009
Messages
9,792
Location
Ruhr Area, Germany
Car(s)
MX-5 ND, Tracer 900 GT & two bikes
Anyone know how the new regs compare to Euro 6?
On the TV news, they said tonight the target in the US is 150 g/km of CO2 for new cars in 2016 (low CO2 per km is the new religion here, nobody seems to be interested in fuel consumption figures anymore).
If that figure is correct, it'd be 25% higher than in Europe: the target here is 120 g/km for 65% of all new cars in 2012 - 75% in 2013, 80% in 2014, all new cars in 2015. Whatever that means, because they calculate fleet averages for every car manufacturer anyway. That's why Porsche wants to get together with VAG...
 
Last edited:

WillDAQ

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2007
Messages
2,725
Location
Ukania
Except for the fact that they won't be developed in the US because our enviro regs and business regs mean that it's not going to happen here.

Errr... so there are regulations that would prevent companies developing products to meet regulations? Now i'm confused.
 

sonza68

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2007
Messages
1,087
Location
Florissant, MO, US
Car(s)
'00 Cougar/'07 Explorer
I suddenly feel proud that my next vehicle will get 12-13 mpg and have absolutely no emissions controls.
 

Nabster

Has Slutty Mustangs
Joined
Oct 15, 2007
Messages
4,583
Location
DFW
Car(s)
1969 Mustang Coupe, 2019 Mustang GT, 2011 F150
I suddenly feel proud that my next vehicle will get 12-13 mpg and have absolutely no emissions controls.

You've described my current vehicle. :lol:
 
Top