Agent009
Agent009
"I sincerely thank you for the warning. Now I'm off to sharpen my pitchfork."
View My AgentSpace

Print this Page | Digg It | del.icio.us

U.S. Transportation Department Proposes Sweeping Economy Standards
The US Transportation Department today will propose a sweeping increase in fuel economy standards, requiring passenger cars to average 35.7 miles per gallon and light trucks 28.6 mpg by 2015, The Detroit News has learned.

The proposal sets a more aggressive timetable than what Congress required when it passed an energy bill in December that calls for an industry fleet average of 35 mpg by 2020 for cars and trucks combined.

The proposed regulation from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration will cost the auto industry an estimated $47 billion to meet the requirements through 2015, a person familiar with the announcement said.

The overall fleet of new passenger cars and light trucks will have to average 31.8 mpg by 2015 -- an annual increase of 4.6 percent per year and above the 4 percent figure Congress required. That compares to the fleet's overall average of 26.7 mpg in the 2007 model year.

The proposal is the first regulatory step on the road to an overall fleet average of at least 35 mpg by 2020 and achieves more than half of that target. The Bush administration hopes to make the proposal final before the next president takes office.

 Read Article
U.S. Transportation Department Proposes Sweeping Economy Standards



Comments:

Images hosted in your AgentSpace can now be posted in the comments section using the following syntax (case matters):
[img]IMAGE URL[/img]
Example: [img]http://agent004.myautospies.com/users/150/Sample-Gallery/sample1.JPG[/img]
sholemonsholemon - 4/22/2008 2:04:11 PMView My AgentSpace
+3 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I think this is a good idea, but its certainly gonna put pressure on the automakers.

reply to this comment
sholemonsholemon - 4/22/2008 2:16:47 PMView My AgentSpace
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I agree with you and think you make a great point!


MadibaPMadibaP - 4/22/2008 5:15:03 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
It is a good idea but I think the fuel price will cause this change sooner than the legislation. At the current rate of increase, fuel cost will be doubling in a shorter and shorter space of time.

The answer is light cars and low speeds. Not hard to get super good economy in an 800kg car with a 55mph top end.


holmstarholmstar - 4/22/2008 2:52:35 PM
0 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I really don't think this is as big of an issue as the auto industry makes it sound. Things like cylinder deactivation will become standard, and it will really be a non-event.

reply to this comment
mercuryguymercuryguy - 4/22/2008 3:02:31 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
So why don’t the American Big 3 return to the innovation they once had and start putting Diesel engines in cars with a Manual Gearbox? Lets scrap this all wheel drive idea. No one needs a 4x4 on dry or even wet pavement. An 8 Speed gearbox with a 2 speed rear end for city vs. Hwy driving would be a smart idea. People are going to have to learn to drive manuals again. These are more sound idea than equipping cars with donut spares an using plastic screws and adhesives to reduce weight. As far as electric cars, they are designed more as a disposable car, because who will want to buy a 5 year old electric car. The drive trains and power systems are so complex that it will cost a fortune to repair and maintain them over time.
Why are the oil companies steering the American consumer away from Diesel?
Why does the New York State prohibit Diesel cars from being register able in New York State? Is it because the state is worried about the loss of Tax revenue on each gallon of gasoline?


reply to this comment
minimalistminimalist - 4/22/2008 4:25:49 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
yeppers.

if anything, the proposed legislation will benefit american automakers which, in turn, could strengthen the crappo us economy.


SteedPubSteedPub - 4/22/2008 3:09:09 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
We are all going to hell.

reply to this comment
topneurotopneuro - 4/22/2008 3:45:28 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
We do not need more US Government policies on Fossil fuels, Coal, and natural gas.
Earth, wind, water, and fire, sound familiar?
True “Green” energy sources are Geothermal, Windturbines, Hydroturbines, and Solar.
What our politician’s AKA corporate peons say “It is too hard…, It is too expensive…
Not any more with the way fossil fuel cost are rising and the American peso is plummeting.
All “Green” energy sources can be use to generate electricity for silent electric cars, all silent and ZEV. The electrical infrastructure is all there.
If not ready to accept this, time warp back to the 20th Century.
Oh, and get used to China, the 21st Century belongs to them.


reply to this comment
KillBotKillBot - 4/22/2008 4:10:00 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
This may sound like a stupid question. But, I've never heard it asked or addressed. If we were all to switch to electric cars. What would be the amount of increased toxins at the power plants, due to the extra charging of electric cars? Are we just replacing one evil with another? I personally think that bio-fuels are the best idea and can be the most profitable for the US. Back to the story above, I think it's a good idea, kind of. But, I don't agree with the Bush administration causing the rise in gas prices and then putting it on the shoulders of "free enterprise" to deal with it. Talk about passing the buck.

Killbot

reply to this comment
MonkMonk - 4/22/2008 10:05:21 PMView My AgentSpace
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
bio-fuels should only mean waste oil i.e. oil used to cook fries in mcdonald's. fuels like ethanol strain the food supply AND actually create more C02 than gasoline. talk to Rupert. natural gas formed by algae seems like a prospective idea.


LUXCAR32LUXCAR32 - 4/22/2008 4:22:12 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I think it's a really good idea and needs to be done, but the fact that it is happening in such a short time period doesn't allow enough time for the engineering of good cars and engines. Designs made to meet these requirements could end up being rushed and as a result have lower build quality. Also, it costs a lot of money to make these changes, so where are auto companies going to spend less on their cars in order to make room in the budget for better fuel economy? A good example of this is the upcoming Chevy Volt. Production is being rushed so much that they're are saying a truely all new, more efficient Volt model won't actually be on the market until it's second generation a couple years after the first generation. They just want to get out a decent product to catch the appeal of the concept. All I'm saying is that the cars we are going to be getting in 2015 aren't going to be the best quality. For good quality cars with high mpg's we'll probably have to wait till like 2020.

reply to this comment
toolatetoracetoolatetorace - 4/22/2008 10:48:12 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Well, this is going to be my first positive comment for that Japanese automaker(s) Toyota saw this coming and their government worked with their number one auto maker on developing a battery for the Prius hybrid to help get this thing to market to make it a win-win. What does the US- DOT come up with? ,,,, A "this is the way it's going to be guys" ,comply with it or have an auction

reply to this comment
chewychewy - 4/23/2008 12:15:34 AMView My AgentSpace
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
After the increases there will be an even greater disparity between "cars" and "light duty trucks" In the end you will just have more people driving crossovers with poor fuel economy.

Best solution would be to treat all vehicles equal. It may be difficult, but that's the only way to truely high fuel economy vehicles.

reply to this comment
utahnkidutahnkid - 4/23/2008 2:29:59 AM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Cylinder deactivation does absolute wonder for gas guzzlers. I have a big, very inefficient-in-every-way truck that has MDS and my milage doubles from about 11 to a much easier to stomach 20 when it turns the other cylinders off. I'm sure technologies like this will help a lot.

reply to this comment
t_bonet_bone - 4/23/2008 9:10:26 AM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
On a site where about 2/3rd's of the articles are 450 horsepower this, 620 horsepower that, which I followed for quite a few years, my challenge to automakers is give us a 300 hp hybrid car with good economy. I don't ever want 400 or more horsepower with gas over $4; if they figure about a way to get 40mpg out of 400hp, I'd rather them give me 50mpg from 300. Give me enough power to have a bit of fun but cheap enough running that it doesn't sit in the garage.

reply to this comment
utahnkidutahnkid - 4/23/2008 1:31:07 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Keep in mind that gas prices are almost entirely artificial. Somehow the idea of the world coming to the end of it's oil supply got so engrained in people minds that everyone is kind of thinking this is the beginning of the end and it's just going to go higher and higher until its all dried up. If the government stopped messing around with the market we might have some new, cleaner fuels to replace gasoline that might give us the cars you're talking about but instead we have soon to be defunct government subsidized "biofuel". I'll take the more powerful 40 mpg over the less powerful 30 mpg car any day.. I already get a measly 12.


mercuryguymercuryguy - 4/23/2008 1:46:16 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
The big 3 should have retooled in the 80s and brought to the Market Diesels with 8-Speed manual gearboxes. They missed the boat and are now way behind. American Management and Marketing is so short sighted. Forget Innovation, sell them on an idea, no matter how ridiculous.

reply to this comment
mercuryguymercuryguy - 4/23/2008 2:14:39 PM
+2 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
I think we were better prepared for the Oil Crisis of the Late 70s. At a time when the American Car Companies struggled to bring efficient cars to the market within a year or two, people adapted well. Everyone embraced Manual shift cars as a sensible step forward. Pickups went mini with 4 and 6 cylinder engines coupled to 5-speed overdrives manuals. My friends parents bought an Isuzu Mini Pickup, single cab, 4 cylinder Diesel with a 5-speed manual. They were getting 50 miles to the Gallon with the bed loaded with a quarter ton of stuff. This vehicle was so efficient that within a few years it was driven from the American Market due as dealers were somehow forced to remove them from lots. My guess is that the Big 3 couldn’t compete and then lobbied Washington to oust the unfair competitors. People went to the dealers to buy the last of them and the dealers had to turn people away with apologies on not being able to legally sell them anymore.
Cylinder Deactivation and other innovations:
The big 3 ruined the whole concept of Fuel efficiency. The developed ill-conceived ideas like cylinder deactivation on the 1982 Cadillac. BIG FAILURE. It had a digital pad on the dash to choose 4,6,or 8 cylinders. They constantly needed costly repair and people tried to sell these headaches off.
The next BIG FALURE was GMs Brilliant Idea to take a Chevy 350cid Gas engine and with a magic wand, presto make it a Diesel engine overnight. Never mind that a Diesel has an 20:1 Compression ratio, it sounded like our answer to the OPEC OIL consortium. The engine failed so miserably, that get this, people had to actually repower their GM vehicles back to a Gas engine, as the cost of repairs to the Junk Diesel made the high cost of gasoline look insignificant. I remember people barrowing money to replace engines on new cars they still owed money on. They could even sell the cars, because they would run very well. Once the news spread, people avoided the GM fake Diesel like the Plague.
Rudolf Diesel was a genius. He made the world’s most efficient engine, and leave it to GM to ruin a great idea. The Diesel is so efficient that the Germans used them in their submarines to cross the Atlantic. (the Design was Diesel Electric) They had enormous range on a 1 tank of fuel. Also the Diesel engine was originally designed to run on Peanut Oil, but was switched to Petroleum during WW2 as Petroleum was more widely available at that time.


reply to this comment
t_bonet_bone - 4/24/2008 8:23:53 PM
+1 BoostDrop the Boost Up the Boost
Great post.
To post a comment for this story, you must first Login.

If you do not have an account, you will need to Register (It's Free!).

Most Recent Stories
Is Lexus Missing the Boat By Not Having a BMW CS Competitor?EVO Magazine: Nissan Skyline GT-R Birth Of An Icon 1989EVO Magazine Long Term Test: Mitsubishi Evo X FQ-300 SST.....More Exciting Then The M3?2009 Suzuki SX4 Special Edition With TRIPCarlsson Tuned Mercedes GL500 With 435HP2008 Bentley Continental GTS Black Edition by Project KahnBMW Puts Lexus and Mercedes on Notice - But Did BMW Go Far Enough With Their New 7-Series?Bigger and more powerful Prius in the works2008 Jaguar XKR Portfolio Limited Edition in AustraliaPorsche 911 Powered Trike Troubled Waters by Phoenix Trike WorksPeugeot Builds 50 Millionth Peugeot CarPaolo Martin’s rendering of what the Fiat Topolino should look likeBrazil receives a new Volkswagen Gol 2009 modelSeat reveals schedule until 2010, includes first ever Seat SUVBritish companies plan a new kinetic hybrid flywheel systemTata faces a rough ride as shares dropGordon Murrays T25 City Car SketchesInterior spy pictures of the next-generation BMW 5-seriesSpy pictures of the BMW X6 HybridNew Tatra concept revealed, the 903 concept modelOpel to feature the Insignia hatchback and sedan at the British Motor ShowThe Chevrolet Beat is being considered for the U.S marketBugatti wants a new model, maybe even a four-door-coupeToyota Canada Reduce Retail Prices on 11 ModelsMaybach Exelero Concept for sale for $7.8 millionDetails emerge on 2010 Toyota Prius, more power and better fuel-economy2009 Ford Focus RS images leaked before debutGM To Unleash Corvette S-Limited in JapanA Sneak Peek At Mercedes Benz's European SLR Code Name Z199Leaked Images Have Hit The Web But The Spies Are The First With Full Details Of The New 7-SeriesSTUD or DUD? The 2009 BMW 7 Series Leaks It Way On The WebMINI SUV to spawn a 5-door hatchbackThink June Sales Were Bad? Both GM and Toyota Say Their Sales Will Fall Even FurtherBMW 135i with carbon fiber partsMerrill says GM bankruptcy possibleAUTOEXPRESS UK: Jaguar XKR-S vs Audi R8 vs Nissan GT-RPorsche 997 TARGA Refresh Leaked Before LaunchAudi A5 3.2 Quattro ReviewToyota struggling to meet small car and hybrid demandNow Just What Would You Do For A Tank Of Gas?High Gas Prices Causing European Market DownturnThe Good The Bad And the Ugly - Who Will Rise And Who Will Fall In 2008?Video: New Lexus RX goes testing at Nurburgring2008 JE Design Audi Q7 Street Rocket2008 BMW Z0 Concept Design by Andrei Avarvarii2008 Lamberti LS1 ConceptThe New Kia Forte Sport Sedan2008 Volvo & DOE Expand Drivelines2008 Audi R8 DTM Safety CarB&B Tuned Audi TTS Sportcoupe With 362HP