Sign In Join 



Has CAFE reached the end of its usefulness?

507 messages,  Last post on Oct 27, 2009 at 11:49 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Fuel Efficiency (MPG)


Messages Page 3 of 51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
51
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#21 of 507
Rocky by nippononly
May 01, 2006 (10:24 am)
Reply
yeah, this will accomplish nothing just as the revisions of the truck standards will do nothing but pander to the domestics. They will now make their trucks bigger to beat the standard. No prob - Americans love bigger trucks anyway.
 
As for the cars, up until now automakers had to at least TRY to make fuel-efficient cars to meet the average, which applied to all cars they sold. Now there will be no need to try to do that any more, because they can just quit making small cars, and then will only have to meet a lesser standard becausr their cars are larger, which have a lower requirement for fuel efficiency.
 
Way to go Bushie!
 
CAFE HAS to go. Period.
#22 of 507
Re: Rocky [nippononly] by tpe
May 01, 2006 (11:18 am)
Reply

Replying to: nippononly (May 01, 2006 10:24 am)

I agree, CAFE is and has always been a joke.
 
I do have a question about how these averages are computed. I'll use an extreme example. If company A sells 2 cars, one rated at 10 mpg and the other rated at 50 mpg would its CAFE be 30 mpg? I'm assuming it would be. Now if company B sells 2 cars that both get 25 mpg its average would obviously be 25 mpg. So which company's cars burned less gas? Well if you drove all 4 cars 100 miles then company A's cars burned 12 gallons of gas compared to only 8 for company B. A far more credible approach would have been not to average fuel efficiency ratings but to average fuel burned, say per 100 miles. With this approach company A's 2 cars would have been rated at 10 and 2 for an average of 6 gallons consumed per 100 miles. Company B's cars would have been rated at 4 and 4 for an average of 4. Like I said, I don't support CAFE at all but at least this approach better reflects which company's cars are burning the most gas.
#23 of 507
Re: And the free market? [boaz47] by tpe
May 01, 2006 (12:24 pm)
Reply

Replying to: boaz47 (Apr 02, 2006 8:27 am)

Taxes are unavoidable. I don't like them any better than anyone else and see them as having the same effect as a fine. So an income tax is a fine for working and a gas tax is a fine for adding to our trade deficit and putting CO2 into the atmosphere. Which behavior does it make more sense to fine? Your neighbor that works two jobs is probably fined at a higher rate for his harder work. If the revenue collected from gas taxes could be offset by adjusting income tax brackets and rates I'd be all for it.
 
American's use about 330 million gallons of gasoline a day. In a year a $2/gallon tax on fuel would provide about $250 billion in revenue for the government. That would pay for a lot of tax cuts and also cover expansion of public transit for the poor. I recently read an article where an expert in the oil industry said that if the US cut consumption by 3% the price of oil would crash. If a $2/gallon gas tax resulted in this kind of reduced consumption, which in turn significantly reduced the price for oil you might find that the government was able to collect $2 in taxes but it only ended up costing you $1.50. Not to mention the benefit of cleaner air and reduced congestion on the roads. If you've got to have a tax at least make it one that produces some beneficial consequences.
#24 of 507
Hey ya'll don't shoot the messenger.... by rockylee
May 01, 2006 (5:53 pm)
Reply

 
Rocky
#25 of 507
Re: And the free market? [tpe] by rorr
May 02, 2006 (10:22 am)
Reply

Replying to: tpe (May 01, 2006 12:24 pm)

"So an income tax is a fine for working and a gas tax is a fine for adding to our trade deficit and putting CO2 into the atmosphere. Which behavior does it make more sense to fine?"
 
Sounds like you'd be in favor of eliminating income taxes and replacing them with consumption taxes.
 
Sign me up.
#26 of 507
Let's stick to CAFE by pf_flyer HOST
May 02, 2006 (11:18 am)
Reply
The income tax forum is around the corner!
 
PF Flyer
Host
Automotive News & Views, Wagons, & Hybrid Vehicles

 
The Mazda Club Chat is on tonight. The chat room opens at 8:45PM ET Hope to see YOU there! Check out the schedule
#27 of 507
Re: And the free market? [rorr] by tpe
May 02, 2006 (11:48 am)
Reply

Replying to: rorr (May 02, 2006 10:22 am)

That's exactly what I'm saying.
 
If the discussion is about the merits of CAFE then it makes sense to discuss better options, e.g. fuel taxes. And the auto manufacturers definitely favor this approach over higher CAFE. The appeal of CAFE is that it places none of the burden on the person using the product that you are trying to conserve. It also doesn't work. I don't believe that they have fuel standards in Europe and the fleet efficiency for cars is 42 mpg (almost 50% higher than here). Granted some of that is due to diesel availability but that doesn't explain it all. Germany, France and Great Britain all burn less gas today than they did 10 years ago.
#28 of 507
MPG standards are needed, however, by john500
May 02, 2006 (12:19 pm)
Reply
It is clear that the US government will NEVER do anything environmentally responsible when it comes to transportation. It has been ~35 years since the first oil embargo. It has been ~15 years since the EU/Kyoto emission reduction standards. I'm in favor of ANYTHING (high fuel tax, high registration costs, inflation) that forces the average American to get out of their tank. I can't take another 5 foot tall person in a high riding SUV with 97 % blind spots when I am on my motorcycle.
#29 of 507
Re: MPG standards are needed, however, [john500] by tpe
May 02, 2006 (12:26 pm)
Reply

Replying to: john500 (May 02, 2006 12:19 pm)

My understanding of the way these new CAFE standards will be implemented is that cars need to meet an average efficiency within a weight class. So a 2,500 lb Miata that gets 25/30 city/hwy mpg might create more of a problem for the auto manufacturer than a 5,500 lb SUV rated at 15/20 mpg. Does anyone think that's not insane?
#30 of 507
tpe by nippononly
May 02, 2006 (12:51 pm)
Reply
You are spot on. That's insane. Unfortunately, we live in a country of people who are singularly unaware of what is going on in the rest of the world and become more so every year, with a government that finds new ways to profit from that fact at every turn.
 
50 years of being programmed to believe that the U.S. is the most powerful country in a world dedicated to providing it with infinite resources is a powerful disincentive to changing our ways now that a problem is looming...

Messages Page 3 of 51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
...
51
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics

Today's Chats

Advertisement