Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views 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
|
Replying to: grbeck (Apr 08, 2009 8:53 am) I don't have any trust in the 'goodness' of industry to do the right thing for society. Industry should not have improving society as it's first goal, profitability should be the first goal. As such the D3 were ( in the short term ) absolutely right to try to maximize profits and ignore CAFE as much as possible. That's capitalism. But for the long term health of the various companies and for the betterment of society industry 'should' be looking long term. Obviously they haven't. But luckily for us the government has a longer view. We will need at least 30-40% more fuel available to us by 2030. It's got to come from somewhere or a lot of us will have to do without. The petroleum industry says that the easy oil, the low-hanging fruit, is all but gone. While there's plenty left it's all in remote areas where it's going to cost a lot to bring it to the pump. Or we all can do without to some amount or other. Again who's going to volunteer to be the first to sit at home or to take mass transit? Your shortterm view on the price of fuel today is indicative of the very common 'forest and trees' syndrome. It's what got the D3 in the mess they're in presently. Absent the economic crash this year I viewed fuel prices as increasing by $.50 a gallon annually out into the future. I don't see anything except the current lack of business demand around the country that dissuades me from this long term outlook. At some time we will recover and we will start back to work with minimal unemployment and our appetite for fuel will take off again, with booster rockets. At that time $4 and $5 per gallon fuel prices will return. Then we will again be facing annual increases of $.50 a gallon as fuel gets tighter and tighter. So I ask again, 'Who will volunteer to be the first to park their vehicle, stay at home or take mass transit?' With a larger population, more drivers and more vehicles on the road we must have 30-40% more fuel for our needs....or we can drive vehicles that are 30-40% more efficient. Will industry do this on its own? Not until it sees demand and money to be made. With a 5+ yr design cycle and multiple products involved by the time industry sees the demand it will be too late for society. That's where government steps in. 1. Make the national fleet more efficient by 2030 to keep everyone driving 2. Mandate fuel rationing 3. Mandate against single person vehicles 4. Mandate against drivers of certain ages ( none >75 or <18 ) Allowing industry to 'react as demand dictates' is as bad as 'let the markets decide' in our financial crisis. When the crisis hits it's too late.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Apr 08, 2009 11:20 am) I implied no such thing, and please note that the Vega, Pinto and Gremlin all debuted in 1970, BEFORE CAFE was enacted. The domestics were attacking the small car market before CAFE was enacted. (Whether they were good efforts is another matter, but there is no evidence that CAFE has resulted in the production of GOOD vehicles.) Even Ford had made the decision to downsize the original Mustang to create the Mustang II prior to the first fuel crunch. The market was moving to smaller vehicles before the Arab Oil Embargo. That doesn't mean that people were going to immediately abandon Cadillac Fleetwood Broughams and LTD Broughams, but it shows the direction the market was already heading. kdhsypder: The two examples of half-azzed efforts to bring smaller more fuel efficient vehicles to market, the Chevette and Cavalier, show this lack of involvement. You claimed that higher mileage vehicles would have forced the production of more attactive and economical vehicles, and thus prevented GM and Chrysler from reaching the point of bankruptcy. The Cavalier and Chevette prove that mileage standards cannot force a company to make attractive cars - only economical ones. That is not enough to prevent bankruptcy. kdhspyder: But for the long term health of the various companies and for the betterment of society industry 'should' be looking long term. Obviously they haven't. But luckily for us the government has a longer view. Except that GM and Chrysler are still basically bankrupt, which means that CAFE didn't do much good in preventing that one, and Toyota now can't sell Priuses without incentives, so merely making high-mileage cars is obviously not enough to boost sales. kdhsypder: We will need at least 30-40% more fuel available to us by 2030. It's got to come from somewhere or a lot of us will have to do without. The petroleum industry says that the easy oil, the low-hanging fruit, is all but gone. While there's plenty left it's all in remote areas where it's going to cost a lot to bring it to the pump. Which will initially be reflected in the price...and please note that there is no proof that all of our additional energy needs will be met with petroleum. kdhspyder: Your shortterm view on the price of fuel today is indicative of the very common 'forest and trees' syndrome. It's what got the D3 in the mess they're in presently. Absent the economic crash this year I viewed fuel prices as increasing by $.50 a gallon annually out into the future. I don't see anything except the current lack of business demand around the country that dissuades me from this long term outlook. The price of gasoline was declining before the current economic crash. It was based on a commodity bubble and the resulting speculation, not any true shortage in supply. kdhspyder: At some time we will recover and we will start back to work with minimal unemployment and our appetite for fuel will take off again, with booster rockets. At that time $4 and $5 per gallon fuel prices will return. Then we will again be facing annual increases of $.50 a gallon as fuel gets tighter and tighter. I recall similar predictions in 1975 and 1982...didn't work out that way. Gasoline was supposed to hit $3 a gallon by 1985 (in 1980s dollars). Although I don't doubt that gasoline will eventually hit $4 a gallon. Of course, if, in 1980, someone had told me that, in 2009, a brand-new Civic would cost $20,000, and a decent house would cost between $180-200,000 in the area where I live, I would have said, "No one will be able to afford one!" Because I made the common mistake of forgetting to account for increases in income and purchasing power.
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Apr 08, 2009 12:48 pm) The Cavalier and Chevette prove that mileage standards cannot force a company to make attractive cars - only economical ones. That is not enough to prevent bankruptcy. ./. Except that GM and Chrysler are still basically bankrupt, which means that CAFE didn't do much good in preventing that one, and Toyota now can't sell Priuses without incentives, so merely making high-mileage cars is obviously not enough to boost sales. Except that the D3 fought against complying with the CAFE standards of the 80s other than to field a minimally capable team. They made no serious effort frankly until the last two years. Instead of embracing the opportunity they fought it tooth and nail. Money was to be made in fuel efficient products; Camry, Accord, Civic, Corolla, Sonata, et. al. The D3 opted not to compete except marginally to keep a balance with their real money-makers the SUVs and trucks. My contention with them is that instead of keeping a balanced product portfolio that could have reacted quicker to the sudden switch of buyer preferences since 2003 the three of them were left in the dust gasping. Now that they have religion it's frankly too late for two of them. The CAFE standards were not a tool to force the manufacturers to make good fuel efficient vehicles. Whether they did or not was a managerial choice. What CAFE did do was to save us $Billions and keep us from using billions of gallons of fuel over the last 25 years. In that it served its purpose perfectly. If the D3 chose not to participate they did so at their own risk of ruin. Obviously. The price of gasoline varies every year in a very regular curve. Gas Buddy historical chart 5 yrs. Gas prices reach their annual peak just after 4th of July here and then decline through Christmas. Then they begin going up again after Jan 1st. 'Til these last 9 mo's it was only upward, upward, upward. This curve will resume when business recovers.
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Apr 08, 2009 6:19 am) Who paid the salaries of all those fat car civil servants? You cannot tell me that this has not been worthwhile I most certainly can. It has only cost US money. Higher prices for vehicles and another wasteful agency. You cannot show any statistical data that proves it was CAFE and not the consumers own desires to buy more fuel efficient vehicles. The CAFE average has not gone up since 1986 so who paid the wages of all those deadbeats in the agency? Fuel economy increased even when CAFE was relaxed. from 1986-1988 the fuel economy rose even as the price of fuel fell and the CAFE standard was relaxed due to pressure from US automakers I do NOT believe the outcome or the usage of fuel in this country would be any different without CAFE. We are just on opposite ends of the political spectrum. You believe in big government telling US every move. I believe in as little government as we can get by with. |
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Apr 08, 2009 12:48 pm) Don't forget Corvair. A wonderful little car once GM worked the bugs out. If not for that hack Nader it would have evolved into one of the best of the era. If Nader had treated Honda with the same lopsided misinformation attacks it would have never gotten off the ground as an auto maker. The early Hondas were pure CRAP. I know I bought one of the early Accords in 1977 from a Honda motorcycle dealer in Minnesota. We are in agreement. CAFE is purely a waste of tax payers dollars. |
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Apr 08, 2009 2:08 pm) In this case CAFE has more than paid for itself. Your two truck examples are the very reason why CAFE is needed. Without the stick we'd be relying on the D3 to give us their best efforts. Well they have shown over and over again that they won't give us their best efforts unless forced to do so ... and then they'll do it dragging their heels. You're pollyanna-ish if you think the D3 and the other would have given us 30 and 40 mpg vehicles of their own accord. In this I'm much more of a realist. Regardless of political leanings, and yes I am a card-carrying NY liberal, the math cannot be refuted.
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Apr 08, 2009 2:08 pm) That looks like a typo that I'd make. Those fat cars do burn a lot of gas.  With $4 a gallon gas prices still semi-fresh in our minds, do we still need CAFE? Is it time to junk it and let what's left of the market decide?
|
|
|
Replying to: kdhspyder (Apr 08, 2009 3:00 pm) I am the realist. It is fantasy to think that CAFE had any real influence. Just more Big Brother bullying US. We could have saved the billions paid to the 1000s of non essential CAFE people. They did nothing from about 1985 until 2007. Yet you can bet the agency grew and grew and grew. And the math is FUZZY at best.
|
|
|
Replying to: steve_ (Apr 08, 2009 4:18 pm) OMG!!! Alan Greenspan somehow just popped up in an auto thread on Edmunds.  This has been our mantra for the past 30 years as espoused by Greenspan. 'The markets are perfectly efficient and will resolve all imbalances. Let the markets decide.' However in front of Congress he admitted that he was wrong, ergo the financial mess we're in right now. He admitted that more regulation was needed to prevent excesses and bubbles. Then two weeks later he changed course 180 deg and suggested nationalizing BoA and Citi. CAFE is a good piece of regulating legislation in that it keeps the vehicle makers on course to continue offering more fuel efficient vehicles. They will NOT do it on their own. This site is an auto enthusiast site peopled by many with influences from the detroiters. The detroiters have hated CAFE since its inception thus the prevailing sentiment on this site is pure hatred. However in the general population if you pose the question 'Do you favor legislation requiring the vehicle makers to make more fuel efficient vehicles?' The overwhelming response is 'DUH??? Why are you asking such a stupid question, of course I am.' How do I know this? I meet the general buying public every day. 95+% are not auto enthusiasts, they couldn't give a hoot. Most don't even know this site exists. But nearly every one of them is in favor of being offered better choices to use less fuel. It's a huge selling point. If it's got to be mandated, Right ON!!! That goes for all colors in the political spectrum, .
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Apr 08, 2009 8:16 pm) The NHTSA is part of the DOT. It serves a lot of purposes across the nation. The CAFE Dep't can't be 1000's of people...and certainly they're not fat cats. The NHTSA is one of the smallest agencies in the DOT. |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Has CAFE reached the end of its usefulness?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
