Obama will be announcing new CAFE requirements tomorrow - expected 55mpg

Any given parking lot in the Chicago area is about half pickup trucks, large SUVs, minivans and vans. I see plenty of newer Tahoe/Suburban/Yukon/Escalades around and gas prices have been among the highest in the country for some time here. I know large SUV sales are dropping, but I suspect gas would have to double in price to where it is in Europe for the market to really favor fuel efficient vehicles, rather than wasteful vehicles that carry only the driver to work and back.

 

Cost was mentioned, but perception is also involved. If truckers can see the more aerodynamic traditional truck as girly, imagine how they view those.

 

To add to my observations, today I spotted 2 Hummer H2s, an H1, and the usual smattering of monstrosities (e.g. Tahoes, Suburbans/extended length Tahoes/Yukons, Sequoias, Expeditions, etc.). When I could look in, of course they were almost all driven solo.

I harped on the insane # of monstrosity SUVs w/my mom a few weeks ago (she couldn't care less about even calculating her mileage, she won't do it) and her claim was that Americans are big (people). FWIW, I fairly small woman got into her Sequoia next to me today and of course, it was solo.

I saw (and heard) a F250 truck being driven by an elderly couple.

I don't see a lot of new "efficient" non-hybrid ICE cars running around.

 

In 2014 there will still be tons of gas-only cars being sold.

I wish CAFE and EPA didn't have different numbers. It's completely understandable that a LOT of people would be confused by this and that is squarely the government's fault for using two different systems. Most of us know EPA, not CAFE.

 

Skoorbmax - Thank you. Exactly my point.

Most of the buying public will expect 54.5 mpg in 2025. (If they remember that long)
In truth ... I doubt the industry could meet a 54.5 (EPA) standard. I am certain they could not and continue to make large land yachts, SUV's and Pick-ups.... which seems to be what the American public wants. I am strongly suspicious that the Prius 50 mpg (EPA) is possibly solely because Toyota optomized weight, low drag, ICE, tires, A/C, CVT, and of course HSI.

After watching the recent debt debackle .... I suspect the confusion between CAFE and EPA is done on purpose. The "politicians" can pontificate about watching out for the driving public; protector of the low wage earner. No difference in Congress, just passed, "debt reduction" package that adds $7 trillion to the debt.

 

Part of the reason GM and Ford are still making so many trucks and not getting fined for any model, is the FFV advantage. If a vehicle uses alternative fuel, they get a very big advantage over a car that does not use flex fuel.
Link to vehicles that don't meet standards, odd no trucks on there... or is it the FFV
http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/cafe/CAFE_fines_collected_summary.pdf

 

Deficit/debt, EPA/CAFE, War/Scope-Limited Action, well, I'm just part of the general public and too stupid to know the difference. And even if I did know the difference, no matter which party I vote for, the same thing happens. Makes you wonder who really runs things, congress, or big oil and military industrial complex? Anyway, gotta go, by posting this and by owning a couple of hybrids I'm pretty sure they're out to get me now...

 

Actually it's not the body shape anymore that's most critical. If the NatGas + diesel hybrids are what they seem to be then the huge trucks like dump trucks, FedEx trucks, trash haulers, etc can keep their present size and shape ..... and still get 30-40 mpg based on liquid petro-fuel usage.

This technology innovation could be easily extened to the large SUVs and monster trucks in our parking lots all over the country. The main holdup to extending the usage to the F150, F250, Tundra, etc is the lack of a retail distribution system for NatGas

I believe that it's this technology that brought the big truck makers over to the bright side, agreeing to the new higher restrictions. They now know that they can continue to sell their big money makers while still meeting the significantly higher liquid petro-fuel standards.

Win-Win.

 

Paragraph 1... see above.

Paragraph 2... Actually the reason for the difference between the numbers used by the CAFE program and what we see on the Maroney labels is pretty mundane. CAFE is administered by the DOT based on automotive technology while the EPA has the responsibility for the consumer side; i.e. the number we see on the Maroney label.

Initially these numbers were the same. However over the last 40 yrs the EPA has modified the 'retail' numbers three times to make them more realistic for the buying/driving public.

The CAFE program still uses the raw DOT testing methodology, unadjusted for any retail considerations.

 

I'm with Eisenhower, the military industrial complex holds all the power and gets whatever it wants in the final analysis.

 

I don't know if anyone has posted this yet: 2017-2025 CAFE Details Emerge, Loopholes Appear Gaping | The Truth About Cars.

Back to my observations, as usual I saw the usual monstrosity SUVs being driven around. Saw a Hummer H2 or H3 (more likely the latter) today in the distance. I saw a solo driven Excursion next to a solo driven Suburban. As usual, there were way too many extended length monstrosities (e.g. Suburban/Yukon XL, extended length Expeditions) driving around. I'm still not seeing many of the new so-called "efficient" ICE vehicles.

 

I believe that the big 4 truck makers will recognize that the most efficient way to continue to make and sell their medium and large trucks will be to convert them all to the bi-fuel systems by 2025.

Gasoline-only powered rigs would be a relic of the 20th Century. The CNG+diesel bi-fueled vehicles have the benefit of being every bit as capable as today's current vehicles while using up to 90% less liquid petro-fuel.

IOW an F250 using diesel now gets about 12-15 mpg using 100% liquid diesel fuel and it's emissions are rated at 100%. Using the CNG+diesel bi-fuel option the vehicles would use a little as 10% of what they now use in liquid diesel and only put out as little as 10% of the emissions that today's fleet does.

The effective fuel economy rating could be as high as 40+ mpg, possibly higher ( 80 mpg? ). That's something that we should all encourage.

 

Just a note in passing:

Today, GM announced enormous profits ..... on the strength of SUV and Pickup sales.

 

most of my long term plans are being re-evaluated due to what i expect to be a very unfavorable financial climate for me and my family.

i see much greater living expenses, less extra money for recreational purposes,etc. so therefore my plans to have 2 EVs, a 100% EV and a plug in where all our normal commuting needs would be electric with gas only used for occasional trips might be in Jeopardy.

right now; EVs are only reachable by a few despite the HUGE financial benefits of driving one. but most will not get past the purchase price without large subsidies. one can only hope that EVs gain enough traction to where word of mouth sells the car.

i still get people who are amazed at how much money i spent to buy my Leaf and dont seem to understand how i am really not spending that much more money at all.

 

Dave, I don't understand why you say EVs have HUGE financial benefits, but you expect to not be able to afford it. Do you mean country vs personal ?

 

personal. the country has no choice. oil is not sustainable and never was. we were supposed to be moving forward, but oil companies provided oil so cheaply, we became complacent. we stopped looking to improve ourselves.

we took transportation for granted. no where else in the world is it considered a right to drive at 16. its still a privilege here but its simply hard to tell is all. we dont make it difficult to get or maintain a license.

a study in WA State. what is the #1 non-traffic violation accounting for more than 1/3rd of all court cases??

driving on a suspended license. the penalties are so slight, our public transportation system so pathetic, our addiction to oil so extreme, that we have no choice but to change.

the only question is when? the longer we wait, the more pain we will endure and we are long long past the point of "bearable" pain.

people will suffer and suffer greatly, including myself.

 

Has the official announcement been postponed? I haven't seen anything on washingtonpost.com or news.bbc.co.uk today.

 

I don't think so. I haven't been following the announcements closely but did find Official: 2025 CAFE target set at 54.5 mpg; everyone's apparently happy with that — Autoblog Green.

More observations about my area. I saw THREE Hummer H2's today. Two were yellow and parked in the same parking lot.

Now that I think about it, I see a lot fewer of the new "efficient" non-hybrid ICE cars in the Bay Area than I did in WA state.

 

Todays headlines say that Obama will announce new standards for heavy trucks and buses effective 2018. Will that be the same phony CAFE standard?