U.S. Senate Reaches Fuel Efficiency Compromise

[Koasterking]

Here's my take....

What the Governement should do:

For starters, since they are forcing this apon automakers, they should do their own part to help out. First, they also need to be more tougher with energy companies. E85 stations are (in my knowledge) non-existent in the Eastern part of the US; atleast in my area. They need to have them do R&D towards Bi-diesels and possible research of Hydrogen and refueling stations. Second, if the goverment wants something from the automakers, especially the big 3, then they need fund for some of the research needed to accomplish the 35 MPG by 2020. If the goverment does care, I'm sure they would hate to see foreign automakers beat the US to their own game. They shouldn't sit back and watch the inevitable happen to the big 3.

What the automakers should do:

This more or less is towards Gm, Ford and Chrysler. First, they need to get on the ball now! No hesitating, no waiting and seeing if this will change, and definitly no waiting to start after the competition has finished. Second, if all the US automakers want this to work, then they need to work together. They need to come together and form one huge R&D team. Although, there is a down side to this. Third and lastely, the upside to this is GM is pretty ahead of the game. They have great concepts like the Volt, Sequel, etc that musch of the technology is near production.

Overall, because of this, I wouldn't be surprised to see car segments and possibly car brands got extinct. Over 75% of luxury vehicles are gas-guzzlers. Who knows where the luxury segment will be in 2020, along with SUVs and Trucks. It's just a matter of time until we look like the rest of the world. But is that a good thing??

[drew630]

Well its good that we are doing are best to move away from oil automotive wise. I am going to miss not being able to own a new Suburban/Tahoe/Yukon/Yukon XL/Escalade/EXT/ESV though. I really don't see how vehicles like these can achieve the 35 mpg rating. Hopefully GM can figure out how though in 12 years.

[jbernie]

How about the Feds offer the automakers tax breaks instead.

If your fleet averages 35mpg by 2020 you can have a 30% tax break for 10 years assuming the 35mpg average is met.

For every year you fall short after 2020 your tax increases by 2% each year. Once you meet the average, you only get a 5% tax break each year, not exceeding a net 20% break.

30% break for 10 years, or potentially a 20% increase by 2030.

Be creative. Don't make it a law, just make it so they can't afford not to meet the average

[sigma]

Originally Posted by JoeT

Bugger me, that's low!!! Bad news for the US-built Zeta program. Hybrid Holden's are your only hope now! Click here for all the Zeta hybrid news.

It won't be a problem. They don't take effect for 10 years. That's plenty of time for GM to direct inject the engines, make a diesel V8 optional (that car would haul), and use aluminum for the hood and the trunk of the car. While GM's at it, go ahead and get those dual mode hybrids ready.

Those four changes in and of themselves would give the Zeta fleet the economy it needs and wouldn't cost GM much as the diesel engine is already going into production, the dual mode hybrids are going into production (Daimler did most of the work for the RWD sedan version), Cadillac already has the DI engine and the cost differential between the aluminum and steel could be past on to the consumer.

[sigma]

Originally Posted by drew630

Well its good that we are doing are best to move away from oil automotive wise. I am going to miss not being able to own a new Suburban/Tahoe/Yukon/Yukon XL/Escalade/EXT/ESV though. I really don't see how vehicles like these can achieve the 35 mpg rating. Hopefully GM can figure out how though in 12 years.

The fleet average for every car and truck GM sells would have to be 35mpg. So as long as they sold lots of Cobalts that got say 45 mpg, they could also sell lots of SUV's that got 25mpg.

[Olds88]

Originally Posted by sigma

As if that would be a bad thing. Most of the people who drive SUV's don't really need the towing capacity or the higher ground clearance. Getting people out of SUV's that get 15-17mpg and back into station wagons that get 25+ mpg would be a great thing.

Only if they were full size (80in+ wide, 116in+ wheelbase this WAS the fullsize wagon before it died in 1996), with a third row, a V8 with RWD/AWD, and body-on-frame. Many SUV buyers, particularly Suburban, want the BOF-style vehicle. I'll bet GM saw a nice surge in big SUV sales when they killed the B-Body. I bought a truck because I couldn't buy a BOF Caprice or Roadmaster wagon. I don't want the government telling me I need to ride in a crappy unitbody vehicle. Some people do tow with their SUVs, I move a fishing boat with mine.

[New_Mexico_Sunset_on_Rt66]

Ha, ha, ha. So the Senate are now auto designers. Great.

Yea, look at how they responded to Katrina, and now they are going to decide which cars are best for us. ****in' great. Touche.

****, I'll just hand in my "balls" now. I won't need them in 13 years. We'll all be driving Kia Spectras. Joy.

[Masospaghetti]

Making E85 basically mandatory is a ridiculous idea and obviously an influence of the American corn farmers' lobby. E85 is not a bad idea but there are many much better options out in the market, such as biodiesel and butanol. Requiring compliance with E85 will delay or destroy other alternate fuels which are better suited for the auto industry.

We've also established that it'd be impossible to pass an increased gasoline tax to stem consumption, given how messed up our political system is and how short-sighted the public is. However, what might work is, if there was a gasoline tax that offset some other taxes -- basically giving all of the money back that was gained in the gas tax back to the public. So, the net draw on the economy would be zero, but the people using less fuel would gain, and the people guzzling it would lose out. Thus, encouraging less fuel consumption...

[chakis24]

Originally Posted by sigma

As if that would be a bad thing. Most of the people who drive SUV's don't really need the towing capacity or the higher ground clearance. Getting people out of SUV's that get 15-17mpg and back into station wagons that get 25+ mpg would be a great thing.

who cares if they dont need it? if they are willing to foot the bill let them. there are other, more significant, more important places that would have a greater impact on the environment and the economy if they were cleaned up and made more efficient. once again, automakers are the scapegoats. why make ethanol vehicles if there are no pumps? there arent any in my state, so whats the point? like someone else said, say good bye to lambos, ferrari, i dont think bmw mpg is very high. this hurts more than helps. i want to drive what i want to drive. and according to the constitution i am allowed to. compact pickups dont even hit 35 mpgs. not many cars do either. theres only so much that can be done to increase a cars efficiency and keep its size at the same time. we should be able to buy what we wont and not be forced to buy something else.

i am curious though, whats the mpg for an e-85 vehicle? is it still crazy high since your only burning .15 gallons of actual gasoline for every gallon of fuel used, or is it the fuel as a whole? cause then the suv's/pickups are covered.

[vsd]

about time at least something got passed. As an auto enthusiast I'm sad to say this, but we need to move away from cars with 300-400 hp and move toward higher mpg, something that will benefit everyone.

[New_Mexico_Sunset_on_Rt66]

Originally Posted by Masospaghetti

and the people guzzling it would lose out.

Like truckers and contractors. Not to mention aircraft. Be prepared to pay way more for everything. Ahh, I like your spirit, and idealism. Like many of these ideas put forward to quit people from consuming "evil" gasoline. They are noble and well-intentioned. But I disagree with the means. If you care so much, lessen your guilt be driving your hybrid, or bicycle. But don't try to dictate to me what I should do.

Free Market.

[chakis24]

Originally Posted by Olds88

Some people do tow with their SUVs, I move a fishing boat with mine.

and then the argument becomes "well you dont really need that fishing boat do you"

ridiculous

[New_Mexico_Sunset_on_Rt66]

Originally Posted by vsd

, something that will benefit everyone.

Ahh, must have been reading Marx. The "common" good.

[vsd]

Originally Posted by New_Mexico_Sunset_on_Rt66

Ahh, must have been reading Marx. The "common" good.

Yes sir

[New_Mexico_Sunset_on_Rt66]

Originally Posted by camaro chris

Dear Government,


Please let the free market do its job.


Sincerely,

Camaro Chris

Couldn't have said it any better. Second.

Originally Posted by Hitman1970

fueled by happiness,

Fueled by Love, brother. C'mon, man, get hip. And it runs on 91 octane daisies.

Originally Posted by TJ95GAGT

WTF is so hard about letting people choose and letting the market do what it does.

Yep. Gas prices go up and consumers drive less and buy more fuel effiicient products and gas prices decrease as the demand decreases. Seems to work pretty well.