CAFE costs are mounting...

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Originally Posted By: Jeff_in_VABch
That would cut 2010 sales numbers in half. That would probably permanently end the auto industry as we know it.


I think it would definetly change cars from almost disposable fashion accessories, to highly engineered function first transportation tools that people will own for much longer. A Prius is almost there already for a 60mpg car, and if they made it plug in, its easily there.
So to average 60 mpg for the nation, more short city commuters will need to have electric cars, to counter act the folks who still need/want a larger gas vehicle.
Keep in mind CAFE doesn't include commercial vehicles so big trucks will still be available and excluded from the average.


So you want personal transportation to be out of the reach of poorer people. Got it.

After thinking about it some more, I don't think the cars will be that much more expensive anyways. Cars are cheaper now than before CAFE or catalytic converters or seat belts or any other safety or environmental regulation. Its still a freemarket even with a higher CAFE mileage requirement, the smart companies will figure out a way to sell cars. Also if you think about it, CAFE does act like a bit of a subsidy for small cars and lower income folks.

The Aerocivic guy already gets over 60mpg cruising at 80mph... Can you imagine what actual Honda engineers could do with a hybrid drivetrain and told the styling guys to come back and do the headlights when they had the shape done. I can predict the whining about how ugly that car is, but I'd rather have us drive ugly 60+mpg cars with cleaner air, and less money sent offshore, than get caught with a national fleet average of 24mpg when gas prices hit $8-10+/gallon. Then you'll want to buy a 60+mpg car anyways...

 

[Tempest]

Quote:
After thinking about it some more, I don't think the cars will be that much more expensive anyways.

They will be more expensive than they have to be. And if people hold on to them for longer periods, due to their initial expense, there will be fewer used vehicles available for poorer people to buy.

Quote:
Also if you think about it, CAFE does act like a bit of a subsidy for small cars and lower income folks.

How is making cars more expensive a subsidy?

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
After thinking about it some more, I don't think the cars will be that much more expensive anyways.

They will be more expensive than they have to be. And if people hold on to them for longer periods, due to their initial expense, there will be fewer used vehicles available for poorer people to buy.

Quote:
Also if you think about it, CAFE does act like a bit of a subsidy for small cars and lower income folks.

How is making cars more expensive a subsidy?

I guess cars now are more expensive than they have to be, we could have all the safety features optional, but they still are inexpensive compared to the past when the safety features didn't even exist, and better on almost every other measure as well.
As for CAFE acting like a subsidy for small cars, the manufacturers have to sell small cars to make their Corporate Average Fuel Economy number, if they aren't selling at a certain price point they have to lower the small car prices until they do sell. So that's good for lower income folks, who can get new cars under $10k at times.

 

[kb01]

Originally Posted By: Tempest
How is making cars more expensive a subsidy?

I don't know if it's still the case but I read numerous times in 1980's and 1990's that the Big 3 sold economy cars at a loss to help boost their overall fleet fuel economy. This was only possible because truck and SUV sales were so profitable. It worked essentially as a subsidy paid by SUV/truck buyers to force down the cost of economy cars.

 

[Kestas]

Actually, it was in the late 70s and early 80s, before the price of gasoline forced market conditions to favor gas-saving vehicles, when manufacturers geared up for small car production, and the CAFE numbers took care of themselves.

It wasn't trucks and SUVs that carried the profit, but large V8 automobiles (e.g., Delta 88, Imperial, Marquis). Trucks weren't yet the rage, and SUVs were limited to a handful of models in what was a niche market. Plus, trucks and SUVs were exempt from CAFE - a loophole that the public has taken good advantage of.

Otherwise, you're correct.

 

[Darkfire]

Originally Posted By: Jeff_in_VABch
That would cut 2010 sales numbers in half. That would probably permanently end the auto industry as we know it.

That's exactly what the globalist elite want. They consider us all slaves--slaves aren't supposed to own vehicles which facilitate freedom of movement.

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
Keep in mind CAFE doesn't include commercial vehicles so big trucks will still be available and excluded from the average.

I'm sure they'll find a way to "deal" with that as well. The agenda here has absolutely nothing to do with clean air, or helping the environment, it is about control.

Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS

In the end these draconian requirements will affect consumers choice to a huge extent. The manufacturers simply wont be able to offer the same mix of vehicles to meet the new standards and still avoid massive fines from the feds.

Great point, sounds like fascism to me. I wonder if this post will get stealth deleted now (like my last post was) for agreeing with you and using the word "fascism". God forbid if people tell it like it is apparently.

Originally Posted By: Jim 5
That's the good government deciding what's in everyone's best interests.

Sure, says the government, you still have the liberty to buy any car you want, we'll just make sure most can't afford it. After all, we don't think it's good for society for people to be driving around in cars anyway.

Expect more cash for clunkers programs to remove viable and inexpensive used alternatives from the north american fleet, making it harder to opt out.

Excellent post. Everyone needs to remember that it is a complete lie that you will save money by acquiescing (or participating) in the globalist elite's fraudulent "green" agenda. They want to sucker everyone into the notion that they will save money, when it will cost everyone more money--it is an austerity enforcing measure.

Originally Posted By: Win
They are almost certainly going to become very smaller, and much more expensive, and much more dangerous.

Many people will die because the government has an idealogically (sp?) driven energy policy of opposing all domestic energy production.

Not only opposing domestic energy production, but false flag attacking (sabotaging, hacking) existing energy infrastructure.

They push deliberate cost increasing measures such as carbon sequestration for coal fired power plants in order to make the cost of energy coal produces more expensive, in order to make laughable, non-solutions like Biomass, solar, and wind power look "more competitive". That latter 3 are flat out illegitimate sources of reliable power--the reason behind them is that they facilitate energy rationing: "not enough energy to go around means YOU, the slave, must be forced to use less of it". This is the rationale behind the "smart grid", which they want all of the new cars to be able to be plugged into--so that the elite can extort even more money from everyone by dynamically adjusting energy prices in real time, based on the time of day, and based on what the electricity is being used for. It's a version of a ponzi scheme, applied to the energy sector, against the American people.

Originally Posted By: LS2JSTS
Without a set in law national energy policy we are left with the whims and notions of those that happen to be in power. Continually legislating like a king, making new rules by fiat and simple signature. New rules and regs that can ruin an industry in an instant, can close down whole areas for oil development on a whim, it's got to stop....This countries inability to handle the enrgy issue openly and honestly is killing us...a slow death of a thousand cuts.

These policies are set by un-elected individuals, all of these anti-growth energy policies unfolding before your eyes are happening exactly as planned, not out of incompetence. The "green" agenda is 1000% propaganda, and is only about controlling your life.

Originally Posted By: Ursae_Majoris
And we thought that economy is bad now. Our industrial base will cease to exist. Even transplants will close down.

Are we going going to call 2010-2030 the Lost Decades?

Careful, someone might accuse you of being a "conspiracy theorist".

Seriously, does anyone actually think that all of this stuff is happening out of sheer stupidity, ignorance, or by accident? Anyone who does, doesn't read enough real information.

Originally Posted By: IndyIan
I can predict the whining about how ugly that car is, but I'd rather have us drive ugly 60+mpg cars with cleaner air, and less money sent offshore, than get caught with a national fleet average of 24mpg when gas prices hit $8-10+/gallon. Then you'll want to buy a 60+mpg car anyways...

So people can't have the freedom to refuse to drive/own an ugly car?

How is the air cleaner when our energy industry has been deliberately shipped off to China to pollute far worse than they did in the U.S.?

Do you really think that any amount of money that you think would not be sent offshore will be noticeable in yur life whatsoever? Brb GM closing down in America and setting up shop in Russia. Brb closing down offshore drilling for the U.S. and proceeding forward with it for Brazil and Russia (while claiming that we needed to stop it for global environmental reasons). Here's a newsflash--there is such a thing as FAKE environmentalists, and some of them are Greenpeace, the World Wildlife Fund, and T. Boone Pickens.

 

[Bamaro]

Just more gloom and doom. We've heard it many times before.

 

[antonmnster]

Wow, there's more conspiracy [censored] and noise in this thread than normal! Some of you are lost.

So let's keep making trucks and suvs while the world continues to pass us by while we give up on technology. If there's anything that will make us less competitive and cause the loss of American stature, it is if we decide to bury our heads in the sand deny the fundamental truths that science illustrates.

I thought the American spirit requires us to solve problems, to innovate new technological solutions, and to be a world leader in the research, development, and manufacturing of new more efficient technologies.

What I'm hearing here would build a bridge to the past, to an era that never really existed, and that denies reality instead of embracing opportunity.

 

[JOD]

Originally Posted By: Bamaro
Just more gloom and doom. We've heard it many times before.


I'm old enough to remember the rhetoric about mandatory airbags and 3-point safety belts. It was all a grand government conspiracy to steal out freedoms, kill our babies with exploding air bags and and it was going to put the auto industry out of business...

That said, whoever invented/mandated that retractable seatbelt contraption needed to be stabbed in the eye with a pencil. My '87 Camry wagon had those and I was nearly strangled several times. Man, those were horrible.

The only answer to higher CAFE standards that I see is a draconian gas tax. At least now people have the option to keep their older, less fuel-efficient beast on the road or buy used.

 

[meep]

Originally Posted By: antonmnster
Wow, there's more conspiracy [censored] and noise in this thread than normal! Some of you are lost.


I felt the same thing. I am not a tree-hugger, but I'm also not someone who votes for the X party because my dad did it, and his dad did it... etc.

Change happens. It always does. It's never comfortable. Just when you get it comfortable, blam! something happens. I loved early-mid 90's cars. Nice blend of steel, performance, safety, and technology. That was 15 years ago!! (I feel old).

How much oil do we as a country depend on DAILY? What would happen if we had a disruption in supply? How much do we pay for it? and where does that money go? It's not going to our kids or grandkids, that's for sure. Who's governments is it funding?

CAFE may not be the best solution, but nothing is. A spherical fuel tank is optimal for storage per amount of material used, but it doesn't make engineering sense in a vehicle, so the shape must be de-optimized for real-world use. It ain't perfect, but it's the best we've got.

We do have to change with the times. the US will not be able to sustain itself as the most luxurious country in the world, especially when you look at how some other countries have harder work ethics, way stronger education.... sure I'd rather live here but our luxuries are not sustainable when you look at what we produce as a country vs what we buy.

How many of our companies are foreign owned now? I just heard GE was 2 weeks ago!! Really?

We can either look at the global market and adapt to change, or we can sit on our rears and become a has been in the next 100 years.

/rant off

 

[123Saab]

Originally Posted By: antonmnster
Wow, there's more conspiracy [censored] and noise in this thread than normal! Some of you are lost.


yep!

 

[eljefino]

Ok, so we import 70% of our liquid oil and export lots of dollars that are becoming more and more worthless every day.

How do you naysayers propose to turn this around? (I'm getting ahead of myself and assuming you think this is a problem.)

If it's "drill, baby, drill", what proven reserves are there, and how big of a bite will they take out?

Nuke plants and electric cars? Not every "greenie" you label is a full out hippie and against "everything". Some may be reasonable, if you get to know them, and simply want to stop funding al quaeda training camps in saudi arabia.

Why are our *other* auto standards so disharmonous from Europe and the rest of the world? Tire pressure monitoring, ten airbags, NOx and particulate regs banning diesels and lean burning gassers. Is it that our kids don't know science? Can we not hold anyone's attention long enough to explain that a tailpipe emits a bouquet of pollutants and if you turn one down (CO2) another goes up? A clean burning car is not necessarily, and probably isn't, good on gas!

Anyway here's my plan for saving fuel. Don't knock holes in it if you aren't going to share your own harebrained plan.

1) If you run over a pedestrian, cyclist, or motorcyclist with your car there will be a thorough investigation. If you "didn't see them" you go to jail for 6 months for 2nd degree manslaughter and lose your license for years, as an example to other motorists, and to encourage more efficient commuters, who are rightfully afraid of all the idiots out there.

2) double the gas tax but give everyone (with valid licenses and immigration status) rebates for a gallon a day.

3) eliminate registration/insurance fees for 2nd vehicles.

4) Make SUVs and trucks exempt from CAFE counting if they are going to rental agencies, if the agencies let you tow, and if the vehicles get crushed or exported and not resold at the end of their lives.

5) if a car meets all euro standards and gets more than 40 MPG, it meets US standards too. Make the buyer sign a liability waiver acknowledging it's not as safe as staying in bed.

6) single occupant SUVs have to go 5 MPH under the speed limit on the interstate. This includes Subaru Foresters. One will suddenly care about what's printed on the Certificate of Origin in the showrooms.

7) Build up Amtrak, particularly "car trains", so you can go on vacation with your own car, but cover several hundred miles overnight with your motor turned off. The train can run off coal or nuke powered electricity.

 

[LTVibe]

Originally Posted By: 123Saab
Originally Posted By: antonmnster
Wow, there's more conspiracy [censored] and noise in this thread than normal! Some of you are lost.


yep!

That poor cat looks totally embarrassed and humiliated! I'm calling PETA!

 

[KrisZ]

Here is my plan:
1. STOP RUNNING DEFICIT BUDGET.


End of plan.

 

[mechanicx]

I'm not a fan of CAFE but I'm definitely against the idea of increasing gas tax for the purpose of controlling consumption or changing vehicle choices. Is CAFE really costing manufacturers that much anyway? According to NHTSA,

"Since 1983, manufacturers have paid more than $590 million in CAFE civil penalties. Most European manufacturers regularly pay CAFE civil penalties ranging from less than $1 million to more than $20 million annually. Asian and most of the big domestic manufacturers have never paid a civil penalty".

First off $590 million is peanuts relatively over 28 years. We are talking a $1 or $2 or so over the number of vehicles that had to been produced over 28 years. Also it says European manufactures regularly pay the penalties. That doesn't sound like such a bad thing to me. And Domestics have mostly never paid penalties. Now there might be more to it, but it doesn't sound like CAFE is costing consumers much, especially if they buy Domestic or Asian.

I'm sure there are a lot of other cost to the manufacturers to meet the CAFE standards. The worst problem with CAFE is how it dictates and ever increasing and unrealistic increase in fuel economy. I just don't think we need CAFE as it is presently being done. They could change it/lighten it's requirements or something similar. An automaker already is subject to paying the price for being heavy in high fuel consumption SUV when prices increase. It sure costed GM a few years ago.

I'm not for CAFE since it is artificially manipulating the market. But the idea of the need for a higher gas tax which would not only manipulate the market but cost the poorest lots of money is the worst idea one could come up with. At best it is a solution in search of a problem, and at worst a scheme to take more from those that have the least. Let supply and demand dictate prices and behavior.

 

[IndyIan]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
Ok, so we import 70% of our liquid oil and export lots of dollars that are becoming more and more worthless every day.

How do you naysayers propose to turn this around? (I'm getting ahead of myself and assuming you think this is a problem.)

If it's "drill, baby, drill", what proven reserves are there, and how big of a bite will they take out?

Nuke plants and electric cars? Not every "greenie" you label is a full out hippie and against "everything". Some may be reasonable, if you get to know them, and simply want to stop funding al quaeda training camps in saudi arabia.

Why are our *other* auto standards so disharmonous from Europe and the rest of the world? Tire pressure monitoring, ten airbags, NOx and particulate regs banning diesels and lean burning gassers. Is it that our kids don't know science? Can we not hold anyone's attention long enough to explain that a tailpipe emits a bouquet of pollutants and if you turn one down (CO2) another goes up? A clean burning car is not necessarily, and probably isn't, good on gas!

Anyway here's my plan for saving fuel. Don't knock holes in it if you aren't going to share your own harebrained plan.

1) If you run over a pedestrian, cyclist, or motorcyclist with your car there will be a thorough investigation. If you "didn't see them" you go to jail for 6 months for 2nd degree manslaughter and lose your license for years, as an example to other motorists, and to encourage more efficient commuters, who are rightfully afraid of all the idiots out there.

2) double the gas tax but give everyone (with valid licenses and immigration status) rebates for a gallon a day.

3) eliminate registration/insurance fees for 2nd vehicles.

4) Make SUVs and trucks exempt from CAFE counting if they are going to rental agencies, if the agencies let you tow, and if the vehicles get crushed or exported and not resold at the end of their lives.

5) if a car meets all euro standards and gets more than 40 MPG, it meets US standards too. Make the buyer sign a liability waiver acknowledging it's not as safe as staying in bed.

6) single occupant SUVs have to go 5 MPH under the speed limit on the interstate. This includes Subaru Foresters. One will suddenly care about what's printed on the Certificate of Origin in the showrooms.

7) Build up Amtrak, particularly "car trains", so you can go on vacation with your own car, but cover several hundred miles overnight with your motor turned off. The train can run off coal or nuke powered electricity.

Good points!
I'd add that larger vehicles have to designed to be safer in collisions with smaller cars. It makes more sense to "de-fang" a 4x4 pickup than to bulk up a dozen small cars so they are no longer small or fuel efficient.
That would make it easier to reach a higher average fuel economy.

 

[mechanicx]

I just can't fathom why anyone would be for a higher gas tax or any increase in fuel costs. Maybe you have a good job now and a fuel efficient car, so an extra $1/gal doesn't seem to matter. But what happens if you lose your job and are unemployed, maybe have to take a low-paying job, maybe lose your fuel efficient car and have to pick up a less eficient one because the deal was better, have to move further from work, or get divorced. It's not an unlikely scenario at all that one could find themself suddenly in worse economic situations.

Now that extra $1/gal means something. Maybe you have savings but why burn that up jsut to pay for an unnecessary higher cost. Higher fuel costs raises the prices of everything. So it is not as insignificant as it might sound. Why would you ever want to pay more than absolutely necessary for a necessary consumable? I can't fathom why anyone would be for it.

 

[javacontour]

I don't think anybody WANTS higher gas prices.

However, if higher fuel prices today are what it takes to get to a sane and sustainable energy policy for tomorrow, then I'd rather have a little bit of pain today than greater pain tomorrow when we don't have the fuel (pick your reason, war, we run out, middle east just doesn't want to sell to infidels anymore, China bought it all, etc.)

If you can guarantee as much fuel as we want for $0.299/gallon, I'm all ears. But having fuel priced cheaply, but exactly zero fuel available isn't a viable option either.

No body wants high prices. But we also don't want zero supply. Zero supply of the current fuel, or viable alternatives is not a pretty picture.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Exactly right!

And dont forget that the cost of gasoline in this country does not reflect the true cost of securing and providing for it's safe and timely production. Those who propose that the market should dictate gas cost at the pump, should first get honest with themselves and realize that the market doesn't set that price now. Let alone what that market will look like after demand and supply have gotten well out of whack with each other with our expanding worldwide demands.

 

[LS2JSTS]

Originally Posted By: mechanicx
I'm not a fan of CAFE but I'm definitely against the idea of increasing gas tax for the purpose of controlling consumption or changing vehicle choices. Is CAFE really costing manufacturers that much anyway? According to NHTSA,

"Since 1983, manufacturers have paid more than $590 million in CAFE civil penalties. Most European manufacturers regularly pay CAFE civil penalties ranging from less than $1 million to more than $20 million annually. Asian and most of the big domestic manufacturers have never paid a civil penalty".

First off $590 million is peanuts relatively over 28 years. We are talking a $1 or $2 or so over the number of vehicles that had to been produced over 28 years. Also it says European manufactures regularly pay the penalties. That doesn't sound like such a bad thing to me. And Domestics have mostly never paid penalties. Now there might be more to it, but it doesn't sound like CAFE is costing consumers much, especially if they buy Domestic or Asian.

I'm sure there are a lot of other cost to the manufacturers to meet the CAFE standards. The worst problem with CAFE is how it dictates and ever increasing and unrealistic increase in fuel economy. I just don't think we need CAFE as it is presently being done. They could change it/lighten it's requirements or something similar. An automaker already is subject to paying the price for being heavy in high fuel consumption SUV when prices increase. It sure costed GM a few years ago.

I'm not for CAFE since it is artificially manipulating the market. But the idea of the need for a higher gas tax which would not only manipulate the market but cost the poorest lots of money is the worst idea one could come up with. At best it is a solution in search of a problem, and at worst a scheme to take more from those that have the least. Let supply and demand dictate prices and behavior.



You touched on it yourself, and you are right. The fines are just the visible costs that the manufacturers have to bear. There are also the hidden costs that the consumer funds on every vehicle purchase. Development costs and the like to meet the CAFE demands that get passed on to the consumer, higher prices on lower mileage vehicles that are in demand to subsidize the lower demand higher mpg models also cost the consumer.

Depending on which source you choose to believe, I've seen estimates in the range of $150-$350 per vehicle in added cost as a corporate average. There are certain makes and models where the projected cost is much higher.

But please, also keep in mind, this is at current CAFE levels. The REAL problem here mechanix is the huge jump that is proposed in the current CAFE standards. Up until now the increases have been relatively attainable and remained somewhat relaistic, not due in any small part to large amounts of lobbying by the manufacturers. But these new proposals...well they are flat out stupid. They are to big a jump for the current mix of technology and market demand to achieve. Some in power are out there talking about numbers in the 60's by2025, thats crazy, even the number in the 40's will be impossible to achieve without major changes in market demand or vehicle choice.

These new numbers and the size of their increase makes any comparison to the relatively sane increases we saw in past almost irrelevant. These new proposals are game changers that eclipse anything CAFE has tried to do in the past.