Doug Burgum, Secretary of the Interior, just announced the rollback of CAFE standards, in an interview with Fox’s Bret Baier. This is one of the ways they are helping the economy they say.
Ali
Ali
Rollback of CAFE Reported by Doug Burgum
- Thread starter AEHaas
- Start date
- Status
Good!
I like it. In California it's pretty much a scam, smog checks, extra fees, etc. I'd guess 99% of vehicles manufactured in the last 10-15 years would pass.
That crap should have thrown into the dustbin of history decades ago.
Car manufacturers will not deviate from the long term plans. They recognize that this is a whimsical change that will be undone in the future. They recognize the need for efficiency as an economic consideration as much as an environmental one.
I wish California would have kept the 30 year rolling exemption. The number of cars older than a 1995MY are dramatically less than even just 10 year old vehicles.
Even better the EPA is tossing California's custom blended gasoline, meaning a likely significant price drop. That alone will lower the cost of goods here. Also throwing out California's future ban on diesel semi's. That would have caused quite a supply chain shortage and a lot higher prices on goods.
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately your probably right. I could see models staying around longer now though. Maybe a redesign was planned as a need to meet CAFE - and instead they keep selling it. That is why the Xterra was killed off. The production line stayed operating making Fronties for 4 more years, but because the stupid Cafe footprint rule, it would have needed a redesign to continue.
There is also the possibility someone takes a flyer and does - and people like me line up to buy one.
Additionally, certain things might simply go away for 4 years. Like Auto start / stop. Would actually save money for the OEM's to delete it, and most people don't want it.
Cylinder de-activation - gone too.
Given manual transmissions usually do worse on the CAFE test than a CVT - I wonder if the reason you could never find one was for CAFE reasons. Guess we shall see?
Cylinder de-activation - gone too.
Given manual transmissions usually do worse on the CAFE test than a CVT - I wonder if the reason you could never find one was for CAFE reasons. Guess we shall see?
The main change I would like to see are small, simple, low cost, lightweight, efficient cars similar to the current Mirage or Geo of years past.
The answer we are given is that small cars aren’t wanted by any American
but the reality is far from it. Mainly a belt line, emissions , fuel economy (oddly), “safety “, and regulatory impetus to force them off the road.
If this change were to overturn the ideotic platform laws so you can buy any motor and transmission you want without millions of dollars of compliance penalties I would be for it.
But I bet it does absolutely nothing to the actual selection of efficient vehicles or small vehicles that are “banned by proxy” in the current regulatory environment.
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2020
- Messages
- 2,095
I'd like that too, but that's highly unlikely.
I'm waiting for the question of:
"so does this mean I can run a thicker oil? If so, what about the tooolllleeerrraaannnccceesssss!?!"
Its not that we shouldnt have standards its that they were wrote with an agenda and with the rolling structure..
made it impossible for ICE engines to meet.. therefore you were sneakily legislating EVs fully replacing ICE through CAFE.
I dont think we need to go back to 18+ mpg fleet standard
but the standards were unobtanium
such as 60mpg for cars by 2026 and 42mpg for light trucks..
how many Ice vehicles are 60mpg+ even hybrids or phevs.
It was idiocy.
made it impossible for ICE engines to meet.. therefore you were sneakily legislating EVs fully replacing ICE through CAFE.
I dont think we need to go back to 18+ mpg fleet standard
but the standards were unobtanium
such as 60mpg for cars by 2026 and 42mpg for light trucks..
how many Ice vehicles are 60mpg+ even hybrids or phevs.
It was idiocy.
I like OEM's being pushed to innovate for more MPG & cleaner air. Remember, Customers demanded & expected more MPG for their hard earned dollars for more expensive vehicles. I do wonder what this ultimately means but my take is YOY MPG improvement requirements will get delayed which is not great. Anyways, the OEM's will take advantage of this here & there I'm sure.
wemay
Site Donor 2023
Let's not put the cart before the horse. There will be so much red-tape and litigation that i'll believe it when i see it.
This is quite fantastical since he doesnt have anything to do with CAFE standards.
As of now, zero announcements in the news. Find a better source.
have you seen how they compute EV fuel economy.
if they computed it the same way half of these heafty EV's wouldnt pass either
There is something to be said for an EV recharged with solar(or maybe nuclear).. but lets not start down that semi-off-topic subject.
Pretty sure all the diesel guys want to go back about 15 years of regulation to get reliability and simpleness back.
Irrelevant since EVs don't directly consume fuel and hefty EVs are a small fraction of that market anyway.have you seen how they compute EV fuel economy.
if they computed it the same way half of these heafty EV's wouldnt pass either
dnewton3
Staff member
^^^ This ^^^
No one wants smog and horrible MPGs; that's not an era we want to return to.
But the unrealistic standards were covertly intended to cause the demise of ICEs. We don't need to discuss the intent behind the those standards; we all understand what it was about.
What we need are reasonable, realistic structured goals which slowly, methodically increase the requirements, encouraging technology to keep up, resulting in tangible improvements. It's OK to move the goalpost every once in a while, but it must be done in a manner that keeps the motivation intact. When you set goals so far out of sight that it just demoralizes and destroys the motivation, then you've gone too far.
- Status
