Click and Clack say 35 mpg limit is just right for new CAFE standards

[AZEqualizer]

Over at autobloggreen they had this article on Click & Clack from Car Talk.

Key line: "Every single time they've resisted safety, environmental, of fuel economy regulations, auto industry predictions have turned out, in retrospect, to be fear-mongering bull-feathers." You can read the full letter here (http://globalwarming.house.gov/tools/assets/files/0160.pdf) (in PDF).I agree and get tired of "if you legislate us we will cease to exist!" gloom and doom stuff. If it's true maybe they should cease to exist!

[AZEqualizer]

I thought this was important enough to copy from the autobloggreen site.

More on Click and Clack and CAFE - and Halloween!

Posted Oct 30th 2007 8:06PM by Sebastian Blanco

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autobloggreen.com/media/2007/10/bagandcontents-200.jpg
Filed under: Etc., Legislation and Policy, Green Daily
Following my post earlier today on Click and Clack's comments on CAFE (http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/10/30/click-and-clack-say-35-mpg-limit-is-just-right-for-new-cafe-stan/#comments) (can you see I'm caught up in crazy alliteration?) reader Chris Abraham not only posted a comment, but sent in some more information on the letter and what's going on with CAFE tomorrow.

First, if you're adverse to PDFs, you can read a transcript of the brother's letter here.

Second, in celebration of Halloween (tomorrow), members of the Pew Campaign for Fuel Efficiency will be delivering "The Spooky Truth (http://smnr.us/thespookytruth/)" to Members of Congress. This spookiness appears to be some candy bars and a flyer explaining the following:

In June, the Senate passed a strong, bipartisan compromise to raise mileage for cars and light trucks to an average of 35mpg by 2020. This is the first Congressional increase in fuel efficiency in 30 years, and yet the auto industry is pushing a proposal which would weaken and delay the Senate compromise. Their "tricky" proposal would only require 23 mpg by 2022 and actually cap American innovation on mileage improvements at 35mpg. The spooky truth is that just a few years and a few miles do matter when it comes to making a difference for America. In 2020:

Barrels of Oil Saved Per Day:
- 500,000 Auto Lobby Proposal
- 1.2 Million Senate Fuel Economy Compromise
Consumer Savings at the Pump:
- $11 Billion Auto Lobby Proposal
- $25 Billion Senate Fuel Economy Compromise
Emissions Reductions
- 85mmt CO2 Auto Lobby Proposal
- 206 mmt CO2 Senate Fuel Economy Compromise

* Data from the Union of Concerned Scientists, "Energy Bill Must Guarantee Real Oil Savings" Sept. 2007.

The Auto Lobby Proposal is a Trick, Not a Treat (Note, I fixed a couple typos here)

If you're interested in signing on to the message of this Halloween message, you can visit this Energy Bill 2007 website (http://www.energybill2007.org/) and sign the petition.

[Source: The Spooky Truth / Autobloggreen]

[Derwin]

Is this True? The government is only requiring an "average" of 35, and the car industry only wants to go to 23, and that....by the year 2022???!!!!

This is really sick. I may have just come out of a cave somewhere, but I thought the government was making great strides in pressuring for better mpg. If this is all they are trying to get, then we are indeed in big trouble.

I have a question, though. Why doesn't the auto industry want good gas mileage on vehicles? Or, why don't they want to manufacture vehicles with good gas mileage? I really don't understand. Does is cost them more to produce such vehicles? Are they in "cahoots" with the oil industry? I am not making any accusations. I really do not know. It just does not make since that they would fight creating vehicles that get better gas mileage.

I am sure somebody out there has some answers. Please educate me, and other club members, about this. Thanks.

Derwin

[Miracleman89]

Are they in "cahoots" with the oil industry?

Derwin


The Hammer Hit The Nail! Most CEOs and board members at the big three own a good share of stocks in oil companies. An article released about 3 years ago (which I am having problems locating presently) stated that G Richard Wagoner Jr CEO of General motors had personally invested heavily in BP Oil Company:mad:(I believe it was BP but don't quote me). Also in an article around the same time came out with him saying that he new better then the consumers and that he will continue to make enormous SUVs and Trucks because that is what people really want! They are not that concerned about fuel economy!:mad::mad::mad: Mind you that is not and exact quote I don't think but it summarizes his comments well. I can't find that article either but this one kinda supports it, This is a recent article from edmunds straightline: http://blogs.edmunds.com/Straightline/3570

[Derwin]

MM89,

Hello! I kind of understand what the CEO of GM is saying. I don't really think it proves a conspiracy. He is just saying that the people WANT SUV's and Trucks. This really is true! My brother owns a big honkin Dodge Ram and his wife owns a Durango. They purchased those Big cars because they enjoy them. Last year I purchased a 2007 Jeep Wrangler Unlimited. I took it on our yearly fishing trip, and it only got 13 mpg pulling a small boat. But I REALLY LOVE my 4-Door Jeep Unlimited! Heck, I was even eyeing the Hummer H2 HUT. I think this is also a great car, but the price tag is just way to high.

Thier may very well be a "conspiracy" to provide only low mpg vehicles to the public, and if the big 3 own major stock in oil companies, then I would say that this is definately a confilct of interest at the very least.

I have always had the idea that companies can manufacture a very low mileage car, but they DO NOT do so ON PURPOSE. I can't prove this, but I have always thought it. I mean, don't we have the technology to get 50mpg or better on normal size vehicles?

Anyway, I LOVE Venture Vehicles because I really think this "car" will be a hoot to drive, AND we will be doing our part to help the environment. In my case I will just be offsetting the gas I burn with my Jeep Unlimited! :D

Derwin

[Mark Tomlinson]

Agreed, Derwin. The CEO may own Big Oil stock and that gives the impression of impropriety, but does not control the direction of the corporation.

Instead, as I've always said, the Big Three are not in business to build cars. They are in business to turn a profit for the shareholders. The best way to do that is to optimize and expand the production of existing product lines rather than sink money into long term speculative venture. A venture capitalist might be willing to drop $6 million in a project that may or may not pay out in five years. But a shareholder gets a quarterly statement and ticker updates every fifteen minutes. A temporary downturn scares him and he dumps stock. (Sure, GM stock is pretty worthless already, but the company is running scared and doesn't want to lose what they have left).

GM created the EV1 because California law said they had to. After the law changed, the EV1 died because there was no money it and GM didn't have the staying power to see it through. The Hummer, on the other hand, has much larger margins and was way more popular.

As far as 35mpg goes - I think that's reasonable. I think it's attainable by the Big Three, even considering the "turning the Titanic" syndrome of big corporations. Putting it higher (where it arguably should be) would mean there's no chance in hell of getting it signed into law, and that leaves us where we are today.

[Mark Tomlinson]

P.S. I have a GM car today that gets 22mpg city. It's a Saturn L200, which I consider the last of the "real" Saturns. I checked out the Saturn Aura hybrid as a possible replacement and found it gets a whopping 24mpg city.

Yes, that's the Aura hybrid. Somethings got to be done.

[RAN]

You guys should know by now that all you're going to get from Big Business and Big Government is Big B.S.

If automakers just switched production to the clean diesels that most of them already have, they could reach the 35mpg CAFE level by next year. As a side note, I noticed yesterday that here in Phoenix, the few stations that even have diesel fuel charge over 70 cents/gallon more for it than regular unleaded gas. I think this price disparity would change if there were more demand on the diesel side (I hope so, because as it stands now, any mileage advantage will be eaten up at the pump before you even get on the road). Articles on making biodiesel 100 from algae have shown how feasible it could be, and if everything in this paragraph had started back in 2000, it might have been the perfect model for the next 20-50 years.

It only takes about 15 minutes of reading to figure out that hydrogen is the completely wrong way to go. It's too expensive to obtain, and the infrastructure to support it will cost a fortune (this, of course, is why the government, oil companies, and many automakers think hydrogen is the "fuel of the future").

Electric cars are the future, and series hybrids like the Venture 1 are the means of getting us there until battery technology improves and charging infrastructure grows.

It's hard not to draw a comparison between dinosaurs and huge SUV's both caught in the tar pits. Let GM and all the other big automakers stay mired in the past. It's time for something new!

[Derwin]

I agree with most everything being said, but I am not sure about business and government being "BS". I know you are going to think that I am extremely naive, but I think business just wants to give people what they want, regardless of the harm to the environment or anything else. They are in business "TO MAKE MONEY", nothing else. And this is not a bad thing, really.

Ian and his partners at Venture Vehicles are not in this as a hobby, either. Believe me. The people that gave him money must see a profit to be made, or the money would never have been given. This is, of course, how the world works.

The problem with a lot of big business is that they don't really want to "rock the boat". They want to stay with the tried and true way to make money. They also know and understand fully what the people want, and what the people are buying. A lot of people simply LOVE the big SUV's. I am one of them. If they could EVER make an SUV that can get 100mpg, SIGN ME UP! I will ALWAYS go with the better mpg vehicle if it meets my needs and desires.

I am not a scientist, and I sure don't know much about this alternative fuel debate, but I do know that there MUST be some kind of fuel out there that we can get us off the oil.

Heck, remember that guy that died about 10 years ago? He claimed somebody poisoned him. He was the guy that said he created a system to run an internal combustion engine on WATER! He even demonstrated it by running his dune buggy entirely on his water-only system. He claimed people in the industry were out to kill him! I have a question for ANYBODY that knows about this......Was this guy for real? Maybe I should start another forum just for this subject, but I will let you all decide if it is worthy enough.

Anyway, I am going to keep my SUV because I simply love it. And you can't really pull a boat with any of these smaller vehicles. When they come out with an SUV that gets great gas mileage or uses an alternative fuel source, Count me in! I will sell my gas hog in a heart beat. But, until then, I am very limited in my choices.

Let me be clear about one thing......I may be entirely wrong with everything I just said. So please take that into consideration!! :p

[Hardtime11]

As a side note, I noticed yesterday that here in Phoenix, the few stations that even have diesel fuel charge over 70 cents/gallon more for it than regular unleaded gas. I think this price disparity would change if there were more demand on the diesel side (I hope so, because as it stands now, any mileage advantage will be eaten up at the pump before you even get on the road).

It already has changed. If you remember the last gas price wars back in the mid-late '70s diesel was 1/3 the price of gasoline. It is less refined and takes less work to get it to the pumps however in order to keep it justified the government created a dye so they could charge a higher rate to the road going vehicles and give a little break to the agriculture industry. Now diesel costs as much or more than premium fuel. Is this not ironic?

[RAN]

It already has changed. If you remember the last gas price wars back in the mid-late '70s diesel was 1/3 the price of gasoline. It is less refined and takes less work to get it to the pumps however in order to keep it justified the government created a dye so they could charge a higher rate to the road going vehicles and give a little break to the agriculture industry. Now diesel costs as much or more than premium fuel. Is this not ironic?

I would call it a huge rip-off :(

[AZEqualizer]

Other Threads on HHO were moved to Advanced or Alternative Energy -HHO (http://flytheroadclub.com/forums/showthread.php?t=45)

[Miracleman89]

all I can say is that politians need to grow a spine and tell the big three "step up to the plate with the big boys" 35mpg now on all production vehicles or don't make them!!

[WattGas?]

Did you REALLY just use the words "Politician" and "Spine" in the same sentence?

:D ROFLMAO! :D

[RAN]

WattGas I like the way you think lol! Welcome! Better to fly the road... keeps you under the radar. Have a beer on me... http://i186.photobucket.com/albums/x139/MahBoff/beer.gif

[WattGas?]

(iii)D :D

[Billy]

How about a sick thought, set the clock to 10 years ahead.... The headlines read: Venture Vehicles CEO Ian Bruce proposes to buy-out 95% of GM's stock.

That would be the day..