Obama rules may require 60 mpg average by 2025

[JTD]

Automakers are barely into the run-up to a government-required 35.5 miles per gallon in 2016 and they're about to be staring at a 60-mpg standard, it appears.



A proposed mileage rule is expected from the Obama administration this week, listing an overall auto-industry standard in 2025 that could range from about 47 mpg to 60 mpg. The process for finalizing such rules means it wouldn't be set in concrete until late 2011 or early 2012.

One big backer of the 60-mpg number is the Natural Resources Defense Council. The NRDC's transportation issues czar, Roland Hwang, blogs about the issue extensively. He tells Drive On that the technology required for automakers to average 60 mpg (1.67 gallons per 100 miles) would boost the average price of a 2025 vehicle $2,700 in today's dollars. Such a vehicle would repay its owner via fuel savings in about 4.5 years, assuming gasoline is an average of $3.40 a gallon in today's money, he says.

[Sharroll Celby]

I wish there was a moratorium on both emmissions and MPG. For instance, take the current 2011 emissions levels and MPG levels, and keep them until 2021. That year, have each emissions level and mileage level be 10% lower than the 2011 levels.

AND, make them all 50-state compliant at the same time.

[Jamo]

watching...

[JTD]

Advocates and lobbyists say today the Obama administration will unveil a plan for fuel-economy standards on cars as high as 62 miles per gallon in 2025.



Timing aside, the cost to you could be significant. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), an advocacy group that favors the 60 mpg standard, says such a regulation would boost the price of a car an average $2,700 in today's dollars, and you'd make that back in 4.5 years on fuel savings.

But a June report from a respected scientific group -- while not directly addressing 60 mpg -- suggests car buyers could pay more than that:




The report, by the National Research Council of the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), forecast prices of various fuel-saving technologies. The baseline was a conventional gasoline car with a low-tech engine -- no direct-injection, no turbocharging, no cylinder-cutoff, etc.

Whatever you'd pay for that kind of car, add $9,000 to the price to get a sophisticated gas-electric hybrid that'd use half as much fuel, the NAS report said.

That's a lot more than today's "hybrid premium" of $4,000 or less. In fact, Ford Motor's Lincoln brand has eliminated the premium, pricing its 2011 Lincoln MKZ hybrid sedan at the same $35,180 as the gasoline version of that car.

An unsettling aspect of the NAS figure is that the kind of hybrid that'd cost you the additional $9,000 probably wouldn't meet the 60-mpg target. It'd only help an automaker get partway there. To average 60 mpg or so would require many vehicles that get better mileage than that.

The NRDC figures that only about 30% of 2025 vehicles could be conventional gasoline vehiclesfor the industry to meet a 60-mpg standard. The rest would have to be advanced hybrids and battery cars.

Current mileage regulations run though 2016 and require the auto industry as a whole to hit 35.5 mpg (though a credit of 1 mpg or so can come from other clean-air initiatives that don't boost a car's fuel economy).


The government plan for 2017 to 2025 that's expected today is likely to say that the eventual 2025 number should be set between 47 and 62 miles per gallon, leaving some leeway for a less-costly target.

Because the rule-making process takes a long time, a final 2025 standard isn't likely to be set in concrete until 2012.

[csx4910]

While great of rhte enviroment, I dont see any way to make the 600 hp modern day hot rods we know and love get 60 mpg. Or a F150 that needs 500 ft lb of torque to ahul 10000 punds get 60 mpg. That means ahlf the cars will be to be getting 80-100 mog to balance them out. Unlikely in my opinion.

[tcrist]

Quote csx4910.
"I don't see any way to make the 600 hp modern day hot rods we know and love get 60 mpg."

That is the idea. It's all about control. Sure, they kind of care about the environment, but it's the mind control that they want.

[Dan40]

I wonder about "green jobs," and "environmentally friendly industries," and recycling, and "alternative energy" sources.
We have been working toward these kinds of things since the 1960's and seriously so since the fuel 'crisis' of the 70's.

After all this time, is there even a single one industry OR company, that is stand alone profitable without Govt subsidies and incentives?

[computerworks]

Originally Posted by Dan40

After all this time, is there even a single one industry OR company, that is stand alone profitable without Govt subsidies and incentives?

That's taking the thread off topic.

[SP01715]

I have a 2010 TDI Jetta (which is one of, if not the most advanced diesel motor today) and I am getting low 40 to low 50 mpg. I don't see how you are going to get larger vehicles like trucks close to 60 MPG. My Duramax is only getting high teens to low 20 MPG. Hard to push that much weight with good fuel economy.

[Ronbo]

There's still a considerable amount of wasted energy going out your tailpipe.

If the auto manufacturers would address weight as they were forced to address engine efficiency, we'll have even faster, better handling cars than we now have.

My favorite line from Apollo 13 "It's not a miracle, we just decided to go".

Not only can we do this, but with the ever increasing amount of cars on the road we should be doing this. If it wasn't for the 20+yrs wasted in apathy and self pity by (mainly) the US car mfgs. we'd already be there by now.

[SP01715]

Originally Posted by Ronbo

There's still a considerable amount of wasted energy going out your tailpipe.

If the auto manufacturers would address weight as they were forced to address engine efficiency, we'll have even faster, better handling cars than we now have.

My favorite line from Apollo 13 "It's not a miracle, we just decided to go".

Not only can we do this, but with the ever increasing amount of cars on the road we should be doing this. If it wasn't for the 20+yrs wasted in apathy and self pity by (mainly) the US car mfgs. we'd already be there by now.

How do you make a truck with a 15K+ towing capacity lighter? How much lighter can you make cars and have them still be safe and affordable?

[DrivinWest]

Originally Posted by Ronbo

My favorite line from Apollo 13 "It's not a miracle, we just decided to go".

Not only can we do this, but with the ever increasing amount of cars on the road we should be doing this. If it wasn't for the 20+yrs wasted in apathy and self pity by (mainly) the US car mfgs. we'd already be there by now.

Quoted for truth.

[Buzz]

Good one! Everyone mourned the death of automotive performance in 1973 (455 SD Trans Ams nonwithstanding); yet we can buy the fastest cars of all time right now in 2010. I personally can't wait to see what the future holds for performance freaks who aren't terrified of life after the carburetor.



2025 supercar performance prediction:
Weight: 1650 lbs
Power: 4 X 75Kw (+- 400 hp combined) electric motors with computer controlled AWD
Torque: 1355 Nm (1000 ft/lbs) at ALL RPM's
0 - 60 mph: <3 seconds
Dual padded roll bars!!
Top speed: Governor limited to 60 mph for your safety.

PS: don't sweat the paint job - by 2025 we'll probably really like fungus green with purple stripes.

[Buzz]

The thread topic inspired me to render a futuristic cartoon Cobra with a big optima battery sticking out of the hood, but I got carried away.

Without the Optima:





Side view: (the models are only there to give a lil' perspective on the car's height)

[scaffold]

be glad we don't get all the government we pay for --- we surely couldn't stand it.
In 2025 I'll be 83--probably won't even be able to get in and out of my Cobra