Featured E.P.A. Prepares to Roll Back Rules Requiring Cars to Be Cleaner and More Efficient

Great news! This ought to drop used Prius prices dramatically!

 

The truth is Hillary probably would have had to scale back the 2025 targets too...they were extraordinarily strict and it was promised the targets be adjusted for reality if the 2012 rule seemed unreasonable with the passage of time...which it does seem unreasonable now. So the real question is, will the mid-course adjustments make sense or be too lenient? I do not think we know the answer yet...

 

Not sure why this would lower Prius prices. Please explain. If anything I would expect the opposite.

 

Or they could just use gas tax to level gas prices and charge higher taxes and fees on “luxury “ vehicles.

A vehicle vrs size tax could help fuel economy and reduce traffic congestion in larger cities

 

I'll see that "drop" and "raise", and bid "not much change". I think, just a hunch. If you're shopping for a used Prius, would you be more or less motivated with these changes? I kinda think neither.

Bottom line, there's going to be more lenience, more stinkers on the road? Around here, it seems like the majority of vehicles are very clean, and then some big ol' truck, or some "tuned" vehicle rolls by, and you can barely breath.

 

I don't want to send this to the black hole of fred's house of pancakes, but what we know.

The 2025 goals were really unrealistic without high gas prices, which are extremely unlikely now. Even if the mandate didn't change, with low gas prices, the fuel savings would not have happened to the amount wanted because people have been switching to larger vehicles and vmt has been increasing.

2025 was where the suv loophole was finally going to be closed, that is when trucks are no longer favored over cars. This is a loophole that that should have been closed in the 1990s. My bet is the Pruitt epa will leave it in as this benefits oil companies and big auto at the expense of consumers.

The rules are archane, and the current epa is unlikely to fix that. This has led to both cheating and lower real world fuel economy than cafe standards pretend to be. It is likely that anything that replaces the 2025 standards will stall the oil use around the levels of the 2021 standard. The 2021 standard is definite progress over where things were a decade ago, but more should be done.

Size taxes don't do much to help fuel economy or reduce congestion. Gas or oil taxes do seem to work well, and the last increase in the federal tax was 1993. Since then it has not increased with inflation or need or increased fuel economy.

I agree prius won't be affected much from the change. The change mainly reflects changes to large cars which have been decreasing anyway, Trucks and SUVs which will grow further in market share.

 

I believe people will be even more inclined to buy large trucks and SUVs if there is no incentive to drive more efficient cars.. Even today, as sedans fall out of favor, prices of used sedans are lower than used CUV (of the same initial MSRP). Most people don't want fuel-efficient hybrids when gas is cheap and they're not penalized for driving cars that use more fuel.

 

This EPA change has nothing to do with gas prices. It only has to do with what car manufacturers are forced to make. Yes that likely means more big vehicles will be made and sold. That also means that gas prices will likely rise due to increased demand. Gas prices rise and fuel efficient vehicles become more valuable. That is my understanding of economics 101.

 

It's disappointing to me because it takes what should be design challenge, and evolution both in the products themselves..the vehicles, and also perhaps in ourselves as consumers, and throws it all out the window in favor of the status quo, and easier to maintain profits.

But more than that I think it sets a bad precedent. It all becomes political.
How easy it is it now, to set up future standards to be met, that gain the approval of supporters "today"...but how meaningless it really becomes if those same standards simply get rolled back or taken off the books as the deadline approaches tomorrow.

If you care about Global Warming, Emissions, Clean Air, Fuel Dependency, or any combination of these things, the set back or removal of these standards reduces it politically to shadow boxing in the fight to really implement change.
You can advance any argument that automakers aren't ready, that the standards aren't realistic or now obtainable on the timeline available, but it doesn't change the fact that if we set benchmarks, then don't enforce the reaching them? How do you trust any future such legislation or standard implementation in any arena?

It reduces it all IMO to simply a political tango. With one administration getting credit for "doing something" that won't ever happen..and another getting credit for "saving the industry" by bypassing or heading off implementation.

 

Personally the advancements we've had in the last 10 years are all because of these requirements.. you seriously think car manufacturers give a hoot about advancing fuel economy, safety, etc just because they care about us lol? Maybe tesla does since they are new, but the rest don't give a crud about it. They only do it because of regulatory agencies forcing them to do so. Who cares if it increases the price a 1k or 2..it would have done so irregardless just due to corperate greed.

 

I wish there was some way to favor 1 Prius-equivalent + 1 bigger car instead of 2 SUV.s in the driveway

The autos have really made pretty good progress.

 

And lower CAFE targets mean lower pressure to sell less popular, high efficient models. So less manufacturer incentives on new hybrids.

If used Prius prices go down, it is because cars in general are less popular.

 

If they don’t why does the only country with them claim they have room for 50% more cars on the road (and parked) due to those laws and also have a fleet fuel economy average of 33.6mpgs (US) in 2012 compared to our rather poor average even today?

 

I guess I feel that more often governmental legislation actually discourages efficiency. I enjoyed the great gas mileage and efficiency of The Prius when I owned it, but kept hearing about how the state wanted to implement a mileage based, road automotive tax, because Prius Owners, Electric Vehicle Owners, were not paying their "fair share" of the gasoline tax.

Thus instead of encouraging owning a efficient vehicle, actually looking to penalize ownership.

In general, I'm always going to be looking towards things being encouraged to become cleaner and more efficient. Unfortunately in government and in the profit making realm...that usually most often isn't the choice made.

 

Can you give details. Which country has this working. Many have tried with the only sucess claimed not actual.

How do they measure (US) mpgs. If its like nedc or jc08 its not real.

 

Double the Federal gas tax and the problem is solved. Heck, let the Federals agree to no further mileage improvements for a quadruple Federal gas tax that is index to inflation. An additional $0.72/gal would cure a lot of ills.

Bob Wilson

 

It’s a step backwards. Washington and Industry have to get real, make reasonable targets, try to meet them.
Shall we all wear surgical mask, die of lung disease just so industry profits, politicians get paid and stockholders are happy. The World goal must be a continuing struggle for clean air or, eventually we all die prematurely from contaminated air. China already knows how bad it can be and is taking it seriously, re-ducing coal burning, massive solar projects. If Trump does not go out and buy a Hybrid or BEV, he’s not setting a proper example.

 

The first part of your sentiment I agree with completely. The second part comes way out of left field. The post is about cafe regulations between 2021-2025. They have nothing about unhealthy pollution except keeping them likely results in more unhealthy pollution as the higher costs of vehicles would slow adoption of cleaner vehicles. Keeping old polluting vehicles does hurt industry profits and increasing air pollution. The targets were written assumping over $5/gallon gasoline which would encourage people to pay more for more efficient vehicles, at today's prices they would keep older vehicles longer (which is good or bad depending on how you look at it) but would increase unhealthy air. Want to keep cheating diesels on the road, make it so automakers will cheat on the new regulations and charge more.

This is all fred's house of pancakes stuff here. I don't think even the stauchest trump supporters think he is a roll model, why would vehicles be any different. Lots of ghg flying to his golf courses on air force one, no efficient car could possibly make up for that. China is far behind the US on regulating pollution, we can hope they follow, but they are not going to lead.

 

Yea...can you just imagine "The Beast/s" built for our last President (and still used by the current) being Hybrid or BEV? The latter President Trump "statement" also applies to just about every vehicle used by Members of both Houses of Congress and just about every vehicle owned and operated daily by our Federal Government.