Results 1 to 15 of 15

Thread: Direction of US Fuel Efficiency To Be Announced

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    East Coast of the United States
    Posts
    12,007

    Direction of US Fuel Efficiency To Be Announced

    Basically, the US government wants to increase the fuel economy to 35 mpg for cars and SUV's by 2020.

    Dems reach deal on fuel efficiency - Capitol Hill - MSNBC.com

    Democrats reach deal on auto fuel efficiency

    Agreement clears way for energy bill vote in House next week

    WASHINGTON - Congressional Democrats reached a compromise late Friday to boost automobile fuel economy by 40 percent, clearing the way for a House vote probably next week on an energy bill that Democratic leaders would like to send to President Bush before Christmas.

    The agreement came after House Speaker Nancy Pelosi reached an accord with Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., a longtime protector of the auto industry that dominates his home state, to ease the impact of the new fuel economy requirements.

    “A compromise has been reached on automobile fuel efficiency standards,” Dingell announced in a statement.
    Story continues below ↓advertisement

    Automakers would be required to meet an industrywide average of 35 miles per gallon for cars and light trucks, including SUVs, by 2020, the first increase by Congress in car fuel efficiency in 32 years.

    With oil prices hovering near $90 a barrel and gasoline above $3 a gallon, Democrats have been eager to sent Bush a package of new energy measures.

    But Democratic leaders were stymied over disagreement on the auto fuel efficiency issues as Dingell, the longest-serving member of the House and chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, insisted on some provisions to ease the transition for automakers.

    Details of deal
    Under the agreement, the ability of carmakers to use production of so-called flex-fuel vehicles that run on 85 percent ethanol, would be extended to 2020 and more flexibility would be given in improving fuel efficiency for SUVs and pickup trucks, although overall the industry must achieve 35 mpg average counting all vehicles.

    Pelosi, D-Calif., said in a statement that the auto efficiency increases — similar to what already has passed the Senate — “will serve as the cornerstone” of the energy bill she intends to bring up for a vote next week.

    She said the bill also will include a ramp up in the use of ethanol and other biofuels and a requirement for nonpublic electric utilities to use a minimum amount of renewable energy such as wind and solar to produce their power.

    Click for related content
    The stuff campaigns (and movies) are made of
    Bush: Senate judicial reviews mean-spirited

    While details of those provisions were still being worked out, aides said the ethanol provision was expected to mirror Senate requirements for use of 36 billion gallons of ethanol a year by 2022, a sevenfold increase over today’s productions.

    Power companies would have to produce 15 percent of their electricity from renewable energy, aides close to the discussions said.

    GOP filibuster expected
    Both the Senate and House approved separate energy bills last summer, but Democratic leaders have struggled for weeks to try to work out a compromise acceptable to both chambers — and garner the 60 votes needed to survive a sure filibuster in the Senate.

    House Republicans have called the legislation a “non-energy bill” because, they said, it ignores any measures to promote domestic production of oil, natural gas or increased use of coal.

    But Pelosi has said its aim is to turn away from fossil fuels toward development of renewable fuels and place greater emphasis on spurring energy efficiency and conservation.

    She said the auto fuel economy provisions represent a “landmark ... that will offer the automobile industry the certainty it needs, while offering flexibility to automakers and ensuring we keep American manufacturing jobs and continued domestic production of smaller vehicles.”

    The agreement on vehicle fuel economy came after days of tense discussions between Pelosi and Dingell, a staunch defender of the auto industry, who had pressed for concessions to help the industry. Pelosi agreed to a number of Dingell’s demands but stood firm on the overall requirement of 35 mpg, phased in over the next 13 years.

    “The agreement reached today prescribes standards that are both aggressive and attainable,” said Dingell. “We have achieved consensus on several provisions that provide critical environmental safeguards without jeopardizing American jobs.”

    Manufacturers currently have to meet a fleet average of 27.5 mpg for cars — a level that has not increased since 1989 — and 22 mpg for SUVs, passenger vans and pickups.

    Meanwhile it became increasingly likely — though not yet certain — that Democratic leaders will abandon attempts to repeal nearly $16 billion in tax breaks to the oil industry as had been approved by the House earlier this year.

    It remained unclear Friday whether some, more limited tax provisions aimed at ensuring extensions of tax credits and incentives for renewable fuels development would be included.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Aurora, Co
    Posts
    775
    About ****ing time they tried to catch up to the rest of the west...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    WHY are they taking 12 years for this to complete ?
    [rant]
    China, India etc were expected to move almost immediately to low pollution standards in the US objections to Kyoto. If the argument THEN was "no matter how expensive or restrictive it is to those nations we won't play unless they do" and Americans wonder why the world thinks so little of them.
    AND why only 35mpg ?
    Guess the Californians will make it stricter
    [/rant]
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Posts
    6,065
    Will there still be gas in 2020?
    "We went to Wnedy's. I had chicken nuggest." ~ Quiggs

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Southeast US
    Posts
    5,582
    Quote Originally Posted by johnnynumfiv View Post
    Will there still be gas in 2020?

    And beyond....there are new finds all the time.

    Massive deep-water oil find in Brazil challenges technology
    By Jack Chang | McClatchy Newspapers
    Posted on Saturday, December 1, 2007

    RIO DE JANEIRO, Brazil — This country, famed for its development of sugar-cane-produced ethanol, soon could become one of the world's great oil powers — if its state-controlled energy company, Petrobras, can tap a potentially massive deposit beneath the South Atlantic Ocean.

    Experts believe the deposit, in the Tupi field 180 miles off the southeastern Brazilian coast, holds up to 8 billion barrels of light oil and natural gas. If confirmed, the deposit would be the largest petroleum find in seven years and would propel Brazil to the No. 12 position in oil reserves, after the United States and ahead of Canada and Mexico.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    Quote Originally Posted by johnnynumfiv View Post
    Will there still be gas in 2020?
    At $100/barrel many more fields are viable.
    By the time 2020 arrives and oil is $1000/barrel then even more will be worth extracting The US might be charging $5/gall by then
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Goshen, IN
    Posts
    3,377
    Yes. We need this, however I kind of liked the idea of attribute-based CAFE Standards myself. However this will be good but now we will have to see Detroit's response. They have a history of sueing or just lobbying until they get it reduced because they like to whine that they don't have the technology to reach 35mpg but its bull and they would rather make money.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    USA, Colorado, Vallecito Lake
    Posts
    3,831
    Quote Originally Posted by Republicans
    "House Republicans have called the legislation a “non-energy bill” because, they said, it ignores any measures to promote domestic production of oil, natural gas or increased use of coal."
    I always knew the Republican Party likes to live in the stone age, but this is getting ridiculous. The methods that human's go to accumulate energy should be straying away from "oil, natural gas, coal." Its stubborn statements like that which get my hackles up.
    "Horsepower sells motor cars, but torque wins motor races."
    -Carrol Shelby

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Aurora, Co
    Posts
    775
    Well if the US created even a HALF decent public transit system they could cut their emissions ten fold. Problem with Americans is that they dont want to spend the money and they dont want to give up anything...

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mars
    Posts
    931
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    Well if the US created even a HALF decent public transit system they could cut their emissions ten fold. Problem with Americans is that they dont want to spend the money and they dont want to give up anything...
    Public transportation would be great but would you be willing to give up your car max?

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    brisbane - sub-tropical land of mangoes
    Posts
    16,251
    Quote Originally Posted by MRR View Post
    Public transportation would be great but would you be willing to give up your car max?
    you wouldn't have to. you'd just be able to use it less without inconveniencing yourself.
    there are times when taking public transport is actually far easier than driving.
    Andreas Preuninger, Manager of Porsche High Performance Cars: "Grandmas can use paddles. They aren't challenging."

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    True North
    Posts
    7,682
    Quote Originally Posted by MadMax13 View Post
    Well if the US created even a HALF decent public transit system they could cut their emissions ten fold. Problem with Americans is that they dont want to spend the money and they dont want to give up anything...
    Public transit isn't federal...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    95616
    Posts
    5,357
    Quote Originally Posted by MRR View Post
    Public transportation would be great but would you be willing to give up your car max?
    No, he just enjoys criticizing America. Just like Jeremy Clarkson.

    j/k man.
    I'm dropping out to create a company that starts with motorcycles, then cars, and forty years later signs a legendary Brazilian driver who has a public and expensive feud with his French teammate.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Gods Country, USA
    Posts
    1,546
    Quote Originally Posted by The_Canuck View Post
    Public transit isn't federal...
    well said canuck.

    personally i think the CAFE standards are silly. the free market should decide what kind of vehicles are built, not laws that hurt businesses. I think the market spoke quite strongly with the success of the prius, after toyota made it and it was a hit now GM and Ford are following suit releasing their own hybrids without a single law passed. It's obvious that was the way the market was heading.
    A woman goes to the doctor to figure out why she is having breathing problems...The doctor tells her she is overweight. She says she wants a second opinion...the doctor says, "your ugly".

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    nr Edinburgh, Whisky-soaked Scotland
    Posts
    27,775
    good point rooster.
    The free market should always prevail.
    So if someone has the money they should develop , build and delpoy nuclear weapons. Nobody should complain or try to stop it.
    Developing countries should be allowed to pollute as much as they want with no threats of trade embargos.
    Likewise on slavery. Drugs. Under-age sex. .... etc etc

    Thinking the Prius a "success" when it is 2/3 of the "good" that most Japanese/European modern cars achive and have done for years ?
    "A woman without curves is like a road without bends, you might get to your destination quicker but the ride is boring as hell'

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Top fuel dragster facts..
    By clutch-monkey in forum Miscellaneous
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 03-31-2010, 11:52 PM
  2. An alternative fuels artice from FoMoCo.
    By Quiggs in forum Miscellaneous
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-15-2006, 04:44 PM
  3. Solstice GXP to debut at the LA Autoshow
    By Peloton25 in forum General Automotive
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 01-06-2006, 09:15 PM
  4. Beware of posted fuel mileage claims.
    By Dino Scuderia in forum Miscellaneous
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 09-09-2005, 01:25 AM
  5. Supercar Engine Poll
    By Turbonutter55 in forum Technical forums
    Replies: 355
    Last Post: 01-23-2005, 08:53 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •