Federal Government Says 54.5 MPG Goal for 2025 Isn't Going to Happen

setting said goal was political theatrics anyways.  And now relaxing that is also theater, 'hey we are letting up our choke hold on you".  Still, 50 or 52.6 is kind of absurd too.

In the meantime, it's still good to have gradual mpg requirement changes.  Enough to help give a little bit of a boot to more hybrids etc......as long as that consumer burden is not overwhelming.  

and by gas futures... doesn't look like the pump is going to lighten our wallets more quickly very soon

50 is still pretty high, but at least more attainable than 54.5.

If they really want to cut fuel consumption a higher gas tax will do it.  CAFE is pretty pointless. 

Eh, a Cruze is quickly closing in on 30k. Might save money on gas, but the car payment is much bigger....

A good slap in the face for pie-in-the-sky weenies.

Yea, I bet even the 50 will be hard to meet without making everything go hybrid.

Considering where we started, 50 - 52mpg average is pretty amazing.

If carbon pricing were added to fuel, we'd probably even exceed the 54mpg mark. 

A good slap in the face for pie-in-the-sky weenies.

Considering that it is only a 4 mpg re-thinking...

Its still a victory for the "pie-in-the-sky weenies" rather than a slap in the face.

50-52.6 mpg is still a huuuuuuge number to attain. And if it is attained, Id say the "pie-in-the-sky weenies" have had their way....

Well, no $h!. 

 

A good slap in the face for pie-in-the-sky weenies.

Considering that it is only a 4 mpg re-thinking...

Its still a victory for the "pie-in-the-sky weenies" rather than a slap in the face.

 

50-52.6 mpg is still a huuuuuuge number to attain. And if it is attained, Id say the "pie-in-the-sky weenies" have had their way....

 

Gas Prices and SUVs are not working in the Weenies favor! They might just have to take it up the Asssssssssssssssssssssssss!

If I could remember the song that had that line I would post the youtube here but I am not good with that.

 

A good slap in the face for pie-in-the-sky weenies.

Considering that it is only a 4 mpg re-thinking...

Its still a victory for the "pie-in-the-sky weenies" rather than a slap in the face.

 

50-52.6 mpg is still a huuuuuuge number to attain. And if it is attained, Id say the "pie-in-the-sky weenies" have had their way....

 

The weenies (or should I say... vienna sausages) won't even hit 50 mpg.  They will be so sad and shriveled.  The pool is COLD, weenie bros.

i think part of the focus should be 'energy diversity'.

And by that, to me is accomplished right now with say, an E85 capable plug in.  Like a Volt that is E85 capable.

That way you can fuel your car with electricity, or gas that could include a shift back to renewables if those developed more.

That said, i am not a big ethanol fan normally, due to it's lower energy output compared to pure gas.  If ethanol can become more cost effective without relying so much on subsidy, ever, at least that the cars running around if E85 capable are set up for gas fuel diversity.

Gas Prices and SUVs are not working in the Weenies favor! They might just have to take it up the Asssssssssssssssssssssssss!

 

 

 

If I could remember the song that had that line I would post the youtube here but I am not good with that.

 

I wish I could lend you a hand and find that song for you, but alas, I may not know that song.

"Take your job a shove it" is as close as I could get.

The weenies (or should I say... vienna sausages) won't even hit 50 mpg.  They will be so sad and shriveled.  The pool is COLD, weenie bros.

 

 

 

The electric car revolution will probably help achieve this goal.

Many automakers are going full tilt in EVs...

VW is the latest to be thunderstruck.

PS: I like the metaphor!

i think part of the focus should be 'energy diversity'.

 

And by that, to me is accomplished right now with say, an E85 capable plug in.  Like a Volt that is E85 capable.

 

That way you can fuel your car with electricity, or gas that could include a shift back to renewables if those developed more.

 

That said, i am not a big ethanol fan normally, due to it's lower energy output compared to pure gas.  If ethanol can become more cost effective without relying so much on subsidy, ever, at least that the cars running around if E85 capable are set up for gas fuel diversity.

E85 was just poorly implemented by the manufacturers. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. There just isn't a huge advantage in putting 110 octane fuel in a low compression 220 HP V6 pushrod. Put the same fuel in a 220 HP 1.6t with the boost turned way up and see some real fuel savings.

Well I was outside all day, so certain parts of me are salty.  Since you asked. 

Well I was outside all day, so certain parts of me are salty.  Since you asked. 

So one big or small salt lick?

 

i think part of the focus should be 'energy diversity'.

 

And by that, to me is accomplished right now with say, an E85 capable plug in.  Like a Volt that is E85 capable.

 

That way you can fuel your car with electricity, or gas that could include a shift back to renewables if those developed more.

 

That said, i am not a big ethanol fan normally, due to it's lower energy output compared to pure gas.  If ethanol can become more cost effective without relying so much on subsidy, ever, at least that the cars running around if E85 capable are set up for gas fuel diversity.

E85 was just poorly implemented by the manufacturers. There is nothing inherently wrong with it. There just isn't a huge advantage in putting 110 octane fuel in a low compression 220 HP V6 pushrod. Put the same fuel in a 220 HP 1.6t with the boost turned way up and see some real fuel savings.

 

This. The problem with ethanol is that cars aren't tuned to run it with it's true optimization in mind.

There is nothing beneficial to government intervention in any market or industry. This is born out in every record-able metric in the past 50 years. The government is the lowest common denominator and the least cost effective means to an end. Look no further than displacement taxes that encourage turbocharging 1.0L-1.5L motors despite the lack of any real world benefit vs equally advanced N/A engines. People making laws dictating OUR lives know LESS about cars than we do on this forum.

Free market business works the best when innovation is determined by the MARKET, by supply and demand, and by competition. Instead we have $20,000 sub-compact "economy" cars with 10 standard airbags ($1,000+ to repair each one that goes off in an accident) and expensive small displacement, turbocharged, direct-injection engines to meet ever increasing government regulations.

Ethanol fuel is a goddamn sham. Look what its done to the agricultural industry when the world is producing more oil reserves than ever, with new oil extraction methods broadening our oil supply beyond anything we imagined. E85 is also nowhere near as efficient as pure gasoline in any vehicle that offers ethanol compatibility. It's another government subsidized mistake taking billions of dollars from the taxpayers and causing increased cost of food and produce while DECREASING our fuel economy.

There is nothing beneficial to government intervention in any market or industry. This is born out in every record-able metric in the past 50 years. The government is the lowest common denominator and the least cost effective means to an end. Look no further than displacement taxes that encourage turbocharging 1.0L-1.5L motors despite the lack of any real world benefit vs equally advanced N/A engines. People making laws dictating OUR lives know LESS about cars than we do on this forum.

 

Free market business works the best when innovation is determined by the MARKET, by supply and demand, and by competition. Instead we have $20,000 sub-compact "economy" cars with 10 standard airbags ($1,000+ to repair each one that goes off in an accident) and expensive small displacement, turbocharged, direct-injection engines to meet ever increasing government regulations.

 

Ethanol fuel is a goddamn sham. Look what its done to the agricultural industry when the world is producing more oil reserves than ever, with new oil extraction methods broadening our oil supply beyond anything we imagined. E85 is also nowhere near as efficient as pure gasoline in any vehicle that offers ethanol compatibility. It's another government subsidized mistake taking billions of dollars from the taxpayers and causing increased cost of food and produce while DECREASING our fuel economy.

FOR TRUTH 

There is nothing beneficial to government intervention in any market or industry. This is born out in every record-able metric in the past 50 years. The government is the lowest common denominator and the least cost effective means to an end. Look no further than displacement taxes that encourage turbocharging 1.0L-1.5L motors despite the lack of any real world benefit vs equally advanced N/A engines. People making laws dictating OUR lives know LESS about cars than we do on this forum.

 

Free market business works the best when innovation is determined by the MARKET, by supply and demand, and by competition. Instead we have $20,000 sub-compact "economy" cars with 10 standard airbags ($1,000+ to repair each one that goes off in an accident) and expensive small displacement, turbocharged, direct-injection engines to meet ever increasing government regulations.

 

Ethanol fuel is a goddamn sham. Look what its done to the agricultural industry when the world is producing more oil reserves than ever, with new oil extraction methods broadening our oil supply beyond anything we imagined. E85 is also nowhere near as efficient as pure gasoline in any vehicle that offers ethanol compatibility. It's another government subsidized mistake taking billions of dollars from the taxpayers and causing increased cost of food and produce while DECREASING our fuel economy.

Not touching the political points of what you posted, but your technical points on E85 are incorrect or missing the point. If you tried to run peanut oil fuel through your gasoline engine you'd get less than ideal fuel economy also.  E85 is a great fuel when it is put in engines it is designed for as the primary fuel.   In Brazil they use sugar alcohol, essentially E100, in their cars. I don't know what the octane is, but it's gotta be over the 110 that E85 is here. The little 1.0 liter Chevy compacts run around with compression ratios equal to that in the V10 in the old M5 (basically, pretty darn high by industry standards). 

 

There is nothing beneficial to government intervention in any market or industry. This is born out in every record-able metric in the past 50 years. The government is the lowest common denominator and the least cost effective means to an end. Look no further than displacement taxes that encourage turbocharging 1.0L-1.5L motors despite the lack of any real world benefit vs equally advanced N/A engines. People making laws dictating OUR lives know LESS about cars than we do on this forum.

 

Free market business works the best when innovation is determined by the MARKET, by supply and demand, and by competition. Instead we have $20,000 sub-compact "economy" cars with 10 standard airbags ($1,000+ to repair each one that goes off in an accident) and expensive small displacement, turbocharged, direct-injection engines to meet ever increasing government regulations.

 

Ethanol fuel is a goddamn sham. Look what its done to the agricultural industry when the world is producing more oil reserves than ever, with new oil extraction methods broadening our oil supply beyond anything we imagined. E85 is also nowhere near as efficient as pure gasoline in any vehicle that offers ethanol compatibility. It's another government subsidized mistake taking billions of dollars from the taxpayers and causing increased cost of food and produce while DECREASING our fuel economy.

 

 

Not touching the political points of what you posted, but your technical points on E85 are incorrect or missing the point. If you tried to run peanut oil fuel through your gasoline engine you'd get less than ideal fuel economy also.  E85 is a great fuel when it is put in engines it is designed for as the primary fuel.   In Brazil they use sugar alcohol, essentially E100, in their cars. I don't know what the octane is, but it's gotta be over the 110 that E85 is here. The little 1.0 liter Chevy compacts run around with compression ratios equal to that in the V10 in the old M5 (basically, pretty darn high by industry standards). 

 

The loss of fuel economy and the political ramifications are unavoidable. We're forced to have that E15 blend in our gas for our cars engineered to run best on pure gasoline. This is the crux of the subsidized ethanol scam. I see no US automakers developing engines to run E85 or E100 in a way that compares to pure gasoline.

But that's beside the point because our agricultural infrastructure cannot support corn production in a way that will replace gasoline in a significant manner without, again, wreaking havoc on food and produce costs. Meanwhile, we're at a point that so much agricultural production has adjusted for government ethanol subsidies and fuel supply, that we literally cannot stop what they've started without bursting the agricultural economic bubble.

Is there a pattern here?

Government gets involved in housing loans in the 90s - housing bubble.

Government subsidizes interest free college loans - tuition skyrockets (pesky supply and demand), college loan bubble balloons to a trillion dollars in bad debt.

Government subsidizes medical care - hospital/doctor costs shoot astronomically high, $20 for an aspirin, $1000 for overnight stay

Government "corrects" medical cost problem with universal healthcare - insurance rockets premiums and deductibles (simple risk/benefit economics)

Government subsidizes ethanol based on bad science - agricultural bubble (more like a house of cards)

BIG GUB'MENT BAD

That's because the USA half-asses everything and their government decisions reflect that half-assedness.

Which is weird because the American people have more than enough ass to go around. 

 

BIG GUB'MENT BAD

 

That's because the USA half-asses everything and their government decisions reflect that half-assedness.

 

Which is weird because the American people have more than enough ass to go around. 

 

Has zero to do with "half-assing" anything. Increased government control is universally the least efficient way of accomplishing anything.

That was a weird goal, I mean they basically gave less than 15 years to more than double the efficiency of the corporate fleets

That being said....there's better ways to making our countries (Canada and U.S.) more fuel efficient, and it usually revolves around the incentives and disincentives of car ownership in general. But they would hurt the economy in their own ways.

Better public transit, like in the NorthWest U.S. (I'd say Toronto too, but it's a crap shoot for such a large city) can do wonders for clogged cities. But might remove cars off the road that would have otherwise been purchased whether new or used.

Placing tolls not on roads but to enter the core of the city might be better too.

And big government....well, I have certain beliefs, and most of them ain't good about big gov't.

True big gov has always caused countries to fail. Just look at Greece and so many other socialist places where they are bankrupt or about to become.

True big gov has always caused countries to fail. Just look at Greece and so many other socialist places where they are bankrupt or about to become.

Greece....

It aint big government that failed Greece...(it did not help)

Greece...as rich as Ancient Greece is in folklore, myths, stories and history...modern Greece has as many reasons why it failed...

One does not even have to include the 375 years of enslavement that Greece was under the Ottoman Empire to have that many reasons.

 

 

There is nothing beneficial to government intervention in any market or industry. This is born out in every record-able metric in the past 50 years. The government is the lowest common denominator and the least cost effective means to an end. Look no further than displacement taxes that encourage turbocharging 1.0L-1.5L motors despite the lack of any real world benefit vs equally advanced N/A engines. People making laws dictating OUR lives know LESS about cars than we do on this forum.

 

Free market business works the best when innovation is determined by the MARKET, by supply and demand, and by competition. Instead we have $20,000 sub-compact "economy" cars with 10 standard airbags ($1,000+ to repair each one that goes off in an accident) and expensive small displacement, turbocharged, direct-injection engines to meet ever increasing government regulations.

 

Ethanol fuel is a goddamn sham. Look what its done to the agricultural industry when the world is producing more oil reserves than ever, with new oil extraction methods broadening our oil supply beyond anything we imagined. E85 is also nowhere near as efficient as pure gasoline in any vehicle that offers ethanol compatibility. It's another government subsidized mistake taking billions of dollars from the taxpayers and causing increased cost of food and produce while DECREASING our fuel economy.

 

 

Not touching the political points of what you posted, but your technical points on E85 are incorrect or missing the point. If you tried to run peanut oil fuel through your gasoline engine you'd get less than ideal fuel economy also.  E85 is a great fuel when it is put in engines it is designed for as the primary fuel.   In Brazil they use sugar alcohol, essentially E100, in their cars. I don't know what the octane is, but it's gotta be over the 110 that E85 is here. The little 1.0 liter Chevy compacts run around with compression ratios equal to that in the V10 in the old M5 (basically, pretty darn high by industry standards). 

 

 

The loss of fuel economy and the political ramifications are unavoidable. We're forced to have that E15 blend in our gas for our cars engineered to run best on pure gasoline. This is the crux of the subsidized ethanol scam. I see no US automakers developing engines to run E85 or E100 in a way that compares to pure gasoline.

 

But that's beside the point because our agricultural infrastructure cannot support corn production in a way that will replace gasoline in a significant manner without, again, wreaking havoc on food and produce costs. Meanwhile, we're at a point that so much agricultural production has adjusted for government ethanol subsidies and fuel supply, that we literally cannot stop what they've started without bursting the agricultural economic bubble.

Again, for the 3rd time, the failure of E85 has nothing to do with the fuel itself and everything to do with the way it was implemented.  Whether you see it or not, is irrelevant. Any manufacturer that participates in the Brazilian market makes an engine variant the runs on E100. 

There will not be a substantial fuel economy benefit running E85 in an engine designed for gasoline. I fully admit that. However, what E85 allows is for a substantial downsizing of displacement without sacrifice in total output.  Lets take the old 3.9 liter Chevrolet Impala that was E85 capable. It was rated for 230 hp and 235 lb-ft of torque.  It was rated at 17 city / 27 highway on gasoline and 13 / 20 on E85. That's a pretty large drop.    But what if GM had built an Impala to run on E85 first and gasoline second?  To get to that 230hp/235tq target they could have greatly downsized the engine.  Instead of 3.9 liters, the high octane level of E85 would have allowed them to run as small as 1.6 liter turbo with the boost turned way up. I say 1.6T because GM can get 200hp out of one of these on standard pump gas today, getting another 30hp out of it by using 110 octane fuel is trivial. You'd still get all the torque of the big V6 but in the smaller, lighter, and less fuel sucking package of a 1.6T. Get that car out on the highway, and the fuel economy numbers would likely be in the mid-30 rather than high-20s.  THAT is where you get the benefits of E85. All of these Ecoboosts and other DI Turbos running around could have been even smaller and still have the same performance, or remain the same size and get even better performance, had they been tuned from the start to run E85 first. It's it the government's fault that GM took the lazy route?

As for producing the fuel... it doesn't have to come from corn, Brazil uses sugar cane.  Alge and kelp farms off the coast of our ample coastline would have spawned a whole new industry.  Logging industry waste, grass clippings, corn husks, brewery waste, sugar beets, switch grass, and many many other sources are usable to make E85.