President Barack Obama has proposed tough new rules for vehicle emissions, which could see a 30 per cent reduction in individual passenger car emissions by 2016. Obama_CAFE Obama and friends unveil CAFE from the White House Rose Garden The new Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards also decree that car manufacturers …
Emissions, or consumption?
If the standard is for emissions, that would rule out plug in electric cars, since the electricity requirement would boost emissions at the power station enormously. If whoever it is simply mpg at the vehicle, then everything would be roses. Except of course at the power station...
Most people are unaware of the minsicule 16oz pint in the US.
In books they go on about a 'quart' of wine but that's about a litre.
Gallons are tiny.
Uh-oh.... Jaguar are suddenly looking pretty much fucked.
Re: Emissions, or consumption?
Don't be daft, no electric car does worse than the equivalent of 50 mpg, their energy storage capacity alone pretty much forces a small efficient design.
Even using conventional gas or coal power stations to power EVs can reduce emissions compared to running on petrol (they're about 40% efficient, petrol engines can make it up to this level only in ideal conditions and at constant RPM cruising. Stuck in a jam or driving around town and petrol is at a vast disadvantage). CHP power stations (where waste heat is used by local businesses and/or houses) can hit 80% or more efficiency and carbon capture is possible with large fixed plant like this.
For the sanity of readers who have a clue, please please please state mpg (imperial) or mpg (US) in the article - defining your units at the end of the article is more than a bit silly.
Re: Emissions, or consumption?
how to solve a big problem split it into 2 small ones
1. make good electric cars
2. make clean/green power plants
There goes any chance I'll be buying a new vehicle in this lifetime. I actually haul equipment so a pregnant skateboard is worthless.
Mine's the one truck keys in the pocket.
Even my MR2 can do that!
What do American cars do with all that fuel, piss it out on the road? Even if we stopped all cars in the UK tomorrow it would be a drop in the ocean compared to US CO2 emissions. They seem to drive less efficient cars and drive them more (I've only seen Americans drive from one end of the car park to another!).
Mind you, even that's nothing compared to deforestation of the rain forest.....
Wrong on so many levels...
It may improve in the future, but when you look at the numbers leccy cars are actually much worst for the environment (same or more emission of pollutants per km -yes, km, let's use real units will you?-, plus lottsa very nasty chemical in the batteries. Oh, and throw in all these high-voltage power lines too). And emissions from cars are, how to put it, not precisely the biggest source of pollution (even in the US). I guess the other sources are, erm, "too big to bother" or sumfin.
Hey, you gotta keep the sheeple busy I suppose. From this point of view, I have to admit that this kind of hot air is better than invading other countries...
No doubt people will bleat on how power stations are needed for leccy cars, and these stations spew out carbon.
Carbon is just an excuse, leccy cars get the pollution out of the urban areas and move it to whatever FSMforsaken place the power station occupies. A cleaner urban environment is a good thing.
My ten-year-old Ford Escort wagon already gets a fuel economy within 10% of the 2016 requirements, so this announcement seems like small beer... so long as most people drive small cars. It should (hopefully) pretty much kill off obscenities like the Hummer, though.
UK or US gallons?
Is that 51 miles per US gallon (14 miles/litre, 11.4 litres/100km)
or 51 miles per UK gallon (11.3 miles/litre, 14.1 litres/100km)
(I think my maths is right)
The good old days
I used to like those old articles on El Reg, written by economists, saying how cutting emissions would stuff the economy. Now it seems economists have stuffed the economy themselves so we may as well cut emissions it seems.
apples and cranberries
How does these standards compare to (a) EU standards and (b) the rest of the world's cars?
I can't tell how much contempt to allocate to the whining of US carmakers and right libertarians.
You wonder how they only get 43mpg? Here's how:
"The most popular type is the Family Sedan ... Six-cylinder engines are the norm, but smaller sedans might have four-cylinder power and larger ones a V8"
I'll add that they almost always mate that six-cylinder to an automatic transmission, which conveniently absorbs most of that power.
Many of their engines are also technologically challenged; 2 valves per cylinder is common, as is fixed valve timing, and ohv. In many ways they're using a scaled up version of our engine technology from 25 years ago.
When I was last over there I took a Ford Mustang for a test drive. I was really impressed when I turned the engine over and the whole vehicle twisted with the torque. Sadly in use it was rather similar to driving a 1.6 Focus with the steering disconnected ;)
They do also use a different gallon to us...
- Product round-up Ten excellent FREE PC apps to brighten your Windows
- Hi-torque tank engines: EXTREME car hacking with The Register
- Review What's MISSING on Amazon Fire Phone... and why it WON'T set the world alight
- Product round-up Trousers down for six of the best affordable Androids
- Why did it take antivirus giants YEARS to drill into super-scary Regin? Symantec responds...