Skip to comments.U.S. Eyeing 56.2 MPG Cars By 2025
Posted on 06/26/2011 8:19:18 AM PDT by Pontiac
The Obama administration is considering a fleetwide average of 56.2 miles per gallon for all new cars and trucks sold in the U.S. by 2025, two people briefed on the matter said. The proposal would roughly double current fuel-economy targets, and would likely raise the price of some cars by several thousand dollars. The proposal isn't final, and could be adjusted over the next several weeks as regulators prepare a formal draft to send to White House budget officials. The administration has said previously that it is looking at requiring cars average between 47 and 62 mpg by 2025. The fuel-mileage targets would be accompanied by stringent rules to reduce vehicle emissions of greenhouse gases. Environmental groups and the state of California have pressed for the 62 mpg target or something close to that, while the industry has lobbied for a target on the lower end of the administration's range. The targets for 2025 would build on the administration's requirement that autos average 35.5 mpg by 2016. U.S. officials are expected to release their final numbers for 2017-2025 in September.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Why not 56.3? Seriously, go for broke!
and WE THE PUBLIC are supposed to think fuel will be the same price as today
Obozo can demand crap like this all he wants. It’s doable with batteries and electric motors but like the dolt, it won’t be a
I do wonder if the VW TDI engine will pass the air standards test, it does choke 50+ mpg out of a gallon of diesel.
Just end all this insanity in November, 2012.
Great now i can pay 100k for a focus......
I say nothing less than 57.3 MPG.
These people aren’t going for it like they say they are.
They believe that Unicorns and Pixie Dust
This Administration operates on Magical Thinking.
can repeal Newton's Laws of Physics.
They believe that Unicorns and Pixie Dust
I think that O’s approach copies that of Captain Picard or the Enterprise: “Make it so.”
Yes, these morons need to go and everything they have done needs to be undone. Everything.
The market will demand that gas mileage improve, but Obama will take credit.
I think that is their intent. Seriously!
These socialist think that we in the US have had it too good for too long. Their ideology demands equality above all. They intend to break this country to bring us down to the level of the Third World.
They want to bring our countrys economy down by destroying our major industries that make up the basis of our country.
If they are not doing it intentionally it really doesnt matter. It only means that they are too stupid to govern and should be deposed at the first opportunity.
I find decimal points confusing. So to simplify things, the government should mandate 562 MPG.
It requires no work or money or laws from the government. But Obama would like to take credit for it anyway.
Problem is, there won’t be any electricity generated by the Regime (Electricity rates will necessarily skyrocket...)...We will freeze to death and that will solve “the problem”...
Messiah Obama Speaketh. Make it so!
A horse and mule uses no gasoline. I’d say we’d be going back to those except we’ll probably eat the first one we see.
I shut off the engine when coasting downhill.
In other news, the Obama administration is drafting legislation that makes shark attacks illegal.
An anonymous source close to the President said, “without this legislation countless individuals will be attacked by sharks. We must act quickly to prevent any future shark attacks.”
If the initiative is successful, sources say they will use the same approach to solve the growing tornado problem. The same source said, “As we all know, tornados have become more frequent because of global warming. If we don’t do something about them, citizens will continue to feel an economic and emotional toll.”
In all seriousness, this is so stupid. Will they consider the energy cost associated with plugging into the wall? The only way we get 50+ mpg for cars AND TRUCKS is to supplement the combustion engine with electrical power in order to mask the true energy costs.
Even my socialist, “environmentalist” (really anti business), father thinks that electric cars are stupid. He brought it up 2 weeks ago while we were fishing. He can’t understand why people think that electric means no environmental impact.
Only if Obama succeeds in destroying the free market for oil based fuels.
If the world continues to search for new oil field there will be plenty of oil to fuel what ever cars the market wants.
Personally I do not believe that the general populace wants the kind of car that would be necessary to achieve that kind of fuel economy. It would need to be basically a enclosed motorcycle that does 0 to 60 mph in 12+ seconds.
I wonder how many bong hits it took to come up with that number? Lunacy.
/s, as if...
If gas is a lot higher than today, then 50 mpg cars will be very popular.
Because it is not really about the environment at all. It is about socialism vs. capitalism.
By gaining control of energy through the limits on carbon emissions they gain control of the economy.
These people have not given up on the carbon credits trading scheme.
The Left uses guerilla tactics in politics. They failed in instituting carbon credits trading by one method so they will achieve it by incrementalism. This is a small step in achieving the end goal.
These Leftist have a very tenuous grip on reality. Socialism means never having to let reality interfere with your plans.
It’s not considered an automobile by federal standards unless it has at least a solar panel! ; )
I cant figure out what the lower left quadrant is.
Hammer bashing a GOP elephant? Hopefully, there will be a prize for the best guess.
What it would require is fuel prices much higher than today.
Fuel prices high enough to get consumers to demand fuel economy that high would require either very high taxes on fuel, much higher demand for fuel from a much wealthier world consumer population to the point were supply could not meet demand (I think that such a over demand could only be temporary in a free market) or an artificial restriction on the supply of fuel.
I see the first and the last being the most likely (if not both) being favored in a socialist society that Obama and his like minded socialist will create.
Personally I do not believe that the general populace wants the kind of car that would be necessary to achieve that kind of fuel economy.
I bought a VW Jetta diesel and it gets a good, honest 40 mpg. However, I despise the car. Its too small. If theyd put a bench seat into it and ditched the fighter plane cockpit design, it would at least be comfortable for long trips. I bought this after trying the new European Ford, the name of which escapes me now. I had a virtual panic attack the back seat as my feet were locked under the drivers seat and I couldnt move to get out. I had to untrap my feet with my hands. I immediately went and bought the VW, which was spacious by comparison.
As to why there arent more diesels the VW salesman told me that each of the 50 states had its own legislation governing diesel cars that VW would have to qualify for 50 times. If VW just imports a handful of cars then they dont have to go through the various qualifications. In Europe, diesel is more popular than gas and you can get almost any car with a diesel engine.
I bought the sport wagen (sic) which has a big hatch on the back. The regular cars truck was too small for a large cooler. When I travel, I used to take some of my lawn equipment to help out my relatives. I cant do that in this tiny thing.
“A horse and mule uses no gasoline.”
One can always go Amish.
Think of the jobs created. Buggy whip makers. Horse poop collectors. Horse Grooming. Blacksmiths. Makers of Amish-style hats. The list goes on.
A high school friend had one.
I could never feel comfortable in that car. Having the windshield about 3 inches from my nose made me nervous.
But of course in our northern Ohio winters having an old VW with the hot air ducts rusted out meant it was the passengers job to keep the windshield scraped clean of frost so being close to the windshield did have a certain advantage.
Drove it everywhere until they raised the speed limit to 65 mph.
It would cruise 70mph but the flow on the freeway jump to 85mph when the limit was raised.
This is a bunch of bs...the automakers already know how vaporization technology can get over 100 mpg’s and have for sometime now. Maybe Obama does not know that...I the auto makers are too tied at the hip with the oil companies to decrease their profits by at least 3x. Charles Pogue in Canada actually got 205 mpg’s in a large sedan...the oil stock dropped at verified news of that...was in the 30’s. THey took care of him...made him a millionaire and shelved the product. Before anyone cries conspiracy nut...do some research first!
The reality is that it will force the auto makers to sell more cars that no one wants which means selling them at a loss or with huge government subsidies.
Cars that can get that mileage that high will be tiny little boxes; essentially fully enclosed motorcycles.
The cars will be death traps and another drain on the public coffers because they will be very expensive to produce for what they offer the consumer and the government will have to subsidies them to make them sellable just like the Volt.
One thing that such a car will not be is a highbred. A car that gets that kind of mileage will not be dragging around a heavy battery. As you say the Obama administration has not repealed the laws of physics (yet).
Scottie correctly stated “I canna change the Laws of Physics”
drilling and using OUR OWN DAMN OIL is what is and will be popular ......... anyday
They want to force us all onto their "public transportation" systems where Eric Holder's people can have access to us and give us our just desserts.
If they actually succeeded in doing this I think the general public would change their mind about the constitutionality of concealed carry of firearms.
And of course if the general population changed their mind the Dims would suddenly have always been in favor of CCW.