Obama unveils new national fuel efficiency policy, 35.5mpg by 2016

 

Because vehicles emit carbon dioxide any time they burn fuel, the new rules essentially amount to a mileage standard

Because vehicles emit carbon dioxide any time they burn fuel, the new rules essentially amount to a mileage standard

Enlarge Photo
Carmakers are already fretting at the thought of achieving the new 35mpg CAFE standards imposed by the U.S. government by the current 2020 deadline, but an announcement by President Barack Obama today revealed the plan to get the standard up to 35.5mpg by 2016. The plan requires a gain of over 5% per year, matching a standard imposed by California and several other states and thus ending chances of a patchwork of different standards for the U.S.

The deal fulfills a campaign promise by Obama to allow California’s tougher emissions standard to be enacted. Up to 17 other states were expected to implement the same standards but today's announcement ties all states to a single, coherent standard.

"In the past, an agreement such as this would have been considered impossible," said Obama. "That is why this announcement is so important, for it represents not only a change in policy in Washington, but the harbinger of a change in the way business is done in Washington. As a result of this agreement, we will save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles sold in the next five years. And at a time of historic crisis in our auto industry, this rule provides the clear certainty that will allow these companies to plan for a future in which they are building the cars of the 21st century."

Administration officials portray the decision as one that unites the industry and the government with a result that is beneficial to all parties, and the environment. Widespread announcements of support from union and industry leaders on Monday backed up with statement with action, and now all that is left is to get to the business of improving fuel efficiency.

"GM and the auto industry benefit by having more consistency and certainty to guide our product plans," said GM CEO Fritz Henderson in a statement. Toyota also praised the national plan. "We welcome the Administration’s leadership in developing a coordinated fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas standard. This is something we have encouraged and sought for a very long time," said Jim Lentz, president of Toyota Motor Sales, USA.

Ford's Alan Mulally echoed that sentiment, saying, "The framework of the national program will give us greater clarity, certainty and flexibility to achieve the nation’s goals. We will continue to work with the federal agencies to finalize the standards that we are committed to meeting."

Even with the coherent standard, the expenses won't be miniscule. The new plan means that the industry as a whole must meet a 35.5mpg average for both passenger vehicles and light trucks, up 8mpg from today's requirements. Cars will have to hit 42mpg, while trucks will be targeting 27mpg. The new standards cover cars built between the 2012 and 2016 model years. Dovetailing with the mpg requirements is a CO2 target of 250g per mile by 2016 and a linear ramp-up to that figure.

The savings this could represent for the economy is up to 1.8 billion barrels of oil over 5 years, or the same as taking about 58 million cars off the roads. As part of the agreement to a single national standard, the state lawsuits seeking ability to enact tougher-than-federal standards will be dropped. About 900 million metric tons of of green house gas emissions will be prevented.

Consumers will benefit directly as well, saving on average $2,800 in fuel costs over the life of their vehicles. The costs to buy the cars - which will by necessity be more expensive than current cars - will be recouped within three years, according to the Obama administration, though what figure they're using for fuel prices isn't disclosed.

The next challenge will be overcoming the technological and financial hurdles involved in making cars dramatically more fuel efficient with each passing year.



 
Follow Us

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

  • Posting indicates you have read this site's Privacy Policy and Terms of Use
  • Notify me when there are more comments
Comments (18)
  1. Like he is trying to kill the auto comapnies
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  2. Now this is getting me concerned - is this the end of all things great?! Will we be forced to go backwards and have nothing more than humble, cramped, flimsy econobox appliances with no more than buzzy 3 and 4 bangers that can't get out of their own way? This would be something that would shame, and you would apologize for rather than want and desire, and be proud of and feel safe in.

    This would undo all that's developed and evolved over the decades, and I agree with GM soon to be retiring executive "Maximum" Bob Lutz and his views:

    • Forcing Americans/consumers into smaller vehicles is like giving them smaller-sized clothes and saying, "here, go on a diet".

    • It won't sit too well with a luxury-car buyer if he can't get anything larger than an Aveo.

    • If you want less CO2 emissions, breathe less times per minute.

    and the coup d'grace:

    • Global warming is a crock of s#*t.

    The only thing I have against Democrats is the left-wing tree-hugger attitude with some, I don't support, agree or respect it at all. If hippie/envirOnmentalist/tree-huggers had their way, we'd all be living like the Amish! Then you got the hi-profile environmentalist phonies that go to a rally or a meeting in a Prius, but go home to stately mansion with large SUV's, large luxury sedans and hi-end sports-cars in the garage and driveway.

    Lastly, I doubt that the president would give up his lavish and elaborate custom Cadillac presidential limo for an Aveo.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  3. I think you are greatly exaggerating the situation Michael D. There will be changes but not severe as what you paint. Europeans have been building large, luxury cars with 35mpg-plus for years.

    You are also forgetting that the 35mpg by 2016 is a fleet average. A carmaker can still have the big performance models – it just needs to sell more compacts and all-electric models (these have theoretical MPG ratings of 200mpg-plus) to balance out the averages.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  4. I would tend to agree with Micheal as such a move does put the U.S. auto industry in a huge bind financially, not that their already in one. What great wisdom Obama has, here guys have some of my citizens hard earned cash so that you can catch up to the ever moving yard stick you'll never reach, Moron!!!


    Also the left put him in power as George kept bombing the Middle East and rumor has it that was hurting America's image in that region of the world? Just wait and see how friendly they are when we stop buying their oil in six very short years!!! Any guesses as to how soon OPEC will start to raise prices to gouge the market before it dries up?

    I'm sorry but 35mpg as a fleet average is just not possible financially from the domestics and quite frankly you'll see that the imports will struggle to hit such targets too. At so of a dead line soon!


    I also fail to see how 300 million Americans living eco-friendly are going to save the planet when you've got 2 plus billion people in India and China that firstly don't give a shit and secondly dont even know as their governments dont give a shit. Then again if Obama and the Prius owners of the world can sleep well at night thinking that their saving the apparently troubled Mother Earth, then it must be a good thing!!!!!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  5. 35 mpg by 2016 won't be the end of the world. In fact that requirement still trails the requirement for other major markets:

    China ---- 43 mpg ---- (2008)
    EU ------- 47 mpg ---- (2012)
    Japan --- 35.5 mpg -- (2010)

    300 million American using less energy won't save the planet. It will improve our security by making the US less dependent on foreign governments to run our economy.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  6. An easy alternative for most vehicles would be diesel. Unfortunately, the US market doesn't want to buy in. I would say this is fine any other time, but these companies need all the time they can get to fulfill these standards. You think Chrysler and GM are going to be putting most of their cash towards that? And same for Ford, they're trying to become profitable by 2011. That leaves 5 years to kick out a heap of hybrids and Fiestas. I know that's not exactly how it works but lets get out of the woods with this current issue first.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  7. Further proof that the left has their head firmly placed up their arse.

    http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1033233_camaro-too-popular-for-gms-own-good

    They (GM) come up with a profitable product whose profits could be used for such technologies as mentioned above plus pay back the loan I/we gave them. But instead lets put them down and say its a bad thing.

    I'd like to start a new movement and that's a push for potential parents of politicians to use birth control. Now ofcourse this is all a bit Clock Work Orange and reading into the future of DNA but then again control is what "they" want, no?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  8. I don't mind if econoboxes are added in addition to the line-up to bring up the average, but I don't want to see anything large and powerful with higher cylinder counts sacrificed as a result of this.

    I have no peeves with addition of Diesels and Hybrids, too, Diesels have excellent torque for launch and a Hybrid can act as a power-booster as well as a fuel-saving attribute. I also support all types of applies technologies along with Hybrid, such as Multi-Displacement/cylinder-cutoff, D.I., Start/stop, K.E.R.S. (on the higher end performance vehicles), extra transmission speeds and CVTs, Turbocharging, active areadynamics, and others I may have left out. I could also include plug-in/series Hybrids and electrics such as the Tesla and the Fisker - Kudos to both for their efforts!!

    I still want the cars we are proud of such as large luxury sedans, muscle and GT cars, Large SUVs and crossovers, with the sweet powerplants such as Hemi's, LS's, Fords upcoming Boss & Coyote (their EcoBoost V6 is sweet, too) and the high-end imports with the V8s to V12's - please don't take this all away!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  9. I still don't think that goes far enough, buy 2016 there is no good reason why most vehicles couldn't get 50 mpg, with good performance.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  10. For heaven's sake, welcome to the world America. If you are proud of proud of "large luxury sedans, muscle and GT cars, Large SUVs and crossovers, with the sweet powerplants" it shows how seriously distorted your car market is, and how twisted your perceptions of cars are. The entire rest of the planet tends to see such vehicles as jokes. There is nothing particular to America's geography or people to require such vehicles to be the norm, besides a weird ignorance of the rest of the world. Hopefully this law will change the landscape and bring more choice.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  11. For heaven's sake, welcome to the world America. If you are proud of proud of "large luxury sedans, muscle and GT cars, Large SUVs and crossovers, with the sweet powerplants" it shows how seriously distorted your car market is, and how twisted your perceptions of cars are. The entire rest of the planet tends to see such vehicles as jokes. There is nothing particular to America's geography or people to require such vehicles to be the norm, besides a weird ignorance of the rest of the world. Hopefully this law will change the landscape and bring more choice.

    The rest of the world does have great large luxury sedans, muscle and GT cars, Large SUVs and crossovers, too, and even outshining the USA products, all the way up to Rolls-Royces, Bentleys, Maybachs, Land Rovers, Jaguars, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, etc. I support more choice, but, I don't want to lose the great rides that we all marvel at and admire!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  12. Mitzo- When you think luxo barges, supercars and roads with high to no speed limits which continent do you think of?

    For me its Europe and that quite frankly is no worse or better than an SUV!!! Let me guess your house has a lot of glass?
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  13. In Europe and mostly elsewhere, you do not see roads filled with Escalade and F150 type vehicles at all, and the luxury sedan market is a relatively small part of the overall mix. I only hope these new North American regulations apply to trucks as well as passenger cars. Let's bring in more choice as soon as possible.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  14. If you think this is a negative policy or if you think this will somehow hurt the US auto industry you are mistaken. The technology to make cars and trucks more fuel efficient has been around for a long time. Now its time to put our technology to use. This will create jobs, demand for new materials and resources and help our nation. There is literally no downside, unless you are an oil company!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  15. I fail to see the problem when a society gives its residents the choice to drive what they "freely" decide to. Now ofcourse these same folks can also do their own thinking and fully understand that the dinosaurs did not die out because their SUV's were to big.

    If folks want an F150 they also probably need an F150! My last two vehicles were F150's and they fit my needs perfectly.

    Most people tend to only look around themselves and so always assume that if a Fiat Panda fits their needs then it should also fit everyone else's needs too. America is a vast place, parts of the country have populated weather conditions like no where else on the planet and there is tons of opportunity to make money and purchase items/toys you never would back home in the old country. Growing up in the U.K. we always had Mini's, nine to be exact, the largest car we ever owned in the U.K. was a Maestro. Yet once on these shore small cars just did not meet the family lifestyle that had changed due to the above mentioned greater opportunity that exists in the U.S.

    Yes there are folks who could live perfectly well with a Fiat Panda but there are those who need F150's and Escalade's. Until you live here and experience it for yourself you'll never understand. A prime example is the American motorcycle market. Unlike the rest of the world where bikes are bought as a primary mode of transport here in the U.S. they are really bought as toys or a hobby if you will. So therefore these toys also spend quite a bit of time being towed somewhere, as when you go on vacation you take your toys with you. I'll give you two guesses as to what type of vehichles tow these toys and its not made by Fiat! If you ever do make it to these shores go sit on Rt. 95 south around February and watch how people get their bikes to Daytona Bike Week or Rt. 5 in August to see how the west coast takes their toys on vacation. Its a sobering experience if your out to save the proverbial tree frogg and should open your eyes somewhat to the American experience. Dont forget it still is a land of opportunity and a place where such words as "no" just do not exist.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  16. Maybe this is not so bad after all, or, we can say, the more things change, the more they stay the same - I'm referring to this report which surfaced today and I'll post the link below (either click on or copy & paste the URL below into your browser):

    http://www.tundraheadquarters.com/blog/2009/05/20/pickup-trucks-more-fuel-economy/

    This does make perfect sense, and I see it as the best of both worlds!
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  17. Mywheelsonwalls, I am born, raised, and living in Canada. Much colder and more empty than US, and with plenty of money too. People here tow boats to lakes and such too, but they will always do so whether they have to pay higher gas prices or taxes on their trucks - they are a minority anyway. If you got the cottage and the boat, you can surely afford the means to tow it. As for those who do not "need" to do that, smaller vehicles are attractive - we proportionally buy more compact and subcompact vehicles than Americans, even though our car market is treated as as one with the US market by most manufacturers, for $$ sake. One thing is for sure, things are changing, guys, you may well have to find other means to get yourself and your toys around, that are smaller and smarter.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

  18. Did he think of this on his own.
     
    Post Reply
    Vote
    Bad stuff?

 

Have an opinion?Join the conversation!

Connect with Facebook

Motor Authority. Now with your friends.

Discover stories your friends read.
Share stories more easily.
You control what you share.
Learn more

Research New Cars

Go!


 
© 2011 MotorAuthority. All Rights Reserved. MotorAuthority is published by High Gear Media. Stock photography by Homestar, LLC. Send us feedback.