http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/07/29/national/main20085764.shtml Apparently your TARP dollars made the deal possible.
(AP) WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama and automakers ushered in what could be the largest cut in fuel consumption since the 1970s on Friday...
The agreement pledges to double overall fuel economy to 54.5 mpg by 2025... Bee Ess! Never gonna happen.
It builds on a 2009 deal between the Obama administration and automakers, which committed cars and trucks to averaging 35.5 mpg by model year 2016....
The changes also are likely to push up the cost of a new vehicle, but just how much is unclear because the regulation still has to be written. That process will get started in September. I can hardly wait!
The mileage target announced Friday isn't exactly what consumers will see in their future cars. A formula that gives credits to manufacturers for electric cars, the use of low-emission air conditioning refrigerant and technology that shuts down engines at traffic lights means the actual fuel economy is likely to come in closer to about 40 mpg.... pffft. I can beat that with a 10 year old VW Jetta diesel. We're really getting somewhere now!
But by Friday evening, the Republican chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Rep. Darrell Issa of California, had sent letters to the 13 automobile manufacturers that agreed to the deal saying they should preserve all records because he was launching an investigation. Issa alleges that the new mandate was decided without the input of consumers and Congress and could harm consumers.
"It appears that these actions will have the effect of determining the types of vehicles available to consumers, their use, and other factors otherwise best left to consumer choice," Issa said in the letter, obtained by The Associated Press. God bless this man!
For automakers, particularly the Detroit Three, the deal signaled a turnaround from the days when they resisted boosting fuel economy targets, arguing that consumers would not buy smaller and more efficient cars and that the technology to reduce fuel consumption was too expensive. It still is. Taxpayer $$$$$ =
That stance has been challenged in recent years by a 2007 energy law that mandated the government evaluate and set new fuel economy targets, by a Supreme Court decision that said the Environmental Protection Agency had the authority to control global warming pollution from vehicles, and by a state - California - that has set stricter emissions standards than the rest of the country.... They can have them. Leave the rest of us the hell alone! If I want a F350 with a V10 and twin turbos, that's what I want. I'm paying for my fuel. When they start providing it to me they can have a say, until then they can piss off...
A $62 billion taxpayer-funded bailout for GM and Chrysler added to the White House's leverage.... Duh! Ya think?
Automakers are far better prepared with a much stronger line up of small cars, as well as hybrid and electric vehicles. General Motors and Nissan are selling mass-market electric vehicles, while Mitsubishi, Ford, Toyota and others are about to enter the market.
Nissan's vice president Scott Becker in a statement said the Obama administration has issued some extremely challenging greenhouse gas reduction and fuel economy improvement targets, but Nissan was "up to the task."
Nissan introduced the LEAF, the world's first and only 100 percent electric car for the mass market, in December 2010. More than 4,000 of the 99 miles-per-gallon vehicles are already on the road. So if it's truely 100% electric, how come it goes 99 miles on a gallon of gas?A whopping 4000 huh?
GM and Ford already have small gasoline-fueled cars that get 40 mpg or better on the highway, and Chrysler will have one next year. Small car sales are up 21 percent so far this year, showing consumer interest is up.... The only reason for this is increased fuel costs, caused by the .gov's drilling restrictions and strongarming the oil companies.
