READ ABOUT DETROIT AND SOLUTIONS TO ITS PROBLEMS. CLICK HERE.

Thursday, May 28, 2009

Declaring 30 MPG Or 35 MPG Makes Little Difference

SEARCH BLOG: MANDATES

I wrote this almost a year and a half ago. Nothing... nothing... nothing... has changed except the number which is 30 mpg... and 4 years earlier.

Tuesday, December 11, 2007

35 MPG Trucks

So here is my solution. The overriding issue is moving away from petroleum fuels to lessen our dependence on foreign oil. The red herring issue is eliminating CO2 production... which we would be wise to completely ignore. Back to the overriding issue....

For any vehicle using petroleum based fuel, use the actual miles per gallon against the politically declared standard... set by President Obama and the EPA without regard to Congress or requiring any legislative debate or even questioning if it was technologically and economically feasible.

Similarly, for any vehicle that does not use petroleum based fuel, use an arbitrary miles per gallon [no actual gallons used] of 150. So, if the vehicle runs on hydrogen fuel cells or natural gas or propane or just plugs into the wall, they get the manufacturer a credit of 150 mpg per vehicle against the mandated 30 mpg in 2016, 35 mpg in 2020, 40 mpg in 2025, 50 mpg in 2030, 100 mpg in 2050. You may not have heard about all of those mpg requirements, but they are coming in President Obama's second term.

CNG vehicles are a reality [that's compressed natural gas] and the U.S. has an abundance of natural gas available that Congress will make off-limits as soon as the automobile manufacturers invest in making higher volumes of vehicles using that fuel. Regardless, it would be relatively easy to gin up production of these vehicles and home owners could invest in already-tested home fueling stations that tap off their home's natural gas supplies. Filling stations could easily have natural gas lines hooked up to CNG pumps. The infrastructure is basically there.

All it takes is a declaration by the EPA that CNG vehicles get credited for 150 petroleum-based fuel mpgs. Hey, the EPA made a declaration that trucks had to get 30 mpg by 2016 without regard to facts, so why can't they do this?

And while the Federal Government is at it, they can declare a $5,000 per vehicle tax credit for the purchase of any CNG-powered truck.

Then we all can declare ourselves holier-than-thou.

UPDATE

For those who feel this suggestion is outrageous or unethical or giving credence to unreasonable EPA mileage mandates, here is a section from the nhtsa.dot site:

How are alternative fuel vehicles treated under CAFE?

The CAFE law provides for special treatment of vehicle fuel economy calculations for dedicated alternative fuel vehicles and dual-fuel vehicles. The fuel economy of a dedicated alternative fuel vehicle is determined by dividing its fuel economy in equivalent miles per gallon of gasoline or diesel fuel by 0.15. Thus a 15 mpg dedicated alternative fuel vehicle would be rated as 100 mpg. For dual-fuel vehicles (vehicles that can use the alternative fuel and gasoline or diesel interchangeably), the rating is the average of the fuel economy on gasoline or diesel and the fuel economy on the alternative fuel vehicle divided by .15. For example, this calculation procedure turns a dual fuel vehicle that averages 25 mpg on gasoline or diesel with the above 100 mpg alternative fuel to attain the 40 mpg value for CAFE purposes. Several limitations are established for CAFE credits for dual fuel vehicles. For MYs 1993-2004, the maximum CAFE increase attributable to dual fueled vehicles in a manufacturer’s passenger car or light truck fleet is 1.2 mpg.

I would simply eliminate the last sentence and change the denominator to 0.10. That makes sense given the state of current truck hybrid technology and the short timeframe of six years.

..

Labels: , , , , ,

Can"t Find It?

Use the SEARCH BLOG feature at the upper left. For example, try "Global Warming".

You can also use the "LABELS" below or at the end of each post to find related posts.

Blog Archive

Cost of Gasoline - Enter Your Zipcode or Click on Map

Detroit Gas Prices provided by GasBuddy.com
Click here to add this map to your website.

CO2 Cap and Trade

There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.
Henry Louis Mencken (1880–1956)
“The Divine Afflatus,” A Mencken Chrestomathy, chapter 25, p. 443 (1949)
... and one could add "not all human problems really are."
It was beautiful and simple, as truly great swindles are.
- O. Henry
... The Government is on course for an embarrassing showdown with the European Union, business groups and environmental charities after refusing to guarantee that billions of pounds of revenue it stands to earn from carbon-permit trading will be spent on combating climate change.
The Independent (UK)

Tracking Interest Rates

Tracking Interest Rates

FEDERAL RESERVE & HOUSING

SEARCH BLOG: FEDERAL RESERVE for full versions... or use the Blog Archive pulldown menu.

February 3, 2006 Go back to 1999-2000 and see what the Fed did. They are following the same pattern for 2005-06. If it ain't broke, the Fed will fix it... and good!
August 29, 2006 The Federal Reserve always acts on old information... and is the only cause of U.S. recessions.
December 5, 2006 Last spring I wrote about what I saw to be a sharp downturn in the economy in the "rustbelt" states, particularly Michigan.
March 28, 2007
The Federal Reserve sees no need to cut interest rates in the light of adverse recent economic data, Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday.
The Fed chairman said ”to date, the incoming data have supported the view that the current stance of policy is likely to foster sustainable economic growth and a gradual ebbing in core inflation”.

July 21, 2007 My guess is that if there is an interest rate change, a cut is more likely than an increase. The key variables to be watching at this point are real estate prices and the inventory of unsold homes.
August 11, 2007 I suspect that within 6 months the Federal Reserve will be forced to lower interest rates before housing becomes a black hole.
September 11, 2007 It only means that the overall process has flaws guaranteeing it will be slow in responding to changes in the economy... and tend to over-react as a result.
September 18, 2007 I think a 4% rate is really what is needed to turn the economy back on the right course. The rate may not get there, but more cuts will be needed with employment rates down and foreclosure rates up.
October 25, 2007 How long will it be before I will be able to write: "The Federal Reserve lowered its lending rate to 4% in response to the collapse of the U.S. housing market and massive numbers of foreclosures that threaten the banking and mortgage sectors."
November 28, 2007 FED VICE CHAIRMAN DONALD KOHN
"Should the elevated turbulence persist, it would increase the possibility of further tightening in financial conditions for households and businesses," he said.

"Uncertainties about the economic outlook are unusually high right now," he said. "These uncertainties require flexible and pragmatic policymaking -- nimble is the adjective I used a few weeks ago."
http://www.reuters.com/

December 11, 2007 Somehow the Fed misses the obvious.
fed_rate_moves_425_small.gif
[Image from: CNNMoney.com]
December 13, 2007 [from The Christian Science Monitor]
"The odds of a recession are now above 50 percent," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. "We are right on the edge of a recession in part because of the Fed's reluctance to reduce interest rates more aggressively." [see my comments of September 11]
January 7, 2008 The real problem now is that consumers can't rescue the economy and manufacturing, which is already weakening, will continue to weaken. We've gutted the forces that could avoid a downturn. The question is not whether there will be a recession, but can it be dampened sufficiently so that it is very short.
January 11, 2008 This is death by a thousand cuts.
January 13, 2008 [N.Y. Times]
“The question is not whether we will have a recession, but how deep and prolonged it will be,” said David Rosenberg, the chief North American economist at Merrill Lynch. “Even if the Fed’s moves are going to work, it will not show up until the later part of 2008 or 2009.”
January 17, 2008 A few days ago, Anna Schwartz, nonagenarian economist, implicated the Federal Reserve as the cause of the present lending crisis [from the Telegraph - UK]:
The high priestess of US monetarism - a revered figure at the Fed - says the central bank is itself the chief cause of the credit bubble, and now seems stunned as the consequences of its own actions engulf the financial system. "The new group at the Fed is not equal to the problem that faces it," she says, daring to utter a thought that fellow critics mostly utter sotto voce.
January 22, 2008 The cut has become infected and a limb is in danger. Ben Bernanke is panicking and the Fed has its emergency triage team cutting rates... this time by 3/4%. ...

What should the Federal Reserve do now? Step back... and don't be so anxious to raise rates at the first sign of economic improvement.
Individuals and businesses need stability in their financial cost structures so that they can plan effectively and keep their ships afloat. Wildly fluctuating rates... regardless of what the absolute levels are... create problems. Either too much spending or too much fear. It's just not that difficult to comprehend. Why has it been so difficult for the Fed?

About Me

My photo
Michigan, United States
Air Force (SAC) captain 1968-72. Retired after 35 years of business and logistical planning, including running a small business. Two sons with advanced degrees; one with a business and pre-law degree. Beautiful wife who has put up with me for 4 decades. Education: B.A. (Sociology major; minors in philosopy, English literature, and German) M.S. Operations Management (like a mixture of an MBA with logistical planning)