LyrArc Article Gist
EIA says half of the benefit of higher fuel efficiency standards for Automobiles 2010-2020 in US was lost because of SUV's and the incentivizing of SUV's in the 2006 CAFE standards have made things worse. The first SUV's came in the 1980's. By 2004 SUV's made up half of car sales and by 2025 outsold cars 2 to 1. What if we took all SUV's and large cars off the roads, or even some of these SUV's by deincentivizing of SUV's in the US CAFE corporate fuel efficiency standards? What would be the savings in crude oil and in carbon footprint? Would it be about the same as releasing an additional 400 million barrels of oil into the markets in addition to the 400 million barrels that are now released through EIA and member countries? This New Yorker essay touches on this idea. During the Iran war the volatile Middle East as a source of oil supplies is a major problem for countries. Some are rationing supplies and in one country 40 million children are not going to school for 2 weeks starting this week because of the sources of oil are so precarious, government offices will only have half of the employees, the rest working from home (almost like Covid pandemic). Many other countries face that situation. The International Energy Agency recently reported that, if “SUVs were an individual country, they would rank sixth in the world for absolute emissions in 2021, emitting over 900 million tonnes of CO2.” The agency says governments must redesign their CAFE standards and their policies so that it would reduce S.U.V. sales, tax gas guzzling vehicles. EIA cites governments in the EU doing this- “Some governments have already started introducing relevant measures, such as France and Germany, which have put a tax on large and high-emissions cars.” Within SUV's also there is an opportunity to reduce the size and make more efficient space utilization designs. Small savings also add up. One has to realize that the current freedom to use energy freely in places like the US with self sufficiency in oil comes with a sense of responsibility for using it wisely so that it can be exported to cut the trade deficit, precisely what the president is doing with India, to cut a trade deficit of $58 billion before it gets to $100 billion. Section 301 is already in place for investigations by the US of 18 countries for a new basis to use tariffs after the Supreme Court decision. A similar approach is taken with EU for hundreds of billions of reductions in trade deficit that will only strengthen the US dollar and the US economy in the long run , and be good for stock markets and jobs as it reduces oil prices and increases the manufacturing capacity/cost for the Nation. Europe, India and China can do the same. Remember that in 2010 SUV's made up 17% of total world sales, and by 2025 SUV's made up 46% of world vehicle sales. This would create another 400 million barrels for the oil markets, which would triple what was released through EIA  this week to 1.2 billion barrels and this would create 120 days of supply replacement for the 10 million b/d lost from Straits of Hormuz, and effectively end the Iran War as it would be clear that prices can be kept low even in the $50's. Essentially buying time till the SU can get more production in Venezuela and other parts of the world to replace much of the Middle Eastern oil that is ending up in a quagmire. This is the best way for the US and Europe, India, China to ensure jobs growth, economic growth with low cost crude oil in the $50 range and ensure much of the poorer countries like Egypt and Indonesia, Vietnam, Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Bangladesh, have access to oil at prices they can afford and eliminate poverty. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration is pushing for new U.S. fuel efficiency standards of 56.2 mpg by 2025. In May 2009 President Obama announced domestic car and light truck fuel efficiency standards of 35 mpg by 2016. Europe is expected to reach fuel efficiency of 60 mpg by 2020. This would still leave Europe considerably ahead of the U.S. in fuel efficiency for automobiles, but the gap would be much smaller. For the last several decades the U.S. has fallen sadly behind Europe and Japan in fuel efficiency. The perception of poor fuel efficiency hurt the automakers badly during periods of high fuel prices and when buyers were facing difficult economic choices. The automakers are beginning to grasp this fact. Mark Reuss, president of General Motors, commented that- "it's very challenging, but its upto us engineers to provide high value to the customer and support the environment." This is an issue that has serious national and global implications as it affects the future prices and demand for oil, emissions, and future economic growth. It would also bring the U.S. in line with Europe and Japan when it comes to fuel efficiency of automobiles. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Obama issues directions to federal regulators to give California and 13 other states the right to set their own automobile emissions standards and fuel efficiency standards.

LyrArc Article Gist
Fuel efficiency rules require average fuel efficiency in the U.S. of 35 mpg by 2016. The debate is now on what to do for 2017 to 2025. New technology such as the P2 systems for hybrids already used in VW, Nissan and Hyundai vehicles makes a 20% increase in fuel efficiency possible. Large investments are being made to bring new technology to bear on increasing fuel efficiency significantly. Government agencies are looking at different scenarios by which the new fuel economy standards beyond 2017-2025 could be set between 47 mpg and 62 mpg. An additional factor is the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions- at 47 mpg the reduction would be 3%, at 62 mpg the reduction would be 6%. Another factor is how much the impact is on the cost of vehicles and reduced cost on gasoline. Here there is a wide range in the numbers for average mpg rules at 62 mpg- with EPA estimates at $2800-$3500 increase in vehicle cost and $5000 savings in fuel cost, Centre for Automotive Research estimates at $9790 increase in vehicle cost. The 62 mpg translates into "real world" actual efficiency of 45 mpg. In April 2011, 17 senators put out a letter of support for the 62 mpg proposal. There is a public value involved in this that is also significant- the reduced dependence on foreign oil means savings in defense expenditures in parts of the Middle East, and an economy that is less impacted by volatility in the price of oil. As this aspect of public value or benefits cannot be quantified easily even though they are significant, this may tend to be lost in the debate and the politics of fuel efficiency. For automakers there is significant marketing value in having a visible and strong presence in fuel efficient vehicles because of perception as forward looking- something that hurt Detroit carmakers in the last decade. During periods of gasoline prices at $5 a gallon this provides carmakers with an extra cushion of safety in securing car sales. Carmakers in one country such as the U.S. also have to worry about what carmakers in other countries such as Japan and Germany are doing- if the standards in the U.S. develop a gap compared to other countries developing advanced fuel efficiency technologies this poses significant risks because of the global nature of the automobile marketplace. See the group "Asleep at the Spigot" for more details on this. Many of these less quantifiable factors do not get the attention they deserve because they are significant from experience but not easily quantified. Throw into this the large unknown of what new technologies not yet developed lie ahead with a burst of effort by one country or another, which bring cost reductions at the same time - and the debate requires as much a good sense of what is the path offering the greatest advantages in years ahead than a pure exercize in numbers. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The new EPA rules for auto emission standards were setup under the Obama administration in 2012. The rules are a major part of the effort to meet the challenge of pollution and clean air. The Trump administration and EPA chief Scott Pruitt plan to reverse the higher standards. The new standards which had the support of automakers when enacted require that average fuel economy be doubled to about 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. This would cut oil use by 12 billion barrels over the lifetime of the cars and reduce carbon dioxide pollution by about 6 billion tons.  The EPA under president Trump does not say how much the standards will be rolled back. This also leads to one more tension between California and the Trump administration. California plans to vigorously oppose the rollback. Under the Clean Air Act of 1970 California has historically made its own rules and was followed by 12 other states making up one third of the car market in the U.S. If the Trump administration is able to to this it would create two markets for automobiles in the U.S. which is not in the interest of automakers who are having second thoughts about the change. Amazingly a suburban Virginia Chevy dealership has vigorously opposed being used as the location for the EPA under the Trump administration making an announcement on this issue. Chevy dealerships are saying the Trump administration does not have the facts, that the auto industry has done very well in the last 4-5 years. Chevrolet and GM do not want to be associated with the politics on this issue. California has historically acted as a pioneer in automobile standards with the rest of the nation following. The Trump administration move would be an effort to break this precedent.  ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The struggle between the Detroit automakers and the states over auto emissions of carbon dioxide and other heat trapping gas emissions. California adopted the first state law requiring auto manufacturers to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide in 2002 and in 2004 set standards for the emission reductions. Vermont, as well as Connecticut, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania adopted the same standards. Automakers sued toblock these standars in Vermont and California. While the California case is pending, Judge Sessions issued a ruling on the Vermont case this week against the auto manufacturers. This follows a decision by the US Supreme Court in April 2007 that the Environmental Protection Authority has the right to regulate heat trapping gases like carbon dioxide as air pollutants. This endorses the idea that states can set their own limits. What is needed for a state to do this is to get a waiver from the EPA, as the federal Clean Air Act has a provision that allows California to set ists own standards with a waiver from the EPA, and for other states to follow California's lead. A detailed opinion includes analysis by the Judge in this case stating why the Transportation Department's authority is limited to automobile fuel economy standards and does not carry over into auto emissions as pollutants of the atmosphere, the area of pollutants being reserved for the EPA and the individual states to work out together. Under California law as it is now emissions reductions for cars could be 30% or more below the current levels in the 2016 model year. By 2012 emissions are required to be below 2005 levels by 25% for cars and light trucks, SUV's and larger trucks 18%. Note that what is technologically feasible to accomplish in the area of auto emissions is an unknown. At the same time its a function of determination, R&D investment, collaboration between companies to pool technological and capital resources, development of engineering and manufacturing investment and knowhow to learn mass manufacture at low cost, introduction of the already feasible features quickly such as stop start engines which the Germans have already in the works for mass manufacture across product lines, and so forth. The first comer in these technologies enjoys an advantage as Honda constantly advertises itself, and the the only way to say what is technologically feasible or not is by pointing to these pioneers. In this case because of the stronger environmental movement in Europe especially in Germany, some of this pointing will be done in the direction of the German auto manufacturers progress in this direction to meet the new EU standards of 120 micrograms of CO2 per kilometre. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
BMW's first mass production electric car the i3 will go on sale inthe U.S. in the second quarter of 2014, priced at $41,350. It is a city car with a range of 100 miles from one charge. BMW will launch a i8 in 2014. The i8 is a super sports car with high fuel economy. A electric motor drives the front wheels and a 3 cylinder gasoline engine drives rear wheels. BMW's CEO Reithofer has increased spending on R&D so that it can meet the 30% of automobiles that have to be hybrids or electric vehicles by 2025 for BMW to meet higher European auto emissions standards. R&D spending was up 17% in 2012 to 9.2 billion euros, and capital spending up 42%.

LyrArc Article Gist
Michelin has come up with a tire that improves braking distance and reduces rolling resistance on the tire. This "green" tire is now on the Peugeot 308 model car. It brakes 10 feet shorter than the previous generation tire and cuts carbondioxide emissions by 4 grams per kilometer, equal to a reduction of one metric ton of carbon dioxide during the life of the car. Michelin charges 10% more for this tire. All this is happening while tiremakers in the US which hasn't signed the Kyoto Protocol like the Europeans have, are trying to dissuade Congress and the states from passing new legislation or adding to the current energy legislation to mandate fuel efficiency standards for tires. One of the US tiremakers arguments is that it would create safety problems by increasing braking distance. Which can't be very convincing if Michelin already has the technology. The Japanese tiremakers like Bridgestone also are trying to develop new technologies to come up with better more fuel efficient tires. As this happens will this put US tiremakers behind and give a competitive advantage to the European and Japanese tiremakers? Note that a study in 2006 by the National Academy of Sciences in the USA estimated that about 2 billion gallons of gasoline and diesel fuel could be saved each year in the US by reducing rolling resistance of the tires by 10%. This was estimated to be the equivalent of taking 4 million cars and light trucks off the road. Other studies on the cost side show that the increase in production costs in Europe for reducing rolling resistance of tires comes to about 20 to 30 euros. Add to the 2 billion gallons of gasoline saved in the US the amount saved in Europe and Asia and you have a substantial saving. Add increases in air conditioning efficiency, increases in fuel efficiency of automobiles, and you have significant reductions in demand over the next 5 years and even more over next 10 years. How will this affect gasoline demand and prices? ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Margo Oge, headed the Office of Transportation and AIr Quality at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from 1994-2012. Here she points out the contradiction in what automakers supported when the current fuel emission standards were set and today's effort by the Trump administration to loosen the standards. She also points to the contradiction between the trends in Europe, China, India, which are moving towards stricter standards and the U.S. reversing direction.  About one dozen states in addition to California have the power under the Clean Air Act to set their own standards. These states make up about one third of the U.S. market. What would result is a fracturing of the U.S. market. This would create problems for automakers as one expert recently pointed out in the NYT, that automakers should be careful what they wish for.  Automakers such as Ford say they support the current fuel emissions standards, yet call for flexibility. GM's CEO, Mary Barra, says she supports current standards. Toyota also says it supports the current emission standards. And diesel engines are now declining in Europe as a result of fuel emissions standards to preserve good air quality. History has shown the automakers have suffered badly from competition when emissions and fuel efficiency standards were lax. During the last decade the auto industry in Michigan faced decline as a result of poor management decisions and lack of foresight in pushing forward with new technologies in this field. The current recovery in the auto industry is a result of a reversal of the poor decisions made between 2000-2008, including fuel emissions and fuel efficiency, air quality decisions.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Gasoline pries hit $5.00 a gallon in California in October 2012.

LyrArc Article Gist
A major change is taking place. Automakers around the world are shifting to smaller engines. Hyundai's Sonata for 2011 and the Tucson crossover for 2010 are going to have only 4 cylinder engines. Many V-6's offered by Detroit carmakers are being replaced with 4 cylinder engines and V-8 with V-6 engines. Ford is using the EcoBoost a turbocharged V-6 to offer new options for its Taurus, Lincoln MKT and other cars.

LyrArc Article Gist
Revised auto fuel efficiency standards win the support of GM, Ford, Chrysler, Honda and Hyundai. These standards would lower the average fuel economy to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, a decline from the initial target of 56.2 mpg. The revised proposal calls for a 5% average annual increase in fuel economy for cars and a 3.5% increase for light trucks through 2021. After 2021 both cars and trucks have to meet a 5% annual increase. Useful innovation in the new standards is to provide credits for hybrid pickup trucks, and give credits for technological advances that improve fuel economy but don't show up in EPA tests such as the one that shuts of the engine when a car is idling. Other credits would be offered for solar roof panels on electric vehicles. It includes incentives for "promoting early market penetration of tailpipe CO2/fuel consumption reducing technologies." This comes after a long period in which the U.S. lagged behind other countries in fuel economy. It could be one of the main achievements of the Obama administration, and help build a new auto industry around new technologies....

LyrArc Article Gist
The US gets the lowest score among the large industrialized nations- way behind Europe- in its record on greenhouse gas emissions and air pollution policies, agricultural policies, smog, and other environment criteria in a survey done jointly by researchers at Yale and Columbia Universities. On regional smog the US has a very poor score.

LyrArc Article Gist
The University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute said the average fuel economy of all new passenger vehicles purchased in January 2012 was 23 miles per gallon, up 0.8 or 4% from December 2011. This includes cars, light trucks, minivans, and SUV's. Professors Sivak and Schoettle of the Institute also released a U.S. Eco-Driving Index, or EDI, which estimates average monthly emissions of individual U.S. drivers for Nov. 2011 at 0.86- this is down 14% from October 2007. The need to reduce reliance on imported oil for the U.S., Europe, China and India, the high price of oil, and the need to reduce automobile emissions to improve air quality, make improvements in average fuel economy and emissions per driver absolutely critical.

LyrArc Article Gist
Fuel efficiency standards were left way below the rest of the world, just look at the graph showing Japan and Europe way above the US in fuel efficiency standards, and the US lagging behind badly. Europe and Japan with standards close to 40mpg vs the US below 30 mpg. Any sharp business person can tell one that if there was too big a gap, it would be a cause for serious concern, because the Japanese for instance would also have developed the technologies and manufacturing facilities to support the fuel efficiency standards. There were some serious dangers in falling behind. That is what has happened as the Japanese carmakers have take market share from the US in the American car market.

LyrArc Article Gist
The critical exchange between oil companies and auto companies about who is at fault for the energy crisis. In one ad that ran last year, Chevron argued that "if automakers improved fuel economy across the board by just 5 mpg, we'd save over 22 billion gallons of gasoline a year." The criticism is also sparked by the high price of oil which is hurting sales of pickups and large SUV's that the automakers depend on for profits. One ad by Exxon Mobil shows a cartoon of a large SUV filling up at a gas station and hints that the problem rests with the automakers who have failed to build the kind of highly fuel efficient vehicles that are needed. The ad says that the average fuel economy of new U.S. autos has not gone up much in two decades, the small gains have been offset by the increases in the size and weight of vehicles.

LyrArc Article Gist
Car size shrinks as the Focus, Spark, Aveo, Cruze small cars attract attention at the 2010 International Auto Show in Detroit. The big change is that these small cars are following the European small car in being refined and sophisticated, with a lot of features. This isn't the Chevette that Americans knew in the sixties and seventies, and the perception of what is the right size and comfort is changing completely as a new generation of buyers brought up in a world of pc's, i-phones, and globalized cultures is in the driver seat.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Japan Automobile Dealer's Association says Toyota's Prius hybrid was No. 1 in sales in Japan in 2009 with 209,000 sales, three times the sales in 2008. This shows the high popularity of green cars in Japan and a sign of future trends. Hybrid sales made up 10% of new vehicle sales in Japan in 2009. By comparison hybrid sales in the U.S. were 2.8%. Second in car sales in Japan was the Honda Fit, third the Toyota Vitz, both small fuel efficient cars. About 1.6 million Prius cars were sold worldwide from 1997 to 2009, according to Toyota. Toyota has kept the price of the Prius affordable by pricing it at around $22,000.