RunRyder RC
 3  Topic Subscribe
WATCH
 1 page 526 views POST REPLY
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterOff Topics News & Politics › How the EPA May Cost You Thousands
11-29-2011 11:16 PM  5 years agoPost 1
Dennis (passed)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

How the EPA May Cost You Thousands

Mike Brownfield November 29, 2011

Brace yourself. The cost of a new car in America is set to explode, skyrocketing by thousands of dollars, all thanks to a new regulation proposed by President Barack Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

Under a new 893-page proposal unveiled last week, automakers must hit a fleet-wide fuel economy average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025–double today’s 27.3 standard. The government says it would cost automakers $8.5 billion per year to comply, which means a spike in sticker prices of at least $2,000 to $2,800, according to official projections. Other estimates peg the added costs at $3,100, and that could go even higher. As The Wall Street Journal writes, “Vehicles that currently cost $15,000 or less will effectively be regulated out of existence.”

Apart from increased costs, the new regulations would have other impacts on consumers as well. In a new paper, Heritage’s Diane Katz warns that another unacceptable consequence is loss of life resulting from smaller vehicles:

In past years, the structure of the regulations induced automakers to dramatically downsize some vehicles to meet the standard, which increased traffic fatalities by the thousands. The new standards would require downsizing to both small and large models, which the government contends will neutralize the risk. However, the NHTSA and the EPA disagree on the extent of the risk, while outside experts say that the danger would be heightened by the extreme stringency of the proposed standards.

While consumers struggle to pay the price of higher cost vehicles, U.S. automakers would likely take a hit as well. They would be forced to change the lineup of vehicles they offer in order to meet their fuel efficiency targets, and they would produce cars and trucks that Americans don’t even want. The Wall Street Journal explains:

The only way Detroit can hit these averages will be by turning at least 25% of its fleet into hybrids. But hybrid sales peaked in the U.S. two years ago at 3% of the market and are declining. The EPA’s $157 billion price tag includes only the estimate of what manufacturers will have to invest in new technology, not the billions more that will hemorrhage when nobody buys their EPA-approved products.

And all this comes as the former “Detroit Three” are struggling with weak auto sales, projected to be down by 17.9 percent in 2011 from where they stood at the onset of the recession. Ironically, the federal government that bailed out the industry is now imposing regulations that could once again threaten its existence. The Obama Administration is pointing to the supposed benefits of the new standards–including a fuel savings of $1.7 trillion–but as Katz writes, that number is “pure speculation given that actual savings would depend on the price of gasoline,” which can’t be predicted 14 years into the future, much less next summer.

There’s another point to be made, as well: American consumers would face higher-priced vehicles and fewer choices all at the hands of unelected bureaucrats at the EPA who have never been authorized by Congress to set fuel-efficiency standards for any purpose. That, though, is consistent with President Obama’s modus operandi–to regulate where he cannot legislate. There is something Congress can and should do: bar the EPA and the NHTSA from implementing and enforcing the new standards by withholding funds or passing a law prohibiting the regulation.

The EPA should not be in the business of picking and choosing what kind of cars and trucks Americans can drive, and neither should President Obama. But if Congress does not take action, that could certainly be the result.

http://blog.heritage.org/2011/11/29...=Morning%2BBell

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 01:39 AM  5 years agoPost 2
baby uh1

rrVeteran

St. James, Mo.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

THe real result from this will be that since less people will be able to afford new cars there wil be far more old, less efficient ones left on the road. So the net result will be more pollution and fuel usage!
But you can't argue with the "smart" people in the government.

Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 03:42 AM  5 years agoPost 3
nitro fun

rrApprentice

Oc ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

so much for a free market!!

and welcome a dictatorship....

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 04:12 AM  5 years agoPost 4
Metalizer

rrApprentice

Canton, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

On the upside,>>> it will be good for used car salesmen, Chinese aftermarket parts business men and autobody/mechanics.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 04:18 AM  5 years agoPost 5
Metalizer

rrApprentice

Canton, Ohio

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The EPA should not be in the business of picking and choosing what kind of cars and trucks Americans can drive, and neither should President Obama. But if Congress does not take action, that could certainly be the result
They are picking winners and losers. WTF

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 05:17 AM  5 years agoPost 6
GyroFreak

rrProfessor

Orlando Florida ...28N 81W

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

We all will soon be riding those little motor scooters, put, put.putyput.put, put ....

I think about the hereafter. I go somewhere to get something, then wonder what I'm here after ?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 02:00 PM  5 years agoPost 7
jsenicka

rrProfessor

Eagle River, WI

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) is a lot bigger issue than it may seem. The 54.5mpg average is across the whole product line, which includes pick ups, vans, etc. I believe anything 1 ton and smaller. This rule effectively kills bigger vehicles that many of us drive, as in order to continue to produce a 1 ton pickup that gets 18 or so MPG, you need to offset it with a tiny car with super high mileage. You cannot charge huge bucks for the econo box, so you need to inflate everything else to cover development costs.
At some point, manufactures will have to phase out stuff like trucks and vans as they cost to much in terms of CAFE. Companies like Kia are golden, as they have no big vehicles. Ford, GM and Chrysler are not. Pick ups are best selling vehicles in US, but these rules will kill them.

ON a similar rant, diesel particulate filters. EPA mandated ultra low sulfur fuel. That got rid of a lot of the soot. Then they mandate DPF to remove soot. But the DPF drops mileage by a bunch. So my 2010 super duty does not show any unsightly black exhaust, but it uses about 40% more fuel to do so. It is a federal offense to remove a device that requires my vehicle to burn 30-40% more fuel to do same job as a 2007 model. Not to mention, that super duty getting 16mpg highway figures into CAFE, so Ford will need to offset that with a skateboard getting 100mpg.

Jim Senicka
Team Manager, GrandRC Flight Team

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 07:00 PM  5 years agoPost 8
baby uh1

rrVeteran

St. James, Mo.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

If I was running one of the big three I would invest in a scooter line or maybe even a bicycle division to average out the milages!
Do you think that would work?

Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 07:30 PM  5 years agoPost 9
nitro fun

rrApprentice

Oc ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It has nothing to do with the envioment, it is just dictatorship and control. Who are these people anyway? Anyone vote for the fools?? That are controling our lives.. Do we have a say in their dictator decisions ?

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 07:32 PM  5 years agoPost 10
nitro fun

rrApprentice

Oc ca

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

A 50mpg econo box will make building a house more expensive and use more fuel hauling 3 2*4's. At a time

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 07:35 PM  5 years agoPost 11
Dennis (passed)

rrApprentice

Oregon

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It has nothing to do with the envioment, it is just dictatorship and control.

Who are these people anyway? Anyone vote for the fools?? That are controling our lives.
You've already answered your own question.

Do we have a say in their dictator decisions ?
We most definatley do. That happens at the voting booth.

Its time to flush the big toilet in Washington DC.

Thats the only solution. If it has to happen time and time again one right after the other, wake up America and git r done.

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
11-30-2011 09:03 PM  5 years agoPost 12
baby uh1

rrVeteran

St. James, Mo.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Unless we can elect someone like Ron Paul, Cain or even Palin nothing will change.
Voting for the usual suspects is just like putting on a different pair of dirty underware and expecting it to feel better!

Anything is possible if you don't know what you are talking about!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR
WATCH
 1 page 526 views POST REPLY
Scorpion Power Scorpion Power
HelicopterOff Topics News & Politics › How the EPA May Cost You Thousands
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 3  Topic Subscribe

Wednesday, September 20 - 12:06 pm - Copyright © 2000-2017 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online