8 ms·

Tesla urges US to adopt much tougher fuel efficiency rules

38 points by JeremyNT 3y ago

ur-whale 3y ago
> Tesla urges US to adopt much tougher fuel efficiency rules Color me surprised. Not.
- toomuchtodo 3y ago
  They've already proven the EV model works (along with BYD) [1]. Might as well shove your enemy into the lumber saw if they're trying to weaken standards. Adapt or die. Someone else will make EVs if legacy auto doesn't. No need to encourage folks to drive a studio apartment around (F150) if it is combustion powered. We're burning up so much fossil fuel for people who are social signaling or buying emotionally vs legitimate need [2] [3]. "...75 percent of truck owners use their truck for towing one time a year or less (meaning, never). Nearly 70 percent of truck owners go off-road one time a year or less." If climate change is an emergency, treat it as such. If companies die, they die. [1] https://www.statista.com/chart/30758/most-popular-plug-in-electric-car-brands/ https://www.statista.com/chart/30758/most-popular-plug-in-el... [2] https://twitter.com/TheWarOnCars/status/1497757646455201792 https://twitter.com/TheWarOnCars/status/1497757646455201792 [3] https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-size-pickup-truck-you-need-a-cowboy-costume https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-siz...
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    I agree people fly around the globe, putting tons of Co2 into the air, to simply take a instagram photo! Who cares if the travel industry dies? This is a emergency! Or will only the luxuries your socioeconomic class doesn't engage in be targeted?
    - toomuchtodo 3y ago
      If you fly, you should be required to pay to offset using direct air capture at whatever the current market price is. I pay the fully loaded cost of all CO2 emissions my family is responsible for. The argument isn't "don't do this", the argument is "either avoid emissions or pay for them." Are you comparing the light vehicle emissions of the low and middle class to discretionary pickup truck purchases, priced between $50k and $80k? If you want to drive such a vehicle, and it is a combustion version, as long as whatever mechanism is dispensing the fuel ensures you're paying for that CO2 to be sequestered back underground in a stable form, by all means, Canyonero! But that is not what is on offer at scale. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI_Jl5WFQkA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI_Jl5WFQkA
      - willcipriano 3y ago
        > I pay the fully loaded cost of all CO2 emissions my family is responsible for. Carbon credits are a scam, so no you don't.
        toomuchtodo 3y ago
        I pay Climeworks for annual emissions, all of our vehicles are EVs, and all of our home energy is sourced from solar. You should do more research before making inaccurate statements that "Carbon credits are a scam." Some are, some are not. The ones that aren't are, of course, more expensive. https://climeworks.com/carbon-removal-as-a-solution-to-fight-global-warming https://climeworks.com/carbon-removal-as-a-solution-to-fight... https://climeworks.com/news/climeworks-achievedvalidationfromdnv https://climeworks.com/news/climeworks-achievedvalidationfro...
        willcipriano 3y ago
        Since it's a emergency shouldn't you buy as many carbon credits as you can afford and skip the vacation?
        toomuchtodo 3y ago
        I am not going to keep arguing with you because your ideology compels you to treat me the way you do, in a derogatory, condescending fashion. I am doing my small part (as I think everyone should, in proportion to their means and impact), and I work to find leverage points for scale (early investor in Tesla, donating to political reps who supported the Inflation Reduction Act). If you don't agree with me, that is your right, based upon your mental model. I am satisfied with what I can do with what I have, and mostly with the present velocity of change. I don't need buy in from people like yourself. The data shows it isn't needed, nor material to solve for climate change. If you don't believe climate change is real, or of the level of risk communicated by domain experts, we have nothing to discuss. EDIT: I'm not telling the poor how to live. Living is expensive. It has always been terrible to be poor. That is what subsidies are for, to help the poor deal with climate change. I fully support subsidizing those who need the subsidies to accomplish these goals. Increase taxes if necessary, as high as necessary.
  - oh_sigh 3y ago
    Is "shove your enemy into the lumber saw" a common saying?
  - oaththrowaway 3y ago
    What is a legitimate need in your book? I don't use my truck to tow a lot of stuff (besides a boat which you probably don't think is legitimate either), and I don't go off-roading much except for deer season (again, I'm sure that's terrible for you), but it does get used for hauling things in the bed that wouldn't be able to fit in my car quite a bit. I get people don't like using them for commuters and I agree, but to argue there is no use for them besides towing or going off-roading is absolutely silly to me. But maybe because I'm an idiot who lives in a rural area.
  - ssharp 3y ago
    > "...75 percent of truck owners use their truck for towing one time a year or less (meaning, never). Nearly 70 percent of truck owners go off-road one time a year or less." I don't see how this shows that people aren't using their trucks. Off-roading seems like a odd use for this purpose and towing is not a great metric because you can easily utilize a truck for a ton of hauling that doesn't require towing.
unethical_ban 3y ago
Biased messenger, but correct message. CAFE and crash standards are the example to teach "bad knock-on effect". Make strict efficiency requirements, but exempt huge trucks? Everyone makes huge trucks! Ideally, there would be a progressive gas tax on luxury trucks above a certain weight, but there is no way to enforce that which isn't highly intrusive. I guarantee almost every truck owner could have a Ford Maverick instead of a Ford F-150 and they wouldn't lose an ounce of the needed capacity for their lives. Heck, the 2024 compact pickups are larger and heavier than full-size trucks from 25 years ago. I was looking at Van der Hall (vanderhall.com) 3-wheel roadsters because they look cool and have an old school open air feel about them. They are exempt from so many requirements because they aren't four-wheeled, thus not an automobile WINK WINK. I wonder what kind of sporty, comfortable, functional and efficient cars we could have under $20k in the US if we didn't have the overwrought safety standards and perverse incentives created my federal regulators.
- eropple 3y ago
  > I guarantee almost every truck owner could have a Ford Maverick instead of a Ford F-150 and they wouldn't lose an ounce of the needed capacity for their lives. Heck, the 2024 compact pickups are larger and heavier than full-size trucks from 25 years ago. Trucks have become pieces of consumer flair. I'll probably end up with a van at some point because of it. I won't buy an F-150 because they're comically large, but if I could get a Maverick without a back seat in the cab, I'd have bought one instantaneously.
  - FireBeyond 3y ago
    They very much have. Perhaps exaggerated for the sake of example, but it makes a point. In Europe, a woman rides her horse every weekend for dressage/fun/whatever. So she hooks a horse trailer up to her Audi station wagon and takes it. In America, a woman rides her horse every weekend at her home. But she needs to move it to a different paddock twice a year (summer, winter). So it's obvious she will require an F-350 dual wheel truck as a daily driver...
    - 3y ago
MengerSponge 3y ago
I'd rather just see my government eliminate the SUV loophole. Requiring special insurance or a CDL to drive a Childcrusher GTX truck would be a nice and good thing too.
- VincentEvans 3y ago
  There’s a lot of country outside of whatever starbucks downtown you happen to live in - where it snows, rains, municipal services clean roads “eventually” if ever, before it melts on it’s own, and household shopping doesn’t fit in prada purse.
  - kube-system 3y ago
    I've lived there. And those places had vehicles 30 years ago, when they were all much smaller. And if you've ever been to places where the roads really aren't plowed, people don't buy bigger trucks for that weather, they buy snowmobiles.
    - VincentEvans 3y ago
      I am sorry, apparently there’s only one way to make choices and I was doing it all wrong, so has everyone else who doesn’t have either an electric vehicle or a snowmobile. Never mind that I am writing this while on the side of the mountain and I plow my driveway myself with a diesel truck, you know better.
      - kube-system 3y ago
        We're not attacking your personal preferences, we're pointing out that vehicles have grown in size, and necessity is not the reason they've grown. My old 70s C/K pushed a plow just fine, despite being 50" less in length, 8" shorter, and ~1000lbs lighter than the typical new F150.
        VincentEvans 3y ago
        … and also had half the fuel efficiency of the same F150. https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/09/20190930-sivak.html https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/09/20190930-sivak.html
wing-_-nuts 3y ago
CAFE standards are a half way measure. What we really need are revenue neutral carbon taxes. Gas is now $7 / gallon, but everyone gets an income tax credit. Want to 'not pay taxes'? Buy a more fuel efficient vehicle. Turn down the thermostat, etc. I always thought income taxes were silly. Tax the things you want less of like pollution, etc.
- someguydave 3y ago
  Income taxes are silly but they keep a lid on the entrepreneurial spirits of rich wagies which the wealthy like.
- sp332 3y ago
  That just makes poorer people vulnerable to the weather and also unable to commute to work.
  - wing-_-nuts 3y ago
    I mean, you could easily increase the tax credit to be progressive and not be regressive.
    - sp332 3y ago
      I'm not sure how this works. I'm going to carry all my gas money as debt until tax season?
      - wing-_-nuts 3y ago
        Well, you could theoretically offer to give people their tax credit in monthly installments but I'm pretty sure everyone would opt for the lump sum.
- vorpalhex 3y ago
  Gas is $3 / gallon here. Most of what you are paying IS taxes. The problem with no income tax is the poor spend more of their income, so end up paying more taxes AND the overall tax revenue decreases. You may be able to buy a new $40,000 car. Most of the population can not. I suppose "just freeze a bit" will save a few pennies...
olivermarks 3y ago
Automakers blast US plan to hike fuel efficiency rules The US is on track to completely destroy the western world's automotive industries, with a huge knock on effect in Europe. Millions of jobs will be gone forever and in the near future we will be completely reliant on areas of the world that don't care about pollution control for (probably mediocre quality) vehicles. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/automakers-blast-us-plan-hike-fuel-efficiency-rules-2023-10-16/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/automa...
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
lesuorac 3y ago
> U.S. automakers separately have warned the fines would cost GM $6.5 billion, Stellantis $3 billion and Ford $1 billion. ... Automakers and the United Auto Workers union have previously also complained parallel rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency are not feasible and should be significantly softened. I really find it suspicious that at a cost of $10 billion they can't figure out a way to improve their fleets. I guess they'll just get disrupted by companies that can then.
- onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
  > I guess they'll just get disrupted by companies that can then. Or they'll make sure we never have more efficient cars, or cities designed around anything other than being in a car 24-7, like they have done quite successfully for the last 50 years.
  - bluGill 3y ago
    Sadly (as one of the few people honest enough to admit humans are bad drivers), I don't see significant investment in anything other than the car city.
  - Spivak 3y ago
    You give them too much credit, people build cities designed around cars with no need for pressure from automakers. There's an area by me that went greenfield (well technically brownfield) to huge high-rise apartments, restaurants and shops lining the bottom, a new pedestrian bridge. The city was constrained by no one, they could have built anything and they're as liberal and progressive as they come. An area that's not even 3 square blocks has four brand new 7 story parking garages paid for by city and free-forever. To call it a massive success is an understatement, and largely due to the crazy amount of free parking making it far more attractive than anywhere else to spend a night out. They went from literally an empty field the most expensive real-estate in the region that isn't on a golf-course and competes with our downtown for number of non-resident visitors.
    - onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
VincentEvans 3y ago
What happened to letting the free market sort it out? /s Electric vehicles are so great, so cheap, so universally loved - it’s inconceivable why one would ever buy anything else. And environmentally friendly too? Sign me up!
- phone8675309 3y ago
  I literally have nowhere to charge the thing when I'm home because I live in an apartment. My workplace does not do electric car charging in the parking lot. So an electric car is a no-go for me.
  - VincentEvans 3y ago
    Your problems are of little concern to fiery little bunch of activists in these comments who will force their good deeds right down your throat for the greater good. If it works for them why shouldn’t it work for you too, and if you are still disagreeable - a bit more extra taxes would help you see their point of view.
Racing0461 3y ago
While joe the plumber pays 7$ for gas and uses paper straws, china keeps on building concrete buildings. Your life is being planned, young man, without you in it.
Spivak 3y ago
It's wild seeing a space that usually blasts companies from using regulation to give themselves a moat. I think the only way to make fair and not just kill major US auto manufacturers while still putting pressure to for everyone to improve would be demanding the same efficiency increase for both ICE and electric vehicles. Like can you imaging GM lobbying for stricter regulation on the total weight of vehicles due to the excess road maintenance and environmental damage of wearing through break-pads faster? Like we would all know it's not altruistic and they're just picking one metric they have an inherent advantage on and pushing that harder.
- olivermarks 3y ago
  I think anyone with an ounce of common sense is aware that EVs are analogous to the steam era with similar dangers. Coal power is used to create and force tremendous amounts of trapped energy into batteries, which like a steam boiler is highly stressed with the added danger of explosion, thermal runaway and toxic chemical fire that can't be extinguished. Where EVs - heavy, tire and road shredding devices requiring enormous amounts of largely unrecyclable materials in their batteries etc - have virtually no regulatory burden (why is there not legislation requiring mechanical door locks for example?) ICE vehicles, which are now highly sophisticated and efficient, are subject to endless meddling and restrictions. An entire airport car park burnt down last week, which is an unprecedented event masked by a compliant media who are obsessed with selling the concept that EVs are our future - all just because a bunch of bungling politicians have tried to legislate change. It's all a terrible mess compounded by encouraging people to abandon common sense and buy into the hallucinatory idea grids and the planet can support EVs within a few short years
resoluteteeth 3y ago
There is a lot of research showing that particulate pollution from tires is really harmful as well. I wonder if tesla will also be in favor of tougher regulations on that.
- onedognight 3y ago
  Why wouldn’t they be in favor of tire particulate regulations? They have a heavy car, but it’s no heavier than the top selling SUVs and trucks made by other manufacturers.
  - Trumpi 3y ago
    Because it affects them too.
ouiouibaguette 3y ago
[dead]
bluGill 3y ago
Instead of changing the standards, I think they should keep them the same, but instead change the definition of a light truck (which is exempt) so that it only applies if the vehicle is used as a truck. People using a truck as a truck know that cosmetic damage to the sheet metal will occur and don't worry about it. Thus: A for tax purposes the value of a truck is based only on the number of hours the engine as run, and the mechanical condition (as audited by an independent mechanic). This will kill the rental and lease market for trucks since they won't be allowed to charge extra for cosmetic damages. You can still buy one, trade in will be weird as the dealer won't give you extra for perfect body condition, mean while every once in a while they will have a deep discount sale day to get rid of the not mint condition trucks (everything else will be moved off the lot for that day), but your taxes will still show you paid mint condition price). Of course what will happen is light trucks will be split into two models with slightly different names, one is a light truck and one is car. The car will cost more because it has to comply with CAFE. The truck will be cheaper.
bl_valance 3y ago
Absolute lunacy from this proposal. They well know the current timeline for phasing out ICE vehicles is actually not going that well and they want to further accelerate that timeline? That's just plain greedy, they know Tesla is dominating the EV market atm, this will hurt and slow down current manufactures. We are already seeing Ford slowing the production for the lightning line because the demands is just not there, there is a huge gap in infrastructure to support the upcoming wave of EVs. People are just very hesitant to jump the EV boat, and well justified. EV charging is a mess of apps, unreliable charging rates, and just general availability in non-metro areas.
alienicecream 3y ago
Here come the fanatical tree huggers to explain why a megacorp led by a megalomaniacal conman pushing for the government to strangle their competition is ackshually a good thing.

38 points by JeremyNT 3y ago

ur-whale 3y ago

> Tesla urges US to adopt much tougher fuel efficiency rules Color me surprised. Not.

toomuchtodo 3y ago
They've already proven the EV model works (along with BYD) [1]. Might as well shove your enemy into the lumber saw if they're trying to weaken standards. Adapt or die. Someone else will make EVs if legacy auto doesn't. No need to encourage folks to drive a studio apartment around (F150) if it is combustion powered. We're burning up so much fossil fuel for people who are social signaling or buying emotionally vs legitimate need [2] [3]. "...75 percent of truck owners use their truck for towing one time a year or less (meaning, never). Nearly 70 percent of truck owners go off-road one time a year or less." If climate change is an emergency, treat it as such. If companies die, they die. [1] https://www.statista.com/chart/30758/most-popular-plug-in-electric-car-brands/ https://www.statista.com/chart/30758/most-popular-plug-in-el... [2] https://twitter.com/TheWarOnCars/status/1497757646455201792 https://twitter.com/TheWarOnCars/status/1497757646455201792 [3] https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-size-pickup-truck-you-need-a-cowboy-costume https://www.thedrive.com/news/26907/you-dont-need-a-full-siz...
- willcipriano 3y ago
  I agree people fly around the globe, putting tons of Co2 into the air, to simply take a instagram photo! Who cares if the travel industry dies? This is a emergency! Or will only the luxuries your socioeconomic class doesn't engage in be targeted?
  - toomuchtodo 3y ago
    If you fly, you should be required to pay to offset using direct air capture at whatever the current market price is. I pay the fully loaded cost of all CO2 emissions my family is responsible for. The argument isn't "don't do this", the argument is "either avoid emissions or pay for them." Are you comparing the light vehicle emissions of the low and middle class to discretionary pickup truck purchases, priced between $50k and $80k? If you want to drive such a vehicle, and it is a combustion version, as long as whatever mechanism is dispensing the fuel ensures you're paying for that CO2 to be sequestered back underground in a stable form, by all means, Canyonero! But that is not what is on offer at scale. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI_Jl5WFQkA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PI_Jl5WFQkA
    - willcipriano 3y ago
      > I pay the fully loaded cost of all CO2 emissions my family is responsible for. Carbon credits are a scam, so no you don't.
      - toomuchtodo 3y ago
        I pay Climeworks for annual emissions, all of our vehicles are EVs, and all of our home energy is sourced from solar. You should do more research before making inaccurate statements that "Carbon credits are a scam." Some are, some are not. The ones that aren't are, of course, more expensive. https://climeworks.com/carbon-removal-as-a-solution-to-fight-global-warming https://climeworks.com/carbon-removal-as-a-solution-to-fight... https://climeworks.com/news/climeworks-achievedvalidationfromdnv https://climeworks.com/news/climeworks-achievedvalidationfro...
        willcipriano 3y ago
        Since it's a emergency shouldn't you buy as many carbon credits as you can afford and skip the vacation?
        toomuchtodo 3y ago
        I am not going to keep arguing with you because your ideology compels you to treat me the way you do, in a derogatory, condescending fashion. I am doing my small part (as I think everyone should, in proportion to their means and impact), and I work to find leverage points for scale (early investor in Tesla, donating to political reps who supported the Inflation Reduction Act). If you don't agree with me, that is your right, based upon your mental model. I am satisfied with what I can do with what I have, and mostly with the present velocity of change. I don't need buy in from people like yourself. The data shows it isn't needed, nor material to solve for climate change. If you don't believe climate change is real, or of the level of risk communicated by domain experts, we have nothing to discuss. EDIT: I'm not telling the poor how to live. Living is expensive. It has always been terrible to be poor. That is what subsidies are for, to help the poor deal with climate change. I fully support subsidizing those who need the subsidies to accomplish these goals. Increase taxes if necessary, as high as necessary.
- oh_sigh 3y ago
  Is "shove your enemy into the lumber saw" a common saying?
- oaththrowaway 3y ago
  What is a legitimate need in your book? I don't use my truck to tow a lot of stuff (besides a boat which you probably don't think is legitimate either), and I don't go off-roading much except for deer season (again, I'm sure that's terrible for you), but it does get used for hauling things in the bed that wouldn't be able to fit in my car quite a bit. I get people don't like using them for commuters and I agree, but to argue there is no use for them besides towing or going off-roading is absolutely silly to me. But maybe because I'm an idiot who lives in a rural area.
- ssharp 3y ago
  > "...75 percent of truck owners use their truck for towing one time a year or less (meaning, never). Nearly 70 percent of truck owners go off-road one time a year or less." I don't see how this shows that people aren't using their trucks. Off-roading seems like a odd use for this purpose and towing is not a great metric because you can easily utilize a truck for a ton of hauling that doesn't require towing.

unethical_ban 3y ago

Biased messenger, but correct message. CAFE and crash standards are the example to teach "bad knock-on effect". Make strict efficiency requirements, but exempt huge trucks? Everyone makes huge trucks! Ideally, there would be a progressive gas tax on luxury trucks above a certain weight, but there is no way to enforce that which isn't highly intrusive. I guarantee almost every truck owner could have a Ford Maverick instead of a Ford F-150 and they wouldn't lose an ounce of the needed capacity for their lives. Heck, the 2024 compact pickups are larger and heavier than full-size trucks from 25 years ago. I was looking at Van der Hall (vanderhall.com) 3-wheel roadsters because they look cool and have an old school open air feel about them. They are exempt from so many requirements because they aren't four-wheeled, thus not an automobile WINK WINK. I wonder what kind of sporty, comfortable, functional and efficient cars we could have under $20k in the US if we didn't have the overwrought safety standards and perverse incentives created my federal regulators.

eropple 3y ago
> I guarantee almost every truck owner could have a Ford Maverick instead of a Ford F-150 and they wouldn't lose an ounce of the needed capacity for their lives. Heck, the 2024 compact pickups are larger and heavier than full-size trucks from 25 years ago. Trucks have become pieces of consumer flair. I'll probably end up with a van at some point because of it. I won't buy an F-150 because they're comically large, but if I could get a Maverick without a back seat in the cab, I'd have bought one instantaneously.
- FireBeyond 3y ago
  They very much have. Perhaps exaggerated for the sake of example, but it makes a point. In Europe, a woman rides her horse every weekend for dressage/fun/whatever. So she hooks a horse trailer up to her Audi station wagon and takes it. In America, a woman rides her horse every weekend at her home. But she needs to move it to a different paddock twice a year (summer, winter). So it's obvious she will require an F-350 dual wheel truck as a daily driver...
  - 3y ago

MengerSponge 3y ago

I'd rather just see my government eliminate the SUV loophole. Requiring special insurance or a CDL to drive a Childcrusher GTX truck would be a nice and good thing too.

VincentEvans 3y ago
There’s a lot of country outside of whatever starbucks downtown you happen to live in - where it snows, rains, municipal services clean roads “eventually” if ever, before it melts on it’s own, and household shopping doesn’t fit in prada purse.
- kube-system 3y ago
  I've lived there. And those places had vehicles 30 years ago, when they were all much smaller. And if you've ever been to places where the roads really aren't plowed, people don't buy bigger trucks for that weather, they buy snowmobiles.
  - VincentEvans 3y ago
    I am sorry, apparently there’s only one way to make choices and I was doing it all wrong, so has everyone else who doesn’t have either an electric vehicle or a snowmobile. Never mind that I am writing this while on the side of the mountain and I plow my driveway myself with a diesel truck, you know better.
    - kube-system 3y ago
      We're not attacking your personal preferences, we're pointing out that vehicles have grown in size, and necessity is not the reason they've grown. My old 70s C/K pushed a plow just fine, despite being 50" less in length, 8" shorter, and ~1000lbs lighter than the typical new F150.
      - VincentEvans 3y ago
        … and also had half the fuel efficiency of the same F150. https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/09/20190930-sivak.html https://www.greencarcongress.com/2019/09/20190930-sivak.html

wing-_-nuts 3y ago

CAFE standards are a half way measure. What we really need are revenue neutral carbon taxes. Gas is now $7 / gallon, but everyone gets an income tax credit. Want to 'not pay taxes'? Buy a more fuel efficient vehicle. Turn down the thermostat, etc. I always thought income taxes were silly. Tax the things you want less of like pollution, etc.

someguydave 3y ago
Income taxes are silly but they keep a lid on the entrepreneurial spirits of rich wagies which the wealthy like.
sp332 3y ago
That just makes poorer people vulnerable to the weather and also unable to commute to work.
- wing-_-nuts 3y ago
  I mean, you could easily increase the tax credit to be progressive and not be regressive.
  - sp332 3y ago
    I'm not sure how this works. I'm going to carry all my gas money as debt until tax season?
    - wing-_-nuts 3y ago
      Well, you could theoretically offer to give people their tax credit in monthly installments but I'm pretty sure everyone would opt for the lump sum.
vorpalhex 3y ago
Gas is $3 / gallon here. Most of what you are paying IS taxes. The problem with no income tax is the poor spend more of their income, so end up paying more taxes AND the overall tax revenue decreases. You may be able to buy a new $40,000 car. Most of the population can not. I suppose "just freeze a bit" will save a few pennies...

olivermarks 3y ago

Automakers blast US plan to hike fuel efficiency rules The US is on track to completely destroy the western world's automotive industries, with a huge knock on effect in Europe. Millions of jobs will be gone forever and in the near future we will be completely reliant on areas of the world that don't care about pollution control for (probably mediocre quality) vehicles. https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/automakers-blast-us-plan-hike-fuel-efficiency-rules-2023-10-16/ https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/automa...

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

lesuorac 3y ago

> U.S. automakers separately have warned the fines would cost GM $6.5 billion, Stellantis $3 billion and Ford $1 billion. ... Automakers and the United Auto Workers union have previously also complained parallel rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency are not feasible and should be significantly softened. I really find it suspicious that at a cost of $10 billion they can't figure out a way to improve their fleets. I guess they'll just get disrupted by companies that can then.

onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago
> I guess they'll just get disrupted by companies that can then. Or they'll make sure we never have more efficient cars, or cities designed around anything other than being in a car 24-7, like they have done quite successfully for the last 50 years.
- bluGill 3y ago
  Sadly (as one of the few people honest enough to admit humans are bad drivers), I don't see significant investment in anything other than the car city.
- Spivak 3y ago
  You give them too much credit, people build cities designed around cars with no need for pressure from automakers. There's an area by me that went greenfield (well technically brownfield) to huge high-rise apartments, restaurants and shops lining the bottom, a new pedestrian bridge. The city was constrained by no one, they could have built anything and they're as liberal and progressive as they come. An area that's not even 3 square blocks has four brand new 7 story parking garages paid for by city and free-forever. To call it a massive success is an understatement, and largely due to the crazy amount of free parking making it far more attractive than anywhere else to spend a night out. They went from literally an empty field the most expensive real-estate in the region that isn't on a golf-course and competes with our downtown for number of non-resident visitors.
  - onlyrealcuzzo 3y ago

VincentEvans 3y ago

What happened to letting the free market sort it out? /s Electric vehicles are so great, so cheap, so universally loved - it’s inconceivable why one would ever buy anything else. And environmentally friendly too? Sign me up!

phone8675309 3y ago
I literally have nowhere to charge the thing when I'm home because I live in an apartment. My workplace does not do electric car charging in the parking lot. So an electric car is a no-go for me.
- VincentEvans 3y ago
  Your problems are of little concern to fiery little bunch of activists in these comments who will force their good deeds right down your throat for the greater good. If it works for them why shouldn’t it work for you too, and if you are still disagreeable - a bit more extra taxes would help you see their point of view.

Racing0461 3y ago

While joe the plumber pays 7$ for gas and uses paper straws, china keeps on building concrete buildings. Your life is being planned, young man, without you in it.

Spivak 3y ago

It's wild seeing a space that usually blasts companies from using regulation to give themselves a moat. I think the only way to make fair and not just kill major US auto manufacturers while still putting pressure to for everyone to improve would be demanding the same efficiency increase for both ICE and electric vehicles. Like can you imaging GM lobbying for stricter regulation on the total weight of vehicles due to the excess road maintenance and environmental damage of wearing through break-pads faster? Like we would all know it's not altruistic and they're just picking one metric they have an inherent advantage on and pushing that harder.

olivermarks 3y ago
I think anyone with an ounce of common sense is aware that EVs are analogous to the steam era with similar dangers. Coal power is used to create and force tremendous amounts of trapped energy into batteries, which like a steam boiler is highly stressed with the added danger of explosion, thermal runaway and toxic chemical fire that can't be extinguished. Where EVs - heavy, tire and road shredding devices requiring enormous amounts of largely unrecyclable materials in their batteries etc - have virtually no regulatory burden (why is there not legislation requiring mechanical door locks for example?) ICE vehicles, which are now highly sophisticated and efficient, are subject to endless meddling and restrictions. An entire airport car park burnt down last week, which is an unprecedented event masked by a compliant media who are obsessed with selling the concept that EVs are our future - all just because a bunch of bungling politicians have tried to legislate change. It's all a terrible mess compounded by encouraging people to abandon common sense and buy into the hallucinatory idea grids and the planet can support EVs within a few short years

resoluteteeth 3y ago

There is a lot of research showing that particulate pollution from tires is really harmful as well. I wonder if tesla will also be in favor of tougher regulations on that.

onedognight 3y ago
Why wouldn’t they be in favor of tire particulate regulations? They have a heavy car, but it’s no heavier than the top selling SUVs and trucks made by other manufacturers.
- Trumpi 3y ago
  Because it affects them too.

ouiouibaguette 3y ago

[dead]

bluGill 3y ago

Instead of changing the standards, I think they should keep them the same, but instead change the definition of a light truck (which is exempt) so that it only applies if the vehicle is used as a truck. People using a truck as a truck know that cosmetic damage to the sheet metal will occur and don't worry about it. Thus: A for tax purposes the value of a truck is based only on the number of hours the engine as run, and the mechanical condition (as audited by an independent mechanic). This will kill the rental and lease market for trucks since they won't be allowed to charge extra for cosmetic damages. You can still buy one, trade in will be weird as the dealer won't give you extra for perfect body condition, mean while every once in a while they will have a deep discount sale day to get rid of the not mint condition trucks (everything else will be moved off the lot for that day), but your taxes will still show you paid mint condition price). Of course what will happen is light trucks will be split into two models with slightly different names, one is a light truck and one is car. The car will cost more because it has to comply with CAFE. The truck will be cheaper.

bl_valance 3y ago

Absolute lunacy from this proposal. They well know the current timeline for phasing out ICE vehicles is actually not going that well and they want to further accelerate that timeline? That's just plain greedy, they know Tesla is dominating the EV market atm, this will hurt and slow down current manufactures. We are already seeing Ford slowing the production for the lightning line because the demands is just not there, there is a huge gap in infrastructure to support the upcoming wave of EVs. People are just very hesitant to jump the EV boat, and well justified. EV charging is a mess of apps, unreliable charging rates, and just general availability in non-metro areas.

alienicecream 3y ago

Here come the fanatical tree huggers to explain why a megacorp led by a megalomaniacal conman pushing for the government to strangle their competition is ackshually a good thing.