Vehicle makers say US fuel economy standards put a million jobs at risk

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

(Speeding tickets are far more effective...)

How on Earth would a speeding ticket get people to drive economically? Driving my Insight at twice the limit (assuming it actually could go that fast :-() is still more economical than driving say an F350 4x4 at 10 mph under. Heck, it probably uses less fuel than the cop car does idling while writing the ticket.

[Fat Charlie]

But people are going to buy the pickup instead of the Insight. Fear of a ticket is probably all that keeps them from driving it at twice the limit.

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

How on Earth would a speeding ticket get people to drive economically? Driving my Insight at twice the limit (assuming it actually could go that fast :-() is still more economical than driving say an F350 4x4 at 10 mph under. Heck, it probably uses less fuel than the cop car does idling while writing the ticket.

Economically, relatively, with what they have.
Most cars are more efficient at 130 km/h (80 mph, our max speed limit) than at 180 km/h, that's how.
Even so, we do see the occasional idiot blast by, but we know they sooner or later lose like a months wage in one go.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by Lemmy

here in the UK you're 70 odd times more likely to die of a catastrophic injury while simply walking, and more likely to die of a heart attack by sitting on my arse taking no exercise at all. In fact, I'm between 40 and 100 times more likely to die as a result of taking no exercise at all, as I am from riding my bicycle.

Thanks; mind if I appropriate that? I should stop being thankful every time I make it across town alive.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by RedDevil

Most cars are more efficient at 130 km/h (80 mph, our max speed limit) than at 180 km/h, that's how..

But that speed-related inefficiency only applies in the instances where you go 180 km/hr. A vehicle that gets say 15 mpg at 130 km/hr is ALWAYS much less efficient than one that gets 60 mpg, regardless of what speed you choose to travel at.

[RedDevil]

Speed tickets won't turn gas spillers into ecomodders, it wil just make them watch their speed more closely. Until they know where all the cameras are of course, then it degenerates to brake hard & floor it again.

What I meant to say is that it has some influence on their behaviour where other measures seem to have no effect at all.

Then, some peaople don't even seen to care about the tickets. Maybe they do buy into the greatest charity thing and just mean to do good.
If only a fixed and substantial percentage of gas tax and traffic rules infringement income were reserved for developing green energy... the world would be a better place for man's vices

[freebeard]

When I competed in the job marketplace, the most charitable description of my driving was 'agressive' and I considered tickets an additional tax for using the highway efficiently.

As soon as I transitioned to Social Security (George W has until 2020 to pay back the $1.37 trillion he gave the bankers*), I chilled the [beep] out. So I think one of the best things to reduce speeding would be a guaranteed/uniform basic income.

My cousin Larry died on his motorcycle on Highway 101, at age 17, because a woman made a hasty left turn to her workplace one morning.

*What? He's out of office? That's the joke.

[niky]

Originally Posted by freebeard

Tesla?

The exception that proves the rule. Tesla simply has no competition... yet.

[aerostealth]

No need to even have a mpg metric. They could simply specify Cd standards, HP, and mass. MPG is just something people want to know when making a decision to buy. The metrics I mentioned are how they are achieved.

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by aerostealth

No need to even have a mpg metric. They could simply specify Cd standards, HP, and mass. MPG is just something people want to know when making a decision to buy. The metrics I mentioned are how they are achieved.

That is way more cumbersome than having an MPG standard. You go from having to enforce regulation on 1 parameter, to regulating 3. Besides, a heavy and powerful vehicle can be more fuel efficient than a lighter and weaker one, especially if it's an EV.

The real root of the issue is the low relative price of petroleum as a fuel. If you want to reduce demand for something, then raise the price.

That said, burning fossil fuels for transportation is an extremely low threat to humanity, and relatively low threat to the environment. Furthermore, and attempts to reduce consumption in a few local areas (the US, for example) will do little to reduce global consumption. If the US stopped all consumption of gasoline, the price would plummet, and other countries would increase consumption.

It would take a near 100% global participation rate for an effort to reduce petroleum consumption to be effective. Anything less than that is either naive, or political marketing.