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

[vskid3]

Originally Posted by redpoint5

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.

I think the real real root of the issue is the lack of financial literacy and rationality. Plenty of people buying the larger/less efficient vehicles really can't afford them and they either don't realize it or don't care. Fuel economy is just one of the factors that goes into the cost of owning a vehicle. The less efficient vehicles usually cost more in the first place. Insurance is usually more for the larger and usually more expensive vehicles. Maintenance is generally more expensive, too. A set of ok tires for my truck was over $600, a set of very nice snow tires for my Prius cost about $500. The giant Mud Terrains some people "need" for their city driving cost well over $1000. All these extra costs come from basing a purchase decision more on wants and perceived needs than actual needs.

If people would realize this, we wouldn't have this issue. I like fast cars and big trucks as much as the next guy, but for commuting and picking up groceries, they're kind of ridiculous.

[freebeard]

https://www.google.com/search?q=goodenough+battery

Here is the event that will moot all argument. The guy who was instrumental in developing the lithium ion battery in the 1990s, has announced a solid state lithium battery. Boom, headshot!

He's now in his 90s. The significance and techology are discussed in the March 3rd EVTV show. The lithium moves from the anode to the cathode [unless dyslexia] and is encased in glass doped with water. The [other electrode] is carbon. So:

• 1/3 the weight
• performant to minus something degrees
• fire and explosion proof
• low barriers to commercialization

The technology demonstrator uses lithium, but by sacrificing energy density and substituting sodium — you might have a battery made from salt, glass and charcoal.

[RedDevil]

Originally Posted by freebeard

https://www.google.com/search?q=goodenough+battery

Here is the event that will moot all argument. The guy who was instrumental in developing the lithium ion battery in the 1990s, has announced a solid state lithium battery. Boom, headshot!

He's now in his 90s. The significance and techology are discussed in the March 3rd EVTV show. The lithium moves from the anode to the cathode [unless dyslexia] and is encased in glass doped with water. The [other electrode] is carbon. So:

• 1/3 the weight
• performant to minus something degrees
• fire and explosion proof
• low barriers to commercialization

The technology demonstrator uses lithium, but by sacrificing energy density and substituting sodium — you might have a battery made from salt, glass and charcoal.

Yup, see http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthrea...ent-34921.html

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by vskid3

I think the real real root of the issue is the lack of financial literacy and rationality.

That, and a fundamental insecurity. The old "big truck compensating for a small penis", writ large. Buy a big, heavy pickup or SUV because it's supposed to be safer, even though statistics show they're generally not. Buy something big and expensive on payments to show your neighbors (and maybe try to convince yourself) that you're doing ok financially, even though you're one paycheck away from bankruptcy. And so on, and so on.

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

The old "big truck compensating for a small penis", writ large.

Trucks and SUVs actually do look cool, even though they're far from being efficiency-oriented. What few people remember, on the other hand, is that trucks became so popular there due to the taxation structure favoring them, while all that "active lifestyle" BS is just a marketing deal to fool the rednecks and drown them in debt.

Buy a big, heavy pickup or SUV because it's supposed to be safer, even though statistics show they're generally not.

Being more prone to rollovers and with a higher weight applied to their pillars, under some circumstances they can actually become a death trap.

Buy something big and expensive on payments to show your neighbors (and maybe try to convince yourself) that you're doing ok financially, even though you're one paycheck away from bankruptcy.

Buy something that you don't need, with money that you don't have, to impress people you don't like. I can't remember where I have read this, but it sounds accurate.

[jamesqf]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Trucks and SUVs actually do look cool...

Matter of taste, of course. I always thought the best a pickup could do is look functional. The ones from the last decade or two just look silly, with the grille & front end treatments that quite honestly do seem deliberate attemps to make them look like giant penises.

...while all that "active lifestyle" BS is just a marketing deal to fool the rednecks and drown them in debt.

Well, there is a use for a pickup in an active lifestyle. I have one - an '88 Toyota - which hauls hay for the horses, firewood for me, other stuff on demand. Other times it gets me to trailheads at the end of 4WD tracks, or through a foot or two of snow for cross-country skiing. (That's snow on the road: the banks are running 12-15 ft this year.) It's maybe half the size and twice the mpg of a modern "full size" pickup, and best of all, it cost me all of $2800 a decade ago, not $50K that I'd still be making payments on...

[ThermionicScott]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

Buy something that you don't need, with money that you don't have, to impress people you don't like. I can't remember where I have read this, but it sounds accurate.

I want to say I first heard it in "Fight Club", but it seems to be much older: https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Walter_Slezak

[cRiPpLe_rOoStEr]

Originally Posted by jamesqf

I always thought the best a pickup could do is look functional.

And they still do look functional at some extent, even though it's not the greatest priority among a majority of buyers.

Well, there is a use for a pickup in an active lifestyle.

Sure, but we can't deny some folks get them only to "look" active even if they're actually a couch potato who doesn't even haul anything but a couple of grocery bags - in the rear seat of their double-cab used mostly for solo commuting.

I have one - an '88 Toyota - which hauls hay for the horses, firewood for me, other stuff on demand. Other times it gets me to trailheads at the end of 4WD tracks, or through a foot or two of snow for cross-country skiing. (That's snow on the road: the banks are running 12-15 ft this year.)

That was one of the last real trucks.

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by cRiPpLe_rOoStEr

And they still do look functional at some extent, even though it's not the greatest priority among a majority of buyers.

So true. For some it's less important than the quarter mile E.T.

[ThermionicScott]

This Jalopnik article touched on the "million jobs at risk" calculation: Here's What's Going On With The Possible Rollback Of Fuel Economy And Emissions Standards