Progressive Automotive X PRIZE

Not All That Guzzles is Olds

With apologies to Bill Shakespeare for mangling his prose, we'd like to point out to our readers that, just as not all that glitters is gold, not all that is Detroit guzzles gas.  Perhaps unduly dismayed by that icon of fuel profligacy, the Hummer, or perhaps too easily seduced by diesel-sipping Bluetecs from Europe, the greener portion of the American public seems to assume that Detroit must (almost by definition) be the biggest villain in the MPG saga.  Not quite so!  As shown in a recently released GAO report on fuel economy standards, most European OEMs who export to these shores regularly violate CAFE targets, choosing instead to ante up the civil penalties that result.  In fact, the Europeans have enriched the US Treasury by some $115 million between 2001 and 2005 (which are the newest figures GAO has), with BMW leading the way, at over $50 million in fines.  Even the People's Car maker, VW, ponies up a few million bucks every few years to cover its fuel-thirsty Audis (and of course those products of another VW subsidiary, Lamborghini).  One cannot tie the numbers easily to a given model or even to a given year, as Uncle Sam allows all sorts of averaging and carry-forwards and -backs, but over the long haul the biggest offender is Mercedes.  And these numbers don't even count the gas-guzzler tax tacked on at the point of sale: these are civil penalties paid by the OEM for violating the CAFE standards.  The Japanese and Koreans are notably absent from the list, as you might expect, but perhaps as you might not expect, so are the Detroit 3: GM, Ford, and Chrysler have never yet had to pay a CAFE fine.  (They may start having to, according to rumors that they have recently strayed out of compliance, but with the lags in these numbers it is hard to tell.)  So, while the Detroit side may be not be as green as we would like, at least the home team is not just paying off the referees.  As German diesels hit these shores the situation may change, but for now remember that while the Big Three may be making too many V-8s, for a big thirsty V-12 you have to go to Europe...

Thoughts on the Third Rail

In a recent posting Glenn Mercer took the courageous step of touching the "third rail."  He wrote:

We need to ask or compel vehicle manufacturers to make more efficient and cleaner vehicles.  We need to ask or compel fuel suppliers to provide the fuels that will enable supply of such vehicles (e.g. ethanol, electricity, hydrogen...).  And we need to ask or compel drivers to consume less vehicle miles. 

The "third rail," fatal to touch (like social security or seat belt interlock) purports to reduce VMT - vehicle miles traveled.  It is true that VMT has been increasing faster than population and faster than GNP.  We
need to seriously ask ourselves what it takes to reduce VMT.   Some high percentage (I seem to remember 80%) of VMT are due to work commute.

Many times it is not a matter of choice.   People cannot afford housing nearer their work place - lack of urban planning!  Sure, in the end we do it to ourselves, but land use (mis)planning should be mentioned along with (as Glenn puts it), "evil Detroit and evil Big Oil."   We require an environmental impact statement for any major project.   We should also require a transportation energy use impact statement whenever a new subdivision is built or a suburb stretches out far beyond places of work.

It is not so much as "we need to ask or compel drivers to consume less vehicle miles," as we need NOT to compel drivers to have to drive such long distances to work.   Incidentally it is one of the worst health hazards too and not just due its effect on air quality.