+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11

Thread: New Cafe Legislation

  1. #1
    I know a lot FSAE alums went to work in the auto industry. I am not full time, I work in metal stamping and participated at Michigan Tech. I have had a few uneducated discussions and read the news about this, but I want to get an honest to goodness engineering opinion, is the strict legislation possible? 4%+ per year? Are product engineers making those kind of fuel enconomy concessions on current models? Do we have that kind of technology in the pipeline (without losing your job by telling me) to see those kind of increases without trading off emissions or reliability? How close are these engines to limits, and how much of this is political swaggering? Bob Lutz seems to think that this will add $6-7k per car, essentially mandating that all cars are hybrids.

    For what it's worth, I don't think the environmentalists from the coasts have any idea what they are talking about (I am sure they hired experts though) simply because of the nature of this legislation. I am believer in the free market, and requiring the oems to meet fuel economy will not change consumer preferences and oems have to satisfy those at end of each quarter. Seems to me that if you want to make cars get better gas mileage, raise the price of gas and thus the cost of ownership of those vehicles. People will naturally buy cars that make the most sense for that person, leading to small cars beginning to make more money, yadda yadda yadda. If only we had a case study maybe 12- 18 months of recent history to demonstrate this most accurately. Hmm, I really wonder......

    [Steps off soapbox]

    Greg Ehlert

  2. #2
    The only case study that's really needed is to look in congested cities within Europe.

    Those car's won't pass US safety standards (remember when seat belts were unheard of, and the dashes were made of steel?). Get rid of them, let people drive smarter again once they realize that if they mess up they likely won't live through it again.
    Campus policies left students shooting back with camera phones. Life's worth more than pictures.
    www.ConcealedCampus.com

  3. #3
    On outboard boat engines, if the emissions keep getting stricter each year, very soon down the line they will have to stick a cat in the exhaust, which would be very hard since the exhaust is currently water cooled.
    Mike Duwe
    UWP Alumni

    Former Drivetrain Leader and Team Captain

  4. #4
    I believe that the legislation has been postponed. However, I think that we will see a great compromise when this bill finally makes it to congress. There is no way that the US government would come down that hard on what is still a prominent industry.
    University of Wisconsin - Platteville

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    762
    Greetings gents,

    Sorry, but could you give a few details as to what this new legislation is? Being on the other side of the world the news hasn't filtered through to us

    cheers all,
    Geoff Pearson

    RMIT FSAE 02-04
    Monash FSAE 05
    RMIT FSAE 06-07

    Design it. Build it. Break it.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Rochester NY
    Posts
    1,061
    You should find out being as tall as you are. Youll be the first to breathe in the bad stuff being 60 miles tall. Tee shirt still owed.

  7. #7
    CAFE - Corporate Average Fuel Economy.

    The "folks from the coasts" have dared to suggest that it's about time the US attempted to catch up with the rest of the world on fuel efficiency - and have asked for a mind-blowing 24mpg average for light trucks...

    The Japanese are laughing their arses off as always, what with having bet the bank on smallish petrols and hybridisation as the future. The Europeans are fecked, having bet their future on diesel and fuel cells. The US auto industry should be ok - as they've invested in nothing - but their HR baggage will still hurt.

    If I were in teh US, I'd be pushing for life-cycle analysis rather than wheel-well analysis - as that'd delay the hybrids. (initially at least!)

    The future for light vehicles has to be fully electric drive, speccing a genset & ultracapacitor for long distance use (say, 15kW genset and an ultracapacitor that can do 0-155mph, once, with a 2-300kW motor-drive system) and a genset & ultracapacitor & 40 mile battery for urban use. Genset can be whatever you like - any fuel; reciprocating or a turbine; internal or external combustion. Gorgeous to drive and stonking performance, as you've an imperial fucktonne of smooth and easily controlled torque form zero speed, but great on fuel too as your power source only runs at peak efficiency. For the urban run, a short battery-only range gives you the zero-emissions where you actually need it, whereas on the interstates/motorways/highways you get the range afforded by the internal genset. *If* fuel cells ever arrive, you simply bin the genset, but even now it's worth doing the /proper/ hybridisation for passenger vehicles?

    That is... ...unless you're core competency and fully depreciated tooling/IP is powertrain, and petrol engines, autoboxes, ladder chassis and similar agricultural kit...
    --
    Marko

  8. #8
    Originally posted by Mike Flitcraft:
    The only case study that's really needed is to look in congested cities within Europe.
    Wohoo - another fellow cyclist!

    Like-for-like, I'd take any European/Japanses motor over the US equivalent for safety, both passive and active. US rules are lax and the customer unsophisticated - and the auto industry plays to this...
    --
    Marko

  9. #9
    I am believer in the free market, and requiring the oems to meet fuel economy will not change consumer preferences and oems have to satisfy those at end of each quarter. Seems to me that if you want to make cars get better gas mileage, raise the price of gas and thus the cost of ownership of those vehicles.
    What would it need to hit in order to matter do you think - and how would you do something that is in the best interests of all?

    We've got the situation in the UK where fuel prices are nuding the psychological 1 GBP/2 USD per litre barrier. General consensus is that they'll stick around there for a while, then rocket to around 1.50GBP per litre, only at which point the effects will /begin/ to be noticed in terms of public behaviour.

    The money is in the southeast. Most new car purchases are in the southeast. Most problems relating to congestion (and annoyance/cost to the economy fur to it), air quality (and annoyance/cost to the economy for it), wanton and excessive consumption of stuff etc are in the southeast. Folks are wealthy, have a taste for expensive cars, and don't actually drive them all that far because the southeast is small and there is nowhere to go. If you've just put 50k GBP/100k USD, or even 20k GBP/40k USD (premium/average car costs here) on a car, and you've just paid 4k GBP/8k USD or 1k GBP/4k USD to licence and insure it for a year's road use, until fuel hits 5 GBP per litre the economy matters not a hoot. Driving this thing around is unnecessary (other options are available), and causes the most acute/visible problems for society as a whole.

    Everywhere else in the country, we tend to buy the castoffs from the southeast - I drive something Camry sized (big for the UK), with a 2 litre engine/getting ~33mpg (middling for the UK), that cost 1.5kGBP/3k USD 5 years old and costs me 0.5k GBP/1k USD per year to licence and insure for road use. Driving this thing around the middle of nowhere is necessary as the only alternative provision is a pushbike or good pair of shoes, and does very little harm by comparason - no air quality issues, no congestion yada yada.

    The US - similar? LA valley = Southeast, Kansas = middle of nowhere? Globally raising the cost of fuel is only going to hurt the nowhere places where cars make sense, and not do anything for the urban areas where they're a problem. CAFE isn't a bad idea in the total absence of anythign better, but it isn't really a free market thing.

    Really, summat else is needed. In the UK it's going to end up as road pricing - anything from 0.00GBP per mile/minute to drive on the road to 100.00GBP per mile/minute dependant on location and time of day should sort the problem overnight, and help redistribute wealth (and people) across the country in a more productive manner than whacking it all in the southeast. In the US? I'd start with bumping the taxation on fuels up just to make it a public issue and relase some money, and hitting the auto industry to do somethign productive with that money I just released, but the issue that really wants addressing is 'zoning' and 'planning' I reckon, addressing what is more of a lifestyle change than a technical one.
    --
    Marko

  10. #10
    Globally raising the cost of fuel is only going to hurt the nowhere places where cars make sense, and not do anything for the urban areas where they're a problem.
    I am not sure that this is certain. Many poorer and middle class people live in cities and their driving habits would be changed. Further, the 'back country' would have no option whereas the city folk could choose other methods to save money. All I am suggesting is that we really tax damages to the economy and environment, not mandate that certain things happen regardless of technical or economic feasibility.

    CAFE isn't a bad idea in the total absence of anythign better, but it isn't really a free market thing.
    I do agree with you that cafe is not a free market device, in fact it is the complete opposite. My opinion is that the free market is very powerful and in the end wins, so if consumers choose to buy more fuel efficient vehicles, detroit will build them, if they want suvs and trucks, they will build those too. Your tailor makes whatever you want.

    I haven't heard about the genset, can you get me started on what exactly that is? I am willing to look around for these things, but a lot travels by work of mouth. Also, how far out would you suspect the production version of this technology is?


    I haven't had a chance to link you some articles, but essentially, the us gov't mandates that manufacturers maintain an average fleet fuel economy. They can pay off discrepancies. Currently trucks need 22 and some change and cars like 27 or something, the new bill is to move to 35 by 2020-ish and 4% per year after that. The 4% has since been dropped, however it still needs to go through the house of representatives. Anyways, detroit's 'friends' in the government have put forth an alternative that keeps pace with their recent non mandated improvements, essentially keeping pace with what they have set themselves.

    I have heard about a few technologies through the grapevine, but I haven't researched them very thoroughly to understand them very well. Well the old roomies want some beer pong, so I gotta go.

    Greg Ehlert

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts