Forum poster proposes plan to boost fuel economy, save Detroit
Over at the GM Inside News forums, a poster has put up an interesting proposal to help the automakers and jump start the economy. Some elements of this have already put forward previously, but a warning to all the anti-diesel zealots in the audience, you won't like this. Essentially the idea is for the president, either the one who is making out his pardon list right now or the one moving in January 20, to issue a temporary waiver allowing high mileage European cars to be imported into the United States. The 24 month reprieve would allow automakers to bring in any car that gets at least 44 mpg combined and passes current European safety regulations and either Euro IV or V emissions regulations. From a safety standpoint, this shouldn't be a problem, since European regulations are different than the ones here in the states, but still plenty safe.
The real issue lies with emissions. Most of the cars that would qualify are diesel powered. While many are now equipped with particulate filters and would have no issue with soot emissions, NOx is another story. Given that California seems to be particularly averse to NOx emissions, it seems unlikely that they would agree to this waiver and its not clear that the president has the power, even under the War Powers Act, to over-rule California's emissions standards.
The other problem with this plan is that right now even fuel efficient cars are not selling because many people, especially those at the low end of the market, can't get credit and they can't afford to pay cash for a new car. Such a plan would have been helpful six months ago, but unless Hank Paulson is willing to start leaning on his banking buddies to actually loan money out instead of just hoarding that $700 billion, it probably won't help. The cost of importing these cars from Europe rather than producing them domestically would probably also make the plan non-viable.
Gallery: 2009 Ford Ka
[Source: GM Inside News]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
state 8:22PM (11/30/2008)
Sam wrote:
"its not clear that the president has the power, even under the War Powers Act, to over-rule California's emissions standards. "
Sam, the more you write, and the more I read your nonsense, the more I realize you are not stupid, you are just chronically angry.
This Non sequitur serve no purpose. Move on or get professional help, you need it.
Reply
Sam Abuelsamid 8:37PM (11/30/2008)
Who's the angry one here? You took my quote out of the context where I was just questioning whether this person's idea was even doable. The premise of using the War Powers Act was not mine, but came from the original posting. Lighten up state.
nads 10:10PM (11/30/2008)
Anything it takes to avoid those government mandates huh. So what happens after the 24month period, and revert back to a highly inefficient vehichles...the Volt. I guess if you're one of the lucky 10K that get one, but once those sell out by month 2, we go back to square one?
The automakers want our money to survive, and the government wants some changes that will improve their long-term viability. How about the government mandates a major realignment of the auto-industry toward plugins and highly efficient cars, and fully subsidizes it with loans, fleet investments, and significant rebates that make them cost-competitive with anything else on the market. That sounds like an actual plan for long term viability.
Sam's proposal to tax taxpayers while giving their money to automakers = BUST.
Random internet poster's idea of bringing in EU models while ignoring long-term viability of business model = BUST.
Mandated highly efficient vehicles + mandating them for governments fleets + loans to pay for realignment + irresistible rebates for those who buy them = WIN!WIN!WIN!
mike 8:41PM (11/30/2008)
I sent this same idea off to obama's .gov site a few weeks ago.
I think we should also strong-arm the fuel companies into producing more high quality diesel.
We need to do that anyways or when the economy begins to turn its upswing will be stifled by piling up transport/trucking costs.
Further, long term we should work with Europe and the japanese to standardize both safety and emissions regs. It will be cheaper for everyone and provide a standard that third world countries can easily adapt as the wealthy nations will have paid for all the testing, certification, etc... so the whole world will get cheaper and cleaner cars.
I'm all for it.
- mike
Reply
ale 10:12PM (11/30/2008)
three thumbs up buddy, if we all had the same emission standards and safety standards, it would make life easier. The problem is each market seems to have different ideas on each of those, maybe not so much safety, except maybe China, but thats not really fair here, but for example the confederation of Californian States and the EPA target NOx while EU targets CO2. Both are equally important, but its time to come to a consensus. I'm tired of drooling over EU cars that never come here. However, lets put a footnote here and say that nothing we theorize or say rarely comes true, as politics does not work that way.
But its good food for thought anyways..
meme 9:13PM (11/30/2008)
Wait... the "news" today is what a poster on a forum writes?
Gotta love those standards.
Reply
Luke 9:25PM (11/30/2008)
"The other problem with this plan is that right now even fuel efficient cars are not selling because many people, especially those at the low end of the market, can't get credit and they can't afford to pay cash for a new car."
In addition to that, I would have to agree with a number of analysts that say that a good portion of the potential buyers are holding out as long as they can so that they can buy 1) the best car that future technology can buy, and 2) so that those technologies can prove themselves. I myself am the driver of a Japanese car who is doing just that, but am also looking forward to only buying the best of what the American car makers have to offer in the future (ass-u-me-ing there is a "future").
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 9:32PM (11/30/2008)
People are not going to load up on 44mpg European cars right now. Gas is $2.
I don't understand how this saves anything. It just seems like another post from a person who is deluded into thinking that people in the US somehow want super slow, super small cars, they just can't find one to buy.
Reply
JerseyGeoff 9:46PM (11/30/2008)
Want to save Detroit( and the US Economy in general)?
A Much Better Bailout Plan
For years now, the Big Three automakers have been unable to produce cars competitively, largely because they have to buy their employees’ and retirees’ healthcare through private insurance, whereas workers in all other industrialized nations are covered by cost-effective national healthcare plans. Even the foreign manufacturers who produce here undercut Detroit by recruiting a younger, healthier workforce.
Now that the bottom has dropped out of the market for SUVs and light trucks, the Big Three are facing certain bankruptcy and need a bailout, possibly for loans to fund the $51 billion they owe to the VEBAs they promised to set up for their retirees’ healthcare. However, the VEBAs will purchase health insurance through private, for-profit providers, which skim off up to 30% from the top, as compared to Medicare, with only a 3% overhead. It would be far better for Congress to allow the UAW workers and retirees to be the first to enroll in a program based on the Conyers-Kucinich Bill (H.R. 676), an expanded Medicare with no premiums, no deductibles, no co-pays, and no hassles. Like Social Security, the H.R. 676 program would be funded by a payroll tax of 4.5% from employers and 3.3% from employees.
Will this save money for Detroit? You bet. If we’re going to bail out the Big Three, let’s do it in a way that solves a real problem that is strangling U.S. manufacturing: the burden of private health insurance.
Reply
ale 10:14PM (11/30/2008)
great idea and great plan, but once upon a time SS was a good idea and we see how that turned out... politics > people
Harvieux 5:35PM (12/01/2008)
We don't need more government programs or government fixes. It was the government that got us into this mess to begin with regarding the lax in oversight regulations for unqualified home buyer's with interest only, no down payment, etc. We can't tax, tax, and tax our way out of this mess. Sure, the unions put a tremendous strain on the big 3's viability comparatively however, the big 3 did not perform in a competent manner to where they may of overcome such a disadvantage by producing vehicles for today's needs.
I'm often wonder how the socialist Euro community's auto makers seem to make it work. Oh, I know! They actually produce vehicles people want and which 60% happens to be hi-tech, clean diesels. You can't tell me that these Euro auto maker's workers don't have similar benefits as UAW workers, can you? Maybe I'm wrong.
slk23 12:13PM (12/01/2008)
Harvieux:
Why do you think all those Europeans want diesel vehicles? A good part of the reason is the cost of gasoline, which is high because it's taxed heavily. The taxes are intended to encourage efficiency and a shift from gasoline to diesel. Without that tax policy, and the emissions laws, you wouldn't see as many clean diesels on the road in Europe.
JerseyGeoff 1:08PM (12/01/2008)
Harvieux, when 17 percent of the US GDP goes for private health care and only 12 or so percent goes for Canadian, German, Japanese healthcare- it's time to drop the "private is good, govt is bad " argument. Of course Detroit needs to build cars that folks want-but somehow $51 billion in unfunded healthcare VEBA's that they owe next year has to have caused them to take their 'eye off the ball' don't you think?
More cars are assembled in Ontario now than Michigan....
and do you think that health care costs may have driven this work out of the US?- I do.
Bolen 10:00PM (11/30/2008)
A couple of questions.
1. Do Japanese Kei-class cars, vans, and trucks meet similar safety standards? If so, why not allow imports of Kei cars too?
2. How different are US, European, and Japanese safety standards? It seems to me automakers would be helped if the governments of major car markets could agree on common international safety standards, so that German Fords, for example, could be imported here without modification.
Reply
Tim 2:15AM (12/01/2008)
IDEA. Many people need/want a car. The auto unions have health care costs that they are partially responsible for. Why not set up a UAW credit union where borrowers pay for membership and in return they will get low interest loans on cars. The membership fees would offset the lower interest rate loans. If the program became successful the revenues would help pay for health care costs. The government could supply the first 5 billion dollars to back the auto loans to get the program started.
Reply
Aimless Six 2:56AM (12/01/2008)
Even in Europe, the offerings from the Big 3 of cars that can get 44 mpg are slim. Are you Americans ready for the Ford Ka, Opel Agila and Chevrolet Matiz?
Or for he Diesel versions of the Opel Corsa and Astra, Ford Focus and Fiesta, Volvo C30 S40 S50 and V50.
Opening up the market for cars designed for Europe will be the last nail in the coffin for the big 3. If they can't cut it now, how will they stand up to the Japanese, French and Italian economy models.
Reply
wxman 5:02AM (12/01/2008)
It’s ironic that the state that’s holding the entire nation hostage to the potential benefits of additional high-mileage diesel models is the one that will likely receive the least benefit (and possibly a disbenefit) from NOx reductions. Most of California (especially Southern California) is extremely “VOC-limited” with respect to ozone (“smog”) formation (Chinkin, et al, “Weekday versus Weekend Activity Patterns for Ozone Precursor Emissions in California’s South Coast Air Basin.” J. Air & Waste Manage. Assoc. 2003, 53 (7), 829-843); thus NOx reductions (without greater reductions in HC and CO) will not improve ground-level ozone, and has the potential to actually make it worse. Even EPA acknowledges the potential of NOx reduction disbenefits in Southern California (EPA Final Regulatory Impact Analysis: Control of Emissions from Nonroad Diesel Engines).
In fact, all urban areas studied thus far are “VOC-limited” (Blanchard, et al, “Differences Between Weekday and Weekend Air Pollutant Levels in Atlanta, Baltimore, Chicago, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Houston, New York, Phoenix, Washington DC, and Surrounding Areas.” 2005, CRC Final Report No. A-47). Non-attainment with the ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) is almost exclusively limited to large urban areas, so widespread exposures to unacceptably high ozone levels won’t be helped (and may actually be made worse) by NOx reductions in these areas.
There may currently be financial reasons which preclude widespread acceptance of diesel vehicles (e.g., unreasonably high price spread between diesel fuel and gasoline), but holding them out for environmental reasons isn’t legitimate.
Reply
why not the LS2LS7? 11:48AM (12/01/2008)
Yes, it is legitimate. There's no point in raising NOxes now. We can work to further reduce VOCs right now, taking advantage of the low NOxes. If we let the NOxes go back up, then we'd have more work to do after we get VOCs down.
wxman 4:13PM (12/01/2008)
I don't think going with Euro 4/5 would cause ambient NOx levels to rise. Tier 2/LEV II has only recently been fully implemented. Tier 1 allowed NOx emission of up to 1.25 grams/mile. The equivalent Euro 4/5 NOx emission limits would be approximately 0.4/0.3 grams/mile, representing a decrease in allowable NOx emissions by a factor of 3 to 4.
At least 2 "source apportionment" studies have linked gasoline exhaust and gasoline vapors to 71% to 80% of ALL ambient HCs in Southern California (not just anthropogenic). A slower decrease in ambient NOx levels with a more rapid decrease in ambient HC levels is just what Southern California (and urban areas in general) need to avoid the potential of making ambient ozone levels (i.e., "smog") worse.
Wally 7:19AM (12/01/2008)
That's what I've been waiting for...a forum poster to save the world....end hunger, wars, and economic chaos...cure AIDS, Cancer, and restless legs...and bring me a car that's burns stinkin' diesel and has bolting that I don't have any tools to fit.
Yes!
A Forum Poster as a world leader!!
Reply