Automotive Fuel Economy How Far Can We Go? (1992) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Pages 1-11
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
The charge to the committee was to estimate "practically achievable" fuel economy levels in various size classes of new passenger cars and light trucks using gasoline and diesel fuel. Any such determination of practically achievable fuel economy levels, however, necessarily involves balancing an array of societal benefits and costs, while keeping in mind where the costs and benefits fall.
|
From page 2... ...
The estimates represent the collective professional judgment of the committee in light of available evidence, including presentations to the committee on market-penetration potential, costs, and effectiveness of technologies to improve fuel economy. They also reflect the committee's consideration of past trends in fuel economy improvements in the United States and fuel economy levels being achieved by today's '~est-in-class" vehicles.
|
From page 3... ...
economy, trends in consumer tastes, and the form of future fuel economy standards themselves, as well as the effects of safety and emissions regulations. The sections that follow highlight the committee's conclusions with respect to factors that must be considered by policymakers in determining practically achievable fuel economy levels for light-duty vehicles.
|
From page 4... ...
_ ~_ ~ _ ,,[ Aside from the limits imposed by the foregoing assumptions, no cost-benefit considerations entered into the determination of the technically achievable fuel economy levels. Specifically, the estimates do not take into account other factors that should be considered by policymakers in determining any future fuel economy regulations, including impacts on the competitiveness of automotive and related industries, sales and employment effects, petroleum import dependence, effects on nonregulated emissions (e.g., the greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide)
|
From page 5... ...
The committee recommends that the Department of Transportation, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, and the Federal Highway Administration, in concert with other federal agencies, such as the Department of Energy and the Department of Commerce, reestablish a robust program of data collection and analysis to support the formulation of national policy. SAFETY IMPLICATIONS Safety, as measured by fatalities in the United States per hundred million vehicle miles driven, has been steadily improving for decades -- falling from about 16 fatalities per hundred million miles in 1930 to about 2 in 1990.
|
From page 6... ...
Moreover, light trucks are oarticularIv aggressive to Passenger cars in car-light truck collisions. Some measures r ~~~ ~ ~~= 3 The issue has significance because weight reduction is important for fuel economy improvement and could be achieved without size reduction through the use of lighter (and more expensive)
|
From page 7... ...
In its fuel economy estimates presented in Table ES-l, the committee assumed that the Tier ~ emissions requirements imposed by the Clean Air Act amendments of 1990 will be met. (The committee took account of the penalty in fuel economy arising from increased weight of new or improved emissions controls on vehicles.)
|
From page 8... ...
They could be aggravated, however, if more stringent standards or standards of an inappropriate form lead to significant increases in vehicle purchase prices that lower sales, or if the standards contribute to a shift toward greater purchases of vehicles manufactured outside the United States. The interactions of higher fuel economy, improved occupant safety, and lower emissions illustrate dramatically the need for coordinated action by policymakers.
|
From page 9... ...
Because light trucks have lower fuel economy, on average, than automobiles, the trend has adversely affected fuel economy goals. Moreover, there has been increasing consumer demand for options that negatively affect fuel economy.
|
From page 10... ...
Because large cars generally have lower fuel economy than small cars, full-line manufacturers must invest resources to increase their sales of small cars and/or invest in technology to increase the fuel economy of their large cars. Manufacturers of small cars, on the other hand, can more readily meet the standards and indeed, may even produce fleets with fuel economy sufficiently above the CAFE standards as to enable them to expand initially into the large-car market without applying the expensive technology required of the full-line manufacturers.
|
From page 11... ...
and increased fuel prices, the available policy instruments include improving the transportation infrastructure, developing intelligent vehicle-highway systems, improving public transit, reducing speed limits, encouraging car-pooling, and so forth. All such policy instruments should be considered in developing an appropriate strategy for reducing petroleum consumption.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.