"PRBot II" (prbot2)
12/19/2013 at 21:38 • Filed to: news dump, srt viper, toyota prius, suck it trebek
3
9|
"PRBot II" (prbot2)
12/19/2013 at 21:38 • Filed to: news dump, srt viper, toyota prius, suck it trebek | 3
| 9 |
The Energy Department is predicting gasoline-powered vehicles will continue to dominate the market through 2040.
The 8.4 liter SRT Viper, yesterday
The Energy Information Agency said in a report Tuesday that it also predicts a big rise in the fuel economy of the nation's cars and trucks. It predicts the fuel efficiency of the nation's cars and trucks will rise from 21.5 mpg in 2012 to 37.2 mpg by 2040. Overall energy consumption by the nation's transportation sector is expected to fall by about 4 percent.
What? Yeah, that's what I thought
The agency predicts that in 2040, 78 percent of all cars and trucks will run on gasoline, down from 82 percent last year. It predicts a big upswing in micro-hybrids and other advanced fuel technologies to 42 percent of all vehicles by 2040. EIA predicts full hybrids will account for 5 percent of vehicles in 2040 — up from 3 percent today. Diesel vehicles will double to 4 percent from the current 2 percent.
It predicts just 1 percent of total sales will be plug-in hybrids and 1 percent full electric vehicles in 2040.
Hnnngggggg
In 2012, the Obama administration issued final rules to double the efficiency of new cars and trucks to 54.5 mpg by 2025 — though in real-world driving and after accounting for credits it will be around 40 miles per gallon. The Environmental Protection Agency said this month that the fuel efficiency of the nation's 2012 model-year cars and trucks hit a record average of 23.6 miles per gallon and is on pace for 24 mpg for the 2013 model year.
Overall fuel economy rose by 1.2 mpg over the prior model year — the second-highest jump over the last 30 years — partly because vehicles are more thrifty with a gallon of gas, and partly because higher gas prices prompted a shift away from trucks and SUVs. The boost represented a hike of about 5 percent. Fuel efficiency has jumped 22 percent since the 2004 model year.
Suck it, Trebek
EIA is now predicting a 30 increase in vehicle miles traveled from 2012 through 2040, compared with a 41 percent increase it had predicted over that time frame last year.
The agency also predicts that when adjusted for inflation, the price of gasoline will rise to $3.90 by 2040, compared to a prior forecast of $4.40; it estimates diesel fuel will rise to $4.73 by 2040, down from $5.03 in its previous forecast.
Reposted from !!!error: Indecipherable SUB-paragraph formatting!!!
PatBateman
> PRBot II
12/19/2013 at 21:43 |
|
Well that sucks. I was looking forward to my Delorean with 1.2 Gigawatts of power.
MoparKetchup
> PRBot II
12/19/2013 at 21:44 |
|
Victory dance: Engaged.
|
PRBot II
> MoparKetchup
12/19/2013 at 21:49 |
|
That is one hell of a .gif right there.
|
PRBot II
> PatBateman
12/19/2013 at 21:54 |
|
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
|
PatBateman
> PRBot II
12/19/2013 at 22:00 |
|
AND I live in Houston!! I'll have to check on this...
FJ80WaitinForaLSV8
> PRBot II
12/19/2013 at 22:01 |
|
We shall see what the 2018 mid term review brings. I think EPA is going to try and push through an increase to 60 MPG.
|
PRBot II
> FJ80WaitinForaLSV8
12/19/2013 at 22:08 |
|
They can push it all they want, but at a certain point it becomes nothing more than wishful thinking. I'm reminded of the quote from Bob Lutz regarding CAFE standards:
"As I've said for years, reducing fuel consumption by forcing automakers to sell smaller and more frugal vehicles is like fighting the nation's obesity epidemic by forcing clothing manufacturers to sell only in small sizes."
|
FJ80WaitinForaLSV8
> PRBot II
12/19/2013 at 22:27 |
|
Yup I love that quote. And I 100% agree at a certain point consumers are not going to want to pay for fuel economy increases. The OEMs already have the tech to hit 54.5 however I would bet a lot of money consumers aren't going to fork over the cash, especially when interest rates start going up.
|
PRBot II
> FJ80WaitinForaLSV8
12/19/2013 at 22:37 |
|
Well said. That tech certainly comes at a cost, and I wouldn't want to pay extra just to save money.