EPA, NHTSA & ARB Draft TAR finds MY 2022-2025 LD fuel and GHG standards can be met largely with more efficient gasoline-

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

GRA

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
14,018
Location
East side of San Francisco Bay
Via GCC:
EPA, NHTSA & ARB Draft TAR finds MY 2022-2025 LD fuel and GHG standards can be met largely with more efficient gasoline-powered cars
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2016/07/20160718-tar.html

The draft TAR shows that automotive manufacturers are innovating and bringing new technology to market at a rapid pace, and that they will be able to meet the MY 2022-2025 standards established in the 2012 rulemaking with a wide range of cost-effective technologies. Moreover, it indicates that these standards can be achieved by relying primarily on advanced gasoline vehicles.

The report projects that only modest penetration of hybrids and only low levels of electric vehicles are needed to meet the standards. This is consistent with what the National Academies of Science found in a comprehensive 2015 study. Manufacturers can meet the standards at similar or even lower costs than what was anticipated in the 2012 rulemaking with substantial fuel savings payback to consumers. . . .
 
From the linked page:

It is clear that the automotive industry is innovating and bringing new technology to market at a rapid pace and neither of the respective agency analyses reflects all of the latest and emerging technologies that may be available in the 2022-2025 time frame. For example, the agencies were not able for this Draft TAR to evaluate the potential for technologies such as electric turbo-charging, variable compression ratio, skip-fire cylinder deactivation, and P2-configuration mild-hybridization. These technologies may provide further cost-effective reductions in GHG emissions and fuel consumption. The agencies will continue to update their analyses throughout the MTE process as new information becomes available.

Gosh, with such advanced tech...hey, wait a minute! You could buy Judson electric superchargers in the Sixties (I think "electric turbocharger" may be a nonsense term), cylinder shutoff as first tried in the Eighties, and mild hybrids are hardly cutting edge. Why do I get the feeling this stuff was written by auto industry engineers, and then just signed by the regulatory agencies named?
 
This is mostly good news because the transition to EVs and renewable energy isn't happening overnight, and in the meantime, it's best that fossil fuels be consumed as efficiently as possible.

On the other hand, this shows that at least in the absence of a significant tax on carbon (implemented in a revenue-neutral manner, I'd suggest), the standards need to be tightened. We need to reduce GHG emissions as much as possible without undue harm to our economy. Because even if the current standards are met, our GHG emissions will still be well beyond safe, sustainable levels. The most conservative approach is to seek to "play it safe" with the climate. It's just not worth the risks of failing to do so.
 
...because harming the environment has no effect on the economy. (sarcasm)

or a healthy environment is "bad for business" on a dying planet.

Really? just use gasoline better? We have the ability to NOT use it at all. Where would that piece of technology fit in , I wonder? the NOT using fossil fuel technology...hmmm.

So many disruptions with this EV thing. All kinds of studies and reports saying be careful, we may not want cleaner air or rely so much on non-renewable energy. Again, more sarcasm. 'Cause it's just laughable that oil/gas is still the answer. just drive slower toward the cliff...
 
Back
Top