PCM

I ran across this article today in regard to 2014 year model and later trucks and new fuel efficiency requirements - the first time any mpg requirements have ever been mandated by the goverment. Here is a link to the article. Phillip

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101024/...l_efficiency_2

Rednecktastic

I guess my next truck will be a 2013

PCM

LOL! Yeah, I have planned for sometime to get a 2014 as probably my last truck. I may have to reconsider and get a 2013, too. I will certainly keep myself informed of the developments for the next generation trucks. pcm

stidwell

I swear they are trying to get us all to go back to the horse and buggy. with all this additional emissions, safety and maileage requirements, no one is gonna be able to afford it.

Also, if my memory serves me correctly, the mileage they are trying to obtain was obtained years ago and was common the the 5.9L cummins.


"Two of the most common elements in the universe are hydrogen and stupidity" -- Harlan Ellison

"unfortunately both are found between the ears of government officals" -- me

JTCHess

At the risk of bringing capitalist economics into the discussion, just raise the price of fuel with additional taxes and let consumer demand be the driving force to incentivize manufacturers to increase the mileage of their vehicles. Does anyone here actually think that commercial users (trucking companies) don't care about mileage standards in their fleet pruchases? Heck the airlines are grounding entire fleets of previous generation jets because the newer jets are achieving 25% less fuel burn.

Rednecktastic

I don't think government control or rationing is "capitalism". Must have skipped Econ101 .

I don't think that's ever really fixed anything.

p035970

Amen brother. Less government as our forefathers intended.

EKUgrad

I get what you are going for here, but "price fixing" via taxation is market manipulation and social engineering -- not free market capitalism. It's antithetical to free market capitalism, actually....

...and are you assuming that the market forces that would prefer improved efficiency are not in place currently? That if Cummins developed an engine capable of a 25% reduction at current fuel taxation/pricing levels no one would bat an eye? Of course I know that you are not saying that... so what real benefit would materialize from higher taxation?

RAMRODD

I actually think that commercial users (trucking companies) don't care about the price of fuel..... Ever hear of a Fuel Surcharge??

Trucking companies will pass on the bill to the consumers. So in other words you for all fuel price/tax increase on fuel.

Beast2B

How does the price of fuel in the US now relate to true capitalism? I'm not in the mood for more gov't either, but how is our fuel cost kept so artificially low relative to the rest of the world?
Not trying to stir anything up, just really want to know from an economic/taxation/gov't position!

JTCHess

I believe that if the costs of maintaining our military in the middle east to ensure the free flow of oil were factored in we would be paying at least double of what we are paying now. Of course then again, how do to you place a value on the human costs incurred as a result. Also, in addition to the airlines, the railroads too are replacing their second generation diesel locomotives with more fuel efficient ones. Not sure what role fuel surcharges play in these modernization efforts.

Rednecktastic

They aren't kept artificially low? It's our transportation system of fuels that keeps real costs down plus we are not gouged with 100-300% tax on fuels.

dmurdock

I know for a fact this is incorrect...at a certain price point rail starts taking away loads. My brother in law is an engineer (train) and he said the higher diesel goes the better for him because the busier they are. Market forces are very complicated....high fuel = high fuel surcharge = higher priced goods = less goods bought = less goods shipped = less goods mfg = less jobs = less people buying goods = less raw materials transported = etc... etc..

Any "fee" or "expense" added anywhere in the supply or consumption chain will trickle in both directions. Making fuel more expensive just makes EVERYTHING cost more...and people buy less.

RAMRODD

I will agree certain product demands go down as price goes up. But certain products still get shipped no mater what the charge and trust me the railroad surcharges by the bushel!!

If the government really had a head on there shoulders and wanted to save fuel and bring down the cost of shippping they would allow heavier loads instead of 80K lets go 90K. Problem with that is it would actually work.

Beast2B

but isn't that directly related to the deteriorating condition of our roads and other transportation system? Don't the taxes (theoretically!) pay for the infrastructure 'worn/damaged' by the vehicles using the fuel? a majority of the taxes collected on anything should go to THAT system, whether it's fuel tax to roads, bridge fees to bridge maint, etc.
i'm no economist, but 'artificially low' to me means that the system doesn't support itself through fees and taxes on the use of that system. drive more? pay more taxes DIRECTLY related to driving to cover your share of the cost.
too simple i'm sure!