Detroit Calls Emissions Proposals Too Strict

[depakid]

If emissions standards are tightened too quickly, the automakers say, the only cars available will be small fuel-efficient models like Toyota’s Prius, above, and consumers will be disappointed.
------------

DETROIT — Automakers said Monday that they were working toward President Obama’s goal of reducing fuel consumption, but rapid imposition of stricter emissions standards could force them to drastically cut productionof larger, more profitable vehicles, adding to their financial duress.

Mr. Obama ordered the government on Monday to reconsider whether California and other states could regulate vehicle emissions to help control greenhouse gas emissions, a reversal of a position taken by the Bush administration. The announcement came as General Motors and Chrysler are borrowing billions of dollars from the government to avoid bankruptcy, and as Toyotaprepares to report its first operating loss in 70 years. Shortly after the president spoke, General Motors said it would cut 2,000 jobs at plants in Michigan and Ohio because of slow sales.

The California regulations, if enacted today, “would basically kill the industry,” said David E. Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research, an independent research organization in Ann Arbor, Mich. “It would have a devastating effect on everybody, and not just the domestics.”

<snip>

Environmental advocates who have long challenged the automakers’ opposition to the proposed California standards say such regulations will help the companies produce vehicles that consumers want. Failing to invest in reducing emissions and increasing efficiency will only prolong Detroit’s problems, said David Doniger, climate policy director for the Natural Resources Defense Council.

“I think this is the pathway to their survival,” Mr. Doniger said. “If carmakers are going to survive in a world of volatile oil prices and global warming, they have to be making more efficient vehicles. When the economy comes back and people start buying cars again, they’re going to expect that gas prices are going to go up, and they’re not going to want the gas hogs that they used to want. Consumers’ tastes have changed in terms of what’s cool.”

More: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/business/27fuel.html

[dipsydoodle]

1. Here we go

:shrug:

[bunnies]

2. Tough shit.

They've had a loooooooooooooong time to prepare for this. Maybe if they had been more forward-looking they wouldnt all be screwed right now.

The time has come for them to take some damned responsibility for the destruction of the earth. :nuke:

[BobRossi]

3. What do you drive?

Just curious.

[bunnies]

5. I dont drive.

I carpool or take public transport. I drove my last car (bought in 1995) until it started to have issues (2005) then I sold it. I refuse to spend a ton of money on the gas-guzzling, air polluting, over priced cars being sold right now.

Maybe when someone comes out with an affordable, 75+ mpg car, I'll buy one - but for now - no thanks.

[CRF450]

16. Toyota's part of the problem too.

They make just as many gas guzzlers as they make fuel sippers.

[spoony]

24. Don't interrupt the "fuck Detroit" meeting.

I mean, it's only a major economic industrial hub and long-time Democratic stronghold. We can afford to tell them to eat shit and die, right?

[CRF450]

35. Unfortunately want cant.

As far as econo cars go, its no secret they usually get better fuel economy. Thats untill you compare midsize/fullsize sedans, trucks and SUV's, even high performance sports cars and luxury cars. They all get around the same fuel consumption. GM and Ford's got some great cars coming into the market soon, I dunno about Dodge. The only thing I'v ever liked from them is the Dakota's which is one of my two vehicles. Best midsize pickup out their IMO.

[CRF450]

36. Sorry **Unfortunately we cant** brain fart....

[Betty]

4. do they want to sell cars or don't they???

why should my tax dollars go to these companies????

[endarkenment]

6. too bad - deal with it

it is time for america to get to work and rebuild our society

[.... callchet ....]

7. Give me a break

Tractor trailers have 400 hp and pull 80 thousand pounds. That is 200 lbs per horsepower. Translate that into what a car needs. Car weighs 3000 pounds. Divide that by 200 lbs per horsepower. You get 15 hp. That is all you need to move a car around. Engines in cars are way bigger than they need to be. Limit engines to 2 liters or less. Early volkswagens were 36 hp. You only need 40 hp in a car. All the rest of the power is for the wow factor.

[.... callchet ....]

8. Hundred thousand pound bulldozer

only has 400 hp. There is a lot of room to work in Detroit to improve economy. Give me that job. I'll make you proud !

[lamp_shade]

9. and every time they cried like that, they got their way. Party's over. Get it done.

[madrchsod]

10. he should have stated all autos sold in the usa must meet california standards

what he said was nonsense.

[OKIsItJustMe]

11. 1980 Briggs & Stratton Hybrid Concept Car

http://auto.howstuffworks.com/1980-briggs-and-stratton-hybrid-concept-car.htm

1980 Briggs & Stratton Hybrid Concept Car

The simple idea behind the 1980 Briggs & Stratton Hybrid concept car was essentially this: If two heads are better than one, why not a car with two power sources?

This unique "best of both worlds" gasoline/electric hybrid was devised around 1980 by Briggs & Stratton, the famous and prolific builder of small engines for everything from washing machines to lawn mowers.

…

The 1980 Briggs & Stratton Hybrid concept car development costs were relatively low. The $250,000 cost was similar to what it cost other manufacturers to create hybrid concept cars. But the 1980 Briggs & Stratton Hybrid concept car incorporated some novel twists. Its gas engine, for instance, was a small 18-horsepower air-cooled twin that B&S had just introduced and wanted to showcase.

…

As he wrote in late 1980, it had the makings of a new Citroën 2CV " the same . . . B&S engine, front-wheel drive, two axles, Kip Stevens bodywork, a carbon-fiber chassis and a 1200-pound curb weight. It should sell for $3000 (or less) and deliver 50 mpg. The Ace Hardware store could sell a bunch of 'em."

…

[One_Life_To_Give]

12. $20,000 off an Escalade

No kidding, who wants to make a $15k vehical that cost $13k to produce when you can get over $45k for a $25k production cost vehical.

[phantom power]

13. Right. Because "the industry" is soooo healthy right now...

:eyes:

These people are like automatons, running an obsolete program from 1982. Probably written in COBOL.

[spoony]

15. Which is why "right now" is a rough time to ask for sweeping

changes to their manufacturing. Yeah, yeah, evil companies destroying earth. But this is probably going to be unworkable in the short term, and may well kill them if they don't get help from the government in transitioning.

[phantom power]

18. Then I invite them to keep building cars nobody can afford to buy.

We'll see how that plan works out.

It's always the same story these guys tell. When they were riding high off of huge SUV profit margins, they said exactly the same thing. "Oh noez! Tougher standards will put us out of business!"

As far as I can tell, the Big 3 CEOs fight CAFE because it's hardwired into them. The answer is always the same, regardless of the situation. It's like Republicans and tax cuts. They don't need a reason.

[spoony]

19. So you think more expenses will equal less cost for buyers?

Brill thinking. Or were you supposing that retooling all of their manufacturing plants plus the costs of design WEREN'T going to be passed on? And I'm not talking about years ago, I'm talking about now. It is now, not years ago.

[phantom power]

22. If they retool for smaller cars that get better mileage, then yes...

it will equal less cost for buyers.

Or, they can continue to fight it tooth and nail. And just maybe they'll win the sacred right to build big trucks and SUVs that are already piling up on the lots, until they really do go out of business. Wouldn't that be a victory over those mean CAFE standards!

[HillbillyBob]

14. They have had since 1973 to change, Jimmy Carter wanted them

to tighten up, RonnyRaygun gave in to the auto lobby and let them slide as did amBushed 1, I was too busy being sick and homeless during Clinton to pay much attention, amBushed II did much the same and worse.
I do recall Florida wanting tighter regs and higher economy too.
Call the Waabulance(love that term) they have been whining for 30 f in years we cant afford to make more efficient cars..all the while Toyota, Honda, and Nissan among others have done so, then foolishly moved to making behemoths like the titan and the path finder etc...
There was an oil co geologist that told the fed and the oil cos that we would be facing peak oil in the 70s did anyone listen?
I ll admit I have owned a couple of those big cars. I enjoyed the ride, I bought them used for cheap as I was not in a position to buy much of anything.
My first new car was a Nissan pickup in 87 it got about 24 mpg, I was an over the road sales man to plant nurseries and had to go some rough roads, I also had an old 74 Porsche 914 that got 35-45 depending on if you were goin over or under 100mph I used on days I would not be going into the bush in SoFlas Everglades areas.
I would say let the bloated 3 die, but I don't want to see all of those jobs lost.
Short sighted,sad,stupid and selfish those are the big things I see.

[Not Sure]

17. 'Detroit' is full of shit

</sympathy for auto executives>

Stop selling the gas hogs. Sell the economy models they already make that meet higher standards. If they want to know how that's done, just take a look at their sales numbers from this summer. Sure, they didn't like the way it looked back then, but it will look a lot better when they aren't using those economy car sales to carry the dead weight of the hogs that sit on lots for 180 days plus. Don't make the hogs = no dead weight = better bottom line.

Here's another idea: don't build a batch of cars for California, a batch for Texas, etc. Check me if I'm wrong, but California has the strictest standards, right? Build all the cars to that standard. One template, one standard.

Detroit is full of shit. They can adhere to the standards by simply flipping a switch - namely, the 'off' switch - at the factories they're currently manufacturing the gas hogs. They are full of shit because they say they can't do this. They can, they just don't want to lose the massive profits from those obscene Escalades and Denalis and Suburbans.

I'm not an economist or a crystal ball gazer, but I smelled the same trouble at the start of the Hemi advertising campaign that I smelled the first time I heard an "interest-only" mortgage ad. We're talking about Detroit's business here, and they a) didn't see this coming? and b) don't have a contingency plan? Gimme a break. I call bullshit.

[spoony]

20. Your solution is to...close factories.

Nice. Glad to see so many pro-worker quasi-pugs on DU.

[kristopher]

21. You're out of line

Congress set aside $25B to retool for battery electric vehicles, and they've included strong tax breaks for buying these vehicles. That is how a new infrastructure gets developed.

Your solution is as short sighted as we have come to expect from automakers executives who are traditionally more concerned about next quarter's profits than next year's jobs.

It doesn't matter whether you believe that EVs are the future of personal transportation, because regardless of your beliefs supply and demand for energy will drive our market in that direction. Already China's biggest battery maker is planning on introducing affordable EVs via their own dealer network starting in 2010. If we don't prepare now, we will be shut out of the basic technologies behind building these cars.

[spoony]

23. Shutting down factories is out of line.

And so is the total lack of understanding or sympathy for what Detroit is going through. But, by all means, keep cramming words in my mouth, as most of that post had nothing to do with what I've said.

[kristopher]

25. Sure it does.

you are accusing people here undeservedly because they don't agree with you.

My remarks are a spot on response to your bullshit.

You wrote: "Which is why "right now" is a rough time to ask for sweeping changes to their manufacturing. Yeah, yeah, evil companies destroying earth. But this is probably going to be unworkable in the short term, and may well kill them if they don't get help from the government in transitioning." post 15.

"So you think more expenses will equal less cost for buyers?
Brill thinking. Or were you supposing that retooling all of their manufacturing plants plus the costs of design WEREN'T going to be passed on? And I'm not talking about years ago, I'm talking about now. It is now, not years ago." post 19.

The auto industry is getting well over $50 billion total (when you count support for battery technologies, retooling money, and financial bailout monies both banking and manufacturing).

What the fuck more do you want?

[phantom power]

26. Fucking-A. If they want Govt off their backs, can we have our $50B back?

[spoony]

28. You haven't paid 50B.

And since it's a loan, you'll be getting it back. Save your fauxrage for the banks.

[phantom power]

29. I've got outrage to spare.

You know what? Nobody questions my patriotism when I vent about the banks. Nobody says I'm having a "fuck Detroit" meeting. Or tells me I don't give a shit about American manufacturing.

I think we should have tougher CAFE standards. We should have had them 25 years ago, but Rick Wagoner and his pals convinced Congress to keep govt out of their way. And now, even after Rick and his buddies have managed Detroit right into the ground, after they've had to go hat in hand to Congress for money, they've still got the brass balls to whine about CAFE.

Seriously, fuck them. Sideways. If I was an American auto worker, I would be focusing my energies on finding Wagoner and stringing him up. Not defending him from people like me whose only crime is pointing out what screw-ups they've been.

[spoony]

30. Trust me, the UAW isn't fond of how shit's been run, BUT

I and most members would rather stand by execs fighting for survival for our region than take the side of people who are so lost in their own ideology that they don't see the horrific consequences of what they want on working families; people that don't live here and think they know this industry and what's going on here. And no, people pointing out screw-ups isn't a "crime" that's silly talk, but people are advocating further strain on a faltering structure without sufficient support--that, for me, is where I pipe up.

[phantom power]

32. Here's the nut of it...

I don't see how the American auto industry (or any other country's auto industry, for that matter) can go forward without building more smaller/cheaper/efficient cars, and fewer larger vehicles.

A hypothetical freedom from CAFE will not help them, because the fleet profile that people can afford to purchase, and fuel, will by economic necessity be CAFE compliant. I do not see why they continue to fight it. It will not constrain their business model any more than the macroeconomic climate is already going to constrain them.

Perhaps Wagoner, being a wealthy man, cannot conceive that this economic recession might last more than a couple years, and so maybe he just doesn't want his hands tied for the awesome recovery he assumes is just around the corner. I don't think the future is going to play out that way. I think the future will be one where more people own just a single car. And more people own none at all. And few people own trucks or SUVs, unless they have a frequent and compelling need for them.

Again, that would not be because of an ideological shift, it would be an economic shift. Where our current crappy economic climate becomes the new baseline, for at least a decade or so.

[kristopher]

31. The TOTAL committment Obama made to renewable energy

in his energy plan was $150 billion over ten years. That was intended to enable the transition to a completely new energy infrastructure, including transportation. Now you are bitching that the EXISTING DEAD END SYSTEM is getting one third of that amount in two years. There are a lot of people around this country that are depending on the work of building this new infrastructure, don't you think?

I mean it isn't as if large resources aren't being devoted to both the auto sector AND the renewable/energy efficiency sectors. I'm guessing that what your demand for additional funding (when you don't seem to know the details of what funding is actually being deployed) doesn't include consideration of the potential effects your demand might have on those who lose that funding, like people refitting homes for energy efficiency?

Does that mean you HATE siding, plumbing, HVAC techs, electricians and all those other practitioners of trades who would get to go to work with an additional $50 billion dollars in project loan guarantees?

That means the cost of money drops from 18%+ down to low single digits.

"And since it's a loan you'll be getting it back" in-very-fucking-deed.

Do you have any idea how attractive that is to developers of renewable and energy efficiency projects?

I'm thinking that you have a pretty limited view of worker solidarity, myself. You want all the seeds for the future given to you so that you can gobble them down now.

Screw that.

[spoony]

27. First of all, it ISN'T A BAILOUT

Those are LOANS. NOT like the banking bailout. Second, it ISN'T enough. Most of it will be used to keep the doors open. Ford, the "healthiest" of our companies, burned through more than 21 billion reserve dollars in 2008. And, as usual, the workers get the brunt of it. The companies are substituting debt payments for cash to health care and pension trust funds, and let's not even forget that in order to get that WONDERFUL loan you are glowing on about, the UAW had to bend over and reopen contracts. Not that any of you care, so long as you can still stand on your soapboxes pissing on Detroit.

OH! And by the way, that retooling money? Besides the first batch, which IS being used (and which shuts down factories for months at a time, but who needs a paycheck when we're all ideologues, right? I'm sure you're suffering in your own way, thousands of miles away, for the cause, right?) the rest is on hold. Who knows when it will come. As I said it'll have to be well before any increased standards, as these things don't turn on a bloody dime. The stimulus package, as of now, has no additional aid for Detroit's Big 3. And those, when they come, are just loans too, adding to the debt burden.

[Not Sure]

34. And yours is to keep them open despite building something useless at best and wasteful at worst?

I mean, hey, if you can find a way to retool the gas hog factories while they are actually in operation, I'd endorse that. My statement is based on the assumption that you can't do that. But keeping the Arlington, TX SUV factory open, for example, just because you don't want the employees to lose their jobs, despite the fact that the Escalade and the similar vehicles made at that plant are just enormous wastes of money at all stages of their production and life cycle, is a little myopic in my opinion.

And, by the way, don't refer to me as a "pug", quasi- or otherwise. I don't appreciate that one bit.

[IrateCitizen]

33. Didn't they say the same things about seat belts...

... and moving the gas tank so it wouldn't explode from a rear-end collision?

More of the same....