Obama Auto Task Force Team's Cars Fail CAFE Standards
After it was pointed out that most of the cars owned by members of President Obama's Task Force on the Auto Industry were imports, our friend Mark made another interesting discovery: nearly all of the cars fail current CAFE standards.
The Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard for passenger cars has been 27.5 miles per gallon since 1990. Mark went through the list of cars, checked their miles per gallon, and found that the average fuel economy was 23.4 mpg.
The best fuel economy goes to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, whose 2008 Toyota Prius and Honda Odyssey minivan average 33 mpg. At 20 mpg, Vice President Biden's chief economist Jared Bernstein's 2005 Honda Odyssey is the worst. For more analysis, check out the original post.
CAFE Standards: Fed Task Force FAIL [William & Mary American Constitution Society]
(Photo: fallenposters
Post a comment
Comments:
What do you expect from politicians - preach one thing practice another.
CAFE is total BS by the way.
What is the MPG on Marine One? That's got to be skewing the average.
Which MPG? Wasn't the CAFE of 1990 based on the old MPG standard? How do they take that into account? Would it affect Mark's "nearly all" findings?
Err...CAFE is pretty hard to reach with our current crop of cars. Basically only subcompact cars and hybrids (as well as a few diesels) can achieve almost 28 mpg average.
I don't like gas guzzlers either, but I can't see anyone with a large family making do with a compact car only...not even many midsizes can achieve that rating.
@Plates: Yeah seriously. My 92' four banger only gets 26 mpg highway...17 years ago. It's only dropped to like 24 mpg since then but still...CAFE seems kinda bullshit.
And who gives a fuck if all their cars aren't the best economically or fuel efficiency-wise? They're running the country, get over it.
Isn't CAFE across brand/company lines, not the average of your personal/family usage?
For the cars to fail CAFE standards, their manufacturer's lines (at the time, since some of those are older than others...) would have to fail. That's not even addressed in the article.
Corporate Average Fuel Economy, huh? Hey, what's up with that word "average"? It's almost like CAFE calls for some sort of, I dunno, mean or median or something. But that would mean individual cars can't "pass" or "fail" CAFE standards, so obviously I'm wrong.
One thing this study probably isn't taking into account is security. Plexiglass isn't lightweight, and neither are armored doors. I don't know if there are specific models that are built to support them or not, but that may be a factor.
Another issue that may come up, particularly with this group, is carpooling. If they've got large families or share vehicles with colleagues, that will also affect their carbon footprint.
Finally, I wonder how accurate these numbers really are. The original article stated "Admittedly, my statistics might be a bit sloppy, but here's my basic accounting methods- I punched in each member's vehicle make and model into fueleconomy.gov and then jotted down the average MPG". Well, that's not a good way to find averages. You're going to have a couple of anomolies here and there unless you remove the top and bottom X entries, where X is either a static number (perhaps the top and bottom 5) or a percentage of respondents, then average the remaining entries. And having a larger sample group helps, too.
Not that I'm trying to be a political apologist or anything. I just think that it's not as simple as just one standard, and I think the statistics left a little too much to the imagination. That said, I think the average would actually end up being *lower* than it's currently listed, due to Edward B. Montgomery's 45-MPG Harley-Davidson.
Makes for a good headline, though. *chuckle*
CAFE is a manufacturing standard. One reason the task force was formed was to figure out make auto manufacturers more "green". So of course the cars they own fail, if they didn't, we wouldn't need the task force.
@dreamsneverend: Look, I'm very conservative and oppose what's going on in Washington, but I don't think it's hypocritical. I seriously doubt these people bought foreign cars to make any kind of statement.
I expect a politician to make an educated buying decision just like I would, and I certainly don't expect them to all run out and buy American cars just because they got appointed to some committee. The fact that they don't drive American cars is an indictment of the US auto manufacturers, not an indictment of the buyer.
@Plates: If some politician owns a V8 muscle car, getting 10mpg, that is fine by me as long as he isn't driving it every day to work over long distances. If he has a car pick him up, or walks to work, and only used the car for fun on the weekends, that may still be less gas used per month than someone commuting every day with a Prius.
Do we REALLY think that chief economist Jared Bernstein drives a 2005 Honda Odyssey to work? I bet he doesn't drive a mini van, and has a car pick him up.
It would be tremendously easy to meet modern fuel standards if we went back to 70's safety standards. Engines are much more efficient, but cars are vastly heavier due to stronger steel, additional safety equipment, etc.
We should also throttle back the power of most cars, which I'm all for. There is absolutely no reason why normal production cars should be as capable as they are of accelerating into the hundreds of miles per hour. Companies can still sell fast cars, and should because they're awesome, but why can an Accord do 140?
I sure some taxpayer money and correct the situation.
@BigFoot_Pete: A small police helicopter uses about 47 gallons of fuel an hour. Or about 250 dollars an hour. But Marine one is like 4 times the size of that...
Who Care's about if they drive American... No offense but I bet money that there Mile Per Gallon is better then those who wrote this article and half of the people replying in this forum. So we are saying they are bad for driving a Hybrid come on... Grow Up and move on.....
Let them drive what they drive.... If americans would start spending money and banks would loan we would be getting out of this mess. We are almost all to blame we just dont like to admit it!!!
Agreed. And a Town Car's giant V8 must get the ass end of the gas mileage stick.
And also agreed on the distance/day thing. In the global scheme of things, an extra 5 mpg on a 3 mile drive is like farting at a tennis match.
If 20mpg is the worst in the bunch, and that's for a 2005 minivan, that isn't too bad. It sure beats the 15 mpg the people in the huge SUVs are getting in a vehicle that they never actually leave the road with, and definitely beats whatever mileage the redneck trucks with the monster truck tires, dual tractor trailer style exhaust pipes, and big KC flood lights get.
@Saboth:
True. We went with a Scion xB over a mini-van, but even with careful driving, it maxes out at an avg of 26 mpg. Until all cars are required to use hybrid engines, run on batteries, or alternate fuels yadda yadda, raising the CAFE numbers means car sizes will have to shrink.
@ADismalScience: Why do we need cars that go any faster than 88? At that point you can just kick on your flux capacitor and travel time to get wherever you need to go.
Here are a few of my favorites. These Guys/Gals should be in charge of Budget reform...
# Larry Summers owns a 1995 Mazda Protege (26 MPG)
# Lisa Heinzerlingra, senior climate policy counsel to the head of the EPA, owns a 1998 Subaru Legacy Outback station wagon (24 MPG)
# Rick Wade, a senior adviser at the Commerce Department, owns a 1998 Chevrolet Cavalier (23 MPG)
While safety equipment plays some role, I doubt "stronger steel" has much to do with it. If anything, modern cars are designed with crumple zones, so that they squish when crashed to absorb energy.
As far as top speed, that's less a goal than a side effect of making cars that accelerate. People want acceleration so they can, say, merge onto an interstate safely without being crushed by a tractor trailer.
The reality is that people want bigger cars, and manufacturers have been giving it to them. They've pretty much stopped making small pickups. The Civic used to be a minicar in the 70's, now it's a roomy sedan. The Accord used to be a compact, now it's practically full-size. The 60's Bronco was the size of a Wrangler, tiny compared to Explorers and Expeditions.
@Saboth: I have an '02 Mazda Protege5 hatchback and get 30MPG in it, my wife and two kids fit easily into the car when needed but we do usually drive my wife's minivan for most road trip, only 'cause it has a TV and after an hour or so on the road the kids get a little bored.
The calculations are severely flawed. Like many Americans (and politicians as well), the author confused arithmetic mean with harmonic mean (average). This error makes a big difference when calculating CAFE. Secondly, he lumped SUVS/Light Trucks into the same category as passenger cars and averaged them all together. Currently, these two different types of vehicles have different CAFE standards. A quick google search can explain how CAFE is calculated and why CAFE standards can only be applied to a particular manufacturer's whole fleet of cars. This article is like comparing apples to oranges and is pretty much worthless except for the fact that he tells us what kind of cars they drive.
A guy isn't driving a 2005 minivan because he's a gas-guzzling jerk but probably because he has a family. I'm against unnecessary driving of large, polluting vehicles (as a girl with a tiny dog and no spawn, I drive a 2004 Honda Insight hybrid -- 1900 lbs and about the size of a Silly Putty egg), but sometimes somebody with a family needs a large vehicle. We're really going to knock them for it?
PS My version of the Insight, which is absolutely adorable, is no longer made, but it gets about 45 mpg in traffic, and about 65 on the highway at 3am (the time in Lost Angeles when nobody's on the freeway). But, how many people have a life as compact as mine -- one girl, tiny dog? If they don't, they're going to need more car. And people buy what they can vis a vis their personal economics and the need for safety for their kids (and a high-off-the-ground, rollover-prone SUV is about the dumbest thing you can buy, vis a vis your kids' safety).
@jscott73:
I don't think the Protege 5 averages 30 mpg though. You take an equal amount of city with highway and divide. It will most likely be more like 25/30 or thereabouts. It *might* hit around 27.5, but it would be close. I had a Miata with the same engine (but the miata weighs a lot less), and it got around 32 highway and around 25 city, if I took it easy.
@Saboth: I keep a spreadsheet of my mileage, I've had the car about a year, filled it up 25 times, put 8283 miles on it, almost all freeway, and my lifetime MPG is 29.203 though I've averaged over 30 6 tanks so far. So the 30 was exaggerated by 0.797 mpg.
Hi, Consumerist. Author of the linked post here. Thanks for chiming in.
I understand that CAFE is a standard for industry averages and this is merely a small sampling of a few individuals. As I stated in the original post, I just felt like this provided an excellent opportunity to highlight that the task force is a microcosm of American commuters as a whole. My intention was not to judge them as policy-makers.
Granted, my analysis was admittedly unscientific and, apparently, somewhat statistically flawed. (Thanks for the feedback!). Nevertheless, the policy question I presented remains the same-- What can we do to provide consumers with more fuel-efficient choices?
And what do they listen to on their iPods in carpool?!?!?!
Yeah but it doesnt take into account how much polution would be created by them selling or junking those cars then buying a new one. Some of them have cars from the late 90's
@majortom1029: I did briefly mention retro-fitting engines. You're right. This really doesn't get discussed enough.
Well, if our cars didn't stink so much......
@Plates: Just add it to the list...
1) Pay taxes
2) Be fiscally responsible
3) Drive "green" automobiles
(feel free to add to the list)
@humphrmi: Exactly. I just felt the need to go through and publish the numbers since nobody else had pointed this out yet. The task force seemed representative of consumers as a whole. I did not intend to be critical of the task force members, rather I just wanted to highlight how badly they need to reform auto industry so we all have more "green" choices (including them).
Reminds me of the new incentive from Obama's new energy rebate incentives.
There's a $1500 max or 30% rebate for replacing a heating system but it requires a 90% AFUE rating. That rating requires a low sulphur fuel which isn't readily available, and most really good systems don't exceed 87% AFUE.
It's impossible to take advantage of the incentive.
Why do they do things like that?
If they bought the cars with their own money, I don't care what they drive and neither should anyone else.
@Canino: It's not that the cars aren't American; it's that they aren't fuel-efficient.
Politicians expect us to buy "clean", "green" vehicles, and they don't do it themselves.
Maybe this is a sign of libertarianism from the Obama administration.
CAFE Standards shouldn't exist. If people don't want to buy a car that gets 35 or 40 MPG, leave them alone.
If the price of gas goes up, that's an incentive to buy a more fuel-efficient vehicle. It shouldn't be the government putting a gun to your head.
@madanthony: Steel used in manufacturing cars is stronger than what was used 30 odd years ago. There are also added strengthening members which add to the weight. Yes, modern cars have crumple zones, but their chassis are stiffer than yesteryear.
I have a base Chevy Cobalt, have owned a 1986 Accord, and a 1990 Escort and never had trouble getting on the interstate at speed. Those who don't actually use the power have no need to have it, and from my perspective that's most of the people on the road. I can't tell you how many times I get behind someone on an entrance ramp who barely gets up to 50 mph before attempting to merge while hitting their brakes.
Yep, overall the market in the US is large cars even though most don't need it. The difference is that Honda and Toyota still make their Camcords with a punchy enough 4 cylinder and 6 cylinders that get better mileage than the domestics. The make-up of the American car landscape isn't gonna change for a long time, and using CAFE to force people into cars they don't want is a poor idea. We should focus on finding different ways of propelling our cars rather than relying on CAFE.
To be fair, I re-calculated the average using the same standards that the government currently applies, namely that only passenger cars and light trucks are factored in, and I got 239mpg/10 cars = 23.9mpg.
(Throwing out the Toyota Highlander and Lexus RX350 as these SUVs are not classified as light trucks)
If you factor in the motorcycle, it jumps to 284mpg/11 = 25.8mpg, showing the impact of a single vehicle on such a small sample size.
More than anything, I think this shows a flaw with the old CAFE standards. Nearly 1/4 of your list would not have been categorized under the standard, and among these were one of the most popular (and thus populous) class of vehicles being sold in the last 10 years...
@MooseOfReason: Sorry Moose, but I believe the first time this story came out last week it was that they weren't American.
Politicians expect us...
That's the problem right there - the fact that politicians expect anything. Politicians are supposed to work for us, not the other way around.
@AlteredBeast: Man, I don't even give a crap if his 10mpg muscle car is being driven every single hour of every single day. If he wants to drive it and pay for the gas, more power to him!
The problem *I* have is when these idiots start telling ME what to drive! You know what, leave me the fuck alone. I'll drive whatever I damn well please, thank you very much.
They're damned if they do and damned if they don't. I thought I was going to hear about their un-CAFE Ferraris, BMWs and Mercedes. These people are driving Hondas & Toyotas. They aren't making millions...they have to buy safe, affordable cars that'll last a long time.
Politicians are hypocrites?