U.S. Tightens Car Mileage Rules, Part of Strategy to Fight Climate Change
www.nytimes.com
The new measure requires automakers to achieve an average of 65 miles per gallon for all the car models they sell by 2031.

The new standards require American automakers to increase fuel economy so that, across their product lines, their passenger vehicles would average 65 miles per gallon by 2031, up from 48.7 miles today. The average mileage for light trucks, including pickup trucks and sport utility vehicles, would have to reach 45 miles per gallon, up from 35.1 miles per gallon. Selling electric vehicles and hybrids would help bring up the average mileage per gallon across their product lines.

  • HornyOnMain@fedia.io
    47·
    6 months ago

    This was absolutely necessary. Car manufacturers have been abusing the previous rules which had lesser requirements for “light trucks”. Have you noticed how almost all ‘cars’ nowadays are the size of an SUV? This is a huge change and will affect so many more things positively(less fatal accidents for one) than JUST miles per gallon.

      • HornyOnMain@fedia.io
        15·
        6 months ago

        It is, and it’s unfortunate that it hasn’t been eliminated which needs to be the end goal. Still, I think this will have hugely positive impacts on the culture around cars, and even if I’m wrong EV’s will lead the way which this bill still leads us to. If it’s all electricity and the manufacturers don’t need to worry about fuel conversion, I feel they’ll be less incentivized to make monster size vehicles since added weight is decreased performance with no cost benefits for them.

      • intensely_human@lemm.ee
        11·
        6 months ago

        It’s an example of why over-complicated laws are terrible. Trying to get too specific with the law’s prescriptions makes a weird game that results in weird plays and inefficient solutions.

    • brbposting@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
      121·
      6 months ago

      I hope we have a breakthrough and battery technology. EVs are awesome though not ideal for pedestrians nor guardrails. Very, very heavy.

      • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world
        8·
        5 months ago

        They really aren’t that much heavier. It is just one downfall that people try to play up because they want to spread anti human propaganda.

        Most of the people buying giant ass vehicles don’t need them at all. If we took 90% of the trucks off the road and replaced them with electric cars the average weight would go down. So it would be good for “guardrails” if we care about them. The pedestrians wouldn’t get hit as high anymore as well making fatalities go down there as well.

        Edit: quick search returned this “The study finds that a 4 inch-increase in vehicle front-end leads to a 22% increase in fatality risk for a pedestrian.”

        • ExFed@lemm.ee
          5·
          5 months ago

          Disclaimer: I am an EV owner.

          EVs are quite a bit heavier when comparing within size class. From checking just a couple curb weights across similarly-sized vehicles, you can expect between 15% and 30% heavier.

          But, to your point… if you instead compare between vehicles with a similar pricetag, EVs are about 15% lighter. When people go to budget a new vehicle, I expect many people are less willing to do the math to realize that trucks are extremely expensive to fuel and maintain, and so they’re lured in by the “utility” they provide, when in reality it’s substantially cheaper to rent one for the 10 days a year they need it.

          With that said… you know what’s even better for humans than EVs? Trains. Buses. Diverse transit infrastructure!

            • ExFed@lemm.ee
              2·
              5 months ago

              Isn’t all non-quantitative language just… A Series Of Poor Choices? 😉

              Love the name, BTW

            • AA5B@lemmy.world
              11·
              5 months ago

              Ok then let’s make the point more concrete ….

              • the headline claims a 4t EV truck was too heavy for current guardrail standards. Ok, but the important part is the 4t, regardless whether it is EV
              • my EV is 2t. Sure, the battery added a lot of weight over what a similar ICE car would have, but it’s far less impact than the existence of so many giant trucks that are so much heavier. Current guardrail standards are plenty to stop my SUV, despite it being EV
              • current guardrail standards are enough to stop most EVs, except for a couple excessive models that are also excessive in size, poor efficiency, poor design. Even for a large EV pickup, most models weight well under 4t
        • frezik@midwest.social
          4·
          5 months ago

          Yup. Most of the people complaining about EV weight didn’t give a shit about ICE vehicles getting bigger and heavier for decades. They bought them by the parking lot.

        • FanciestPants@lemmy.world
          3·
          5 months ago

          As a pedestrian that has been hit twice, I will confirm that getting hit by a GMC Yukon was a worse experience than getting hit by a Toyota Tercel.

      • ExFed@lemm.ee
        3·
        5 months ago

        Crash tests indicate native guardrail system can’t handle heavy electric vehicles

        Fixed that headline for anybody who doesn’t read the article (which is better at explaining some of the nuance). AP is good, but not totally immune to clickbait titles.

      • frezik@midwest.social
        2·
        5 months ago

        There’s no reason to think the weight premium is here to stay. Going much over 350 to 400 miles of range isn’t really necessary, and there many models reaching that already. All further improvements in Wh/kg can go towards reducing weight, not increasing range.