• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CAFE standards for big rigs.

none of those guys are truckers.... 3 of them are manufacturers the other 2 are CEO's of very large trucking firms.
I actually know Stotlar..Con-way was one of my large fleet customers and have met him on a few occasions... George Motts, the now retired head of fleet maintenance for Con-way, was who i dealt with regularly though...Stotlar seemed like a good dude, but not very knowledgeable pertaining to the ins-n-outs of trucks.

I'm not inherently opposed to CAFE standards... but i will point out that they aren't all rainbows and unicorns either... there are downsides that can and will occur, some worse than others.
I see no point in ignoring the "bad" stuff and pretending everything about the issue is kosher.

What, do you mean drivers, is that what you mean by truckers? The parties to be regulated were involved in the regulation process, and they are in agreement with the outcome. They have stated the new technology required will pay for itself in fuel saving over a period of 18 - 24 months. How many years usage can someone get out of a well maintained tractor trailer? Looks like to me they are looking at a substantial savings over the life of the truck.

How would you go about setting an industry pollution standard, as opposed to the way this one was done?
 
What, do you mean drivers, is that what you mean by truckers? The parties to be regulated were involved in the regulation process, and they are in agreement with the outcome. They have stated the new technology required will pay for itself in fuel saving over a period of 18 - 24 months. How many years usage can someone get out of a well maintained tractor trailer? Looks like to me they are looking at a substantial savings over the life of the truck.

How would you go about setting an industry pollution standard, as opposed to the way this one was done?

yeah.. drivers and owner-operators...
the CEO of fed-ex knows exactly nothing about trucks... he's a numbers and ideas kinda guy, as CEO's tend to be.... real truckers know everything about their truck and what it takes to operate it.

i will guarantee you that whatever technology the put on these trucks to meet the CAFE standards will need maintenance and/or repair during this 18-24 month period.... how much that costs will depend upon the specific application... that is a very hard cost to assign when we try to figure out total cost, as it is dependent on a multitude of variables

as for the lifespan of a tractor.. well, the chassis can last 40 years or so...a well maintained powerplant will last out to about a million miles or so ( it will cost about 5 times the value of the motor , in maintenance and repairs, to get it to last that long).. a well maintained power train ( transmission, brownie box, driveline, rear ends) will last out to about 300-500k miles before a rebuild is in the cards... clutches can go anywhere between 6 months and 10 years( depending on driving habits of the operator).. tires can last out to 200k, but that is pretty rare anymore... most truck will go through 1.5 sets of tires per year (about $7-$8k per year).

by my calculations ( very simple ones, admittedly) i'm seeing about $19,000 in fuel savings per year under these new standards ( average miles driven / mpg X average diesel prices)... so it seem to me the manufacturers are advertising that the cost of the new standards will be between $29,000 and $38,000 bucks ( using their stated 18 -24 month recoup window).... if my figures are in the ballpark, that's a mighty hefty price to pay , considering new trucks run $80-$100 grand on average.

the big firms ( Con-way, Yellow/Roadway, Fed Ex, Coca-cola) will pay substantially less for their trucks ( they buy or lease in volume), so their markup will be substantially less than the average owner operator sees... they might even be privy to subsidies and incentives to update their fleets ( which is usually the case when new standards roll down the pike)
the big boys won't be hurt too bad by this, but the little guys, once again, will foot the bill in it's entirety.
 
gimme an hour with a truck driver and about 300 bucks worth of already existing products/technologies/knowledge, and i'll give you your additional 2 mpg average on his truck... but i'm not a manufacturer looking to make additional billions of dollars, so i don't really count for much in the grand scheme of things.

If you really could for $300 increase mpg by 2, you really should be marketing it. You would make a fortune

I would expect any trucking operation that could see 33% decrease in its fuel bill would jump at the chance. The first long distance haul would see the improvement pay for itself (assuming no negative factors in truck maintance or performance from the enhancement
 
If you really could for $300 increase mpg by 2, you really should be marketing it. You would make a fortune

I would expect any trucking operation that could see 33% decrease in its fuel bill would jump at the chance. The first long distance haul would see the improvement pay for itself (assuming no negative factors in truck maintance or performance from the enhancement

well, most of the mileage savings would come in changing the drivers driving habits.. so I could really only charge for a consulting fee...lol

an engine oil drip system coupled with a low flow propane injection system( CNG fumigation works better, but it's more costly) would take care of the rest ( and save money on oil changes to boot).
this stuff, and much more, has been known for years and years.. but lots of truckers/fleets won't do it because it voids warranties.

i had quite a few customers with different fuel setups ( and other ideas put into practice as well).. from the very simple and cheap, to the very complex and costly.
I had an old hippy truck driver as a customer that was very extreme with his ideas.... but his rig averaged almost 10 mpg year in , year out..... it smelled funny and was filthy, but was a mechanical masterpiece, imo.
i didn't make any money off of them, i just passed on the information and the rewarded me with loyalty and future business...and that's all I really wanted anyways.
 
the helping hand comes in the form of putting technologies and products into hte market without a market demand for them.

trucking manufacturers are like any other businesses, they really like to innovate... their engineers get all giddy with glee coming up with new stuff.
the downside is, not all of their innovations are marketable... sometimes the market says " ta hell with that crap, I ain't paying for it.. it ain't worth it".

so then a regulation comes down the pipe that mandates a certain standards that can be effectively met only with these developed technologies and products that the market would not previously accept.
it's not a matter of government saying " you will buy this widget and you will like it".. it's a collaboration.
the government says ' you gotta meet this standard", and the manufacturer say " awesome, i have this technology sitting ion the shelf that will do that".
of course, we are then faced with the notion that the end user will purchase these products, with the additional technology, whether they like it or not....
the regulation , in effect, creates a captured market that will overpay for the technology/products ( because they have no choice but to pay for the products, and the manufacturer will most definitely overcharge )

gimme an hour with a truck driver and about 300 bucks worth of already existing products/technologies/knowledge, and i'll give you your additional 2 mpg average on his truck... but i'm not a manufacturer looking to make additional billions of dollars, so i don't really count for much in the grand scheme of things.
You came the closest to explaining what helping hand the gov is giving but it still falls way short. If there is technology that can make engines more efficient and if these engines are dependable and affordable the trucking comps will buy them like hotcakes, fuel is number ONE expense for trucking comps. And they would be all over this. Sorry but I smell fish here.
 
yeah.. drivers and owner-operators...
the CEO of fed-ex knows exactly nothing about trucks... he's a numbers and ideas kinda guy, as CEO's tend to be.... real truckers know everything about their truck and what it takes to operate it.

What is pertinent is that they know how to increase mileage and reduce air pollution while increasing fuel savings. The drivers and owner-operators do not.

i will guarantee you that whatever technology the put on these trucks to meet the CAFE standards will need maintenance and/or repair during this 18-24 month period.... how much that costs will depend upon the specific application... that is a very hard cost to assign when we try to figure out total cost, as it is dependent on a multitude of variables

And you speculate that engineers did not consider maintenance/repair?


as for the lifespan of a tractor.. well, the chassis can last 40 years or so...a well maintained powerplant will last out to about a million miles or so ( it will cost about 5 times the value of the motor , in maintenance and repairs, to get it to last that long).. a well maintained power train ( transmission, brownie box, driveline, rear ends) will last out to about 300-500k miles before a rebuild is in the cards... clutches can go anywhere between 6 months and 10 years( depending on driving habits of the operator).. tires can last out to 200k, but that is pretty rare anymore... most truck will go through 1.5 sets of tires per year (about $7-$8k per year).

by my calculations ( very simple ones, admittedly) i'm seeing about $19,000 in fuel savings per year under these new standards ( average miles driven / mpg X average diesel prices)... so it seem to me the manufacturers are advertising that the cost of the new standards will be between $29,000 and $38,000 bucks ( using their stated 18 -24 month recoup window).... if my figures are in the ballpark, that's a mighty hefty price to pay , considering new trucks run $80-$100 grand on average.

the big firms ( Con-way, Yellow/Roadway, Fed Ex, Coca-cola) will pay substantially less for their trucks ( they buy or lease in volume), so their markup will be substantially less than the average owner operator sees... they might even be privy to subsidies and incentives to update their fleets ( which is usually the case when new standards roll down the pike)
the big boys won't be hurt too bad by this, but the little guys, once again, will foot the bill in it's entirety.

Then the truck owner, including the independents, comes out the big winner with ten's of thousands of dollars in fuel savings over the life of the truck! Hell of a deal!!! I can see why trucking companies are happy with this new standard.


BTW, You forgot to answer my question. How would you go about setting an industry pollution standard, as opposed to the way this one was done?
 
Last edited:
I keep hearing how gov is working WITH engine manufacturers to make these new great engines, so far nobody can tell me govs role in this marvelous new engine. Tax incentives? Cash handouts? R&D by unemployed NASA scientist? WHAT? So far all I hear govs role in this is DO IT OR ELSE
 
So far all I hear govs role in this is DO IT OR ELSE
Yes, after consulting with manufacturers, scientists, engineers, shippers, etc. in order to understand what should and can be done, and how soon it can happen. Then in order to get it to happen much sooner, it is essentially in your words “DO IT OR ELSE”; much like a coach. Thanks for your understanding.
 
yeah.. drivers and owner-operators...
.... real truckers know everything about their truck and what it takes to operate it.

gimme an hour with a truck driver and about 300 bucks worth of already existing products/technologies/knowledge, and i'll give you your additional 2 mpg average on his truck... but i'm not a manufacturer looking to make additional billions of dollars, so i don't really count for much in the grand scheme of things.
Thrilla, please reconcile these two statements for me. thx
 
Yes, after consulting with manufacturers, scientists, engineers, shippers, etc. in order to understand what should and can be done, and how soon it can happen. Then in order to get it to happen much sooner, it is essentially in your words “DO IT OR ELSE”; much like a coach. Thanks for your understanding.

That’s pretty much what I thought, the myth that gov is working in cooperation with engine designers is just that, a myth. As I have stated before fuel is number one cost to a trucking comp and any engine designer that can get fuel consumption down will be an instant winner. Catch is the trucking comps also want a reliable engine that will save more in fuel cost than it loses in maintenance cost. Obama stepping in and saying make this engine by a certain date guarantees an engine that isn’t ready and will cost trucking comps which will in turn cost you and me, everything you touch came to you on a truck. Now if on a personal level you are OK with that fine but it damn sure isn’t going to help this fragile economy recover.
 
That’s pretty much what I thought, the myth that gov is working in cooperation with engine designers is just that, a myth. As I have stated before fuel is number one cost to a trucking comp and any engine designer that can get fuel consumption down will be an instant winner. Catch is the trucking comps also want a reliable engine that will save more in fuel cost than it loses in maintenance cost. Obama stepping in and saying make this engine by a certain date guarantees an engine that isn’t ready and will cost trucking comps which will in turn cost you and me, everything you touch came to you on a truck. Now if on a personal level you are OK with that fine but it damn sure isn’t going to help this fragile economy recover.
Just so you know that many Presidents were involved, including Bush. Also it’s interesting that the engine manufactures say they will be ready, but maybe they are lying or something, but I don’t think so. I think it will actually help the economy, there are many historical examples.
Corporate Average Fuel Economy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In late 2007, CAFE standards received their first overhaul in more than 30 years. On December 19, President Bush signed into law the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which requires in part that automakers boost fleetwide gas mileage to 35 mpg by the year 2020. This requirement applies to all passenger automobiles, including "light trucks." Politicians had faced increased public pressure to raise CAFE standards; a July 2007 poll conducted in 30 congressional districts in seven states revealed 84-90% in favor of legislating mandatory increases.
On January 26, 2009, President Barack Obama directed the Department of Transportation to review relevant legal, technological, and scientific considerations associated with establishing more stringent fuel economy standards, and to finalize the 2011 model year standard by the end of March. This single-model year standard was issued March 27, 2009 and is about one mpg lower than the fuel economy standards previously recommended under the Bush Administration.
On May 19, 2009 President Barack Obama proposed a new national fuel economy program which adopts uniform federal standards to regulate both fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions while preserving the legal authorities of DOT, EPA and California. The program covers model year 2012 to model year 2016 and ultimately requires an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 miles per US gallon (6.63 L/100 km; 42.6 mpg-imp) in 2016 (of 39 miles per gallon for cars and 30 mpg for trucks), a jump from the current average for all vehicles of 25 miles per gallon.
 
What is pertinent is that they know how to increase mileage and reduce air pollution while increasing fuel savings. The drivers and owner-operators do not.



And you speculate that engineers did not consider maintenance/repair?




Then the truck owner, including the independents, comes out the big winner with ten's of thousands of dollars in fuel savings over the life of the truck! Hell of a deal!!! I can see why trucking companies are happy with this new standard.


BTW, You forgot to answer my question. How would you go about setting an industry pollution standard, as opposed to the way this one was done?

i didn't forget to answer the question... I just realized it's a waste of time continuing the conversation and decided not to.
 
i didn't forget to answer the question... I just realized it's a waste of time continuing the conversation and decided not to.

I wish you had come to that realization before you wasted our time! :sun
 
Just so you know that many Presidents were involved, including Bush. Also it’s interesting that the engine manufactures say they will be ready, but maybe they are lying or something, but I don’t think so. I think it will actually help the economy, there are many historical examples.
Corporate Average Fuel Economy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
In late 2007, CAFE standards received their first overhaul in more than 30 years. On December 19, President Bush signed into law the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which requires in part that automakers boost fleetwide gas mileage to 35 mpg by the year 2020. This requirement applies to all passenger automobiles, including "light trucks." Politicians had faced increased public pressure to raise CAFE standards; a July 2007 poll conducted in 30 congressional districts in seven states revealed 84-90% in favor of legislating mandatory increases.
On January 26, 2009, President Barack Obama directed the Department of Transportation to review relevant legal, technological, and scientific considerations associated with establishing more stringent fuel economy standards, and to finalize the 2011 model year standard by the end of March. This single-model year standard was issued March 27, 2009 and is about one mpg lower than the fuel economy standards previously recommended under the Bush Administration.
On May 19, 2009 President Barack Obama proposed a new national fuel economy program which adopts uniform federal standards to regulate both fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions while preserving the legal authorities of DOT, EPA and California. The program covers model year 2012 to model year 2016 and ultimately requires an average fuel economy standard of 35.5 miles per US gallon (6.63 L/100 km; 42.6 mpg-imp) in 2016 (of 39 miles per gallon for cars and 30 mpg for trucks), a jump from the current average for all vehicles of 25 miles per gallon.

Just one of the many reasons Bush dissapointed me.
 
Back
Top Bottom