Here’s positive news on the fuel-efficiency front.
For the first six months of this year, the average gasoline consumption of new cars and light trucks sold in the United States was the lowest ever for any half-year period.
The average vehicle guzzled about 9.9 litres per 100 kilometres, compared with 10.4 a year earlier.
The figures will keep improving if increasingly tough fuel-consumption limits come into force in the U.S. and Canada by 2016, followed by further tightening over the next eight years that’s been negotiated between the U.S. government, carmakers and unions.
Next week, I’ll elaborate on that “if,” which has much to do with the U.S. presidential election. But for now, assume the rules will stick.
(The numbers here are converted into metric. I haven’t seen comparable Canadian data, but our regulations match theirs and there’s no reason to think trends differ here.)
Although riddled with loopholes, mainly lower standards for larger cars and pickup trucks, the regulations force manufacturers to make less-thirsty vehicles. That’s crucial if, as most experts agree, internal combustion still dominates the market for years to come.
By 2016, cars must be, on average, 37 per cent more efficient than last year’s. Those with the smallest footprint — width multiplied by wheelbase — are to hit 5.7 litres per 100 km. Trucks must be 23 per cent better; those with the biggest footprint must achieve 7.6 L/100 km.
For the two categories, combined, the average must improve to 6.9. For 2025, the proposed average drops to about 4.7.
Accept that some fiddling will occur. Accept also that these numbers, based on laboratory tests, exceed real-world driving. What’s important is the direction.
Buyer preference will impact the final results. But because the average must drop, consumption will improve no matter what vehicles roll from showrooms.
Obviously, if every buyer opted for a Honda Fit or equivalent — the smallest footprint category — fuel efficiency would far exceed the required average.
Two new reports suggest that won’t occur.
In the 1970s oil-price shock, buyers had to choose between cramped (and many thought unsafe) fuel sippers or bigger, more comfortable guzzlers. Most opted for the latter.
They continue to generally make the same choice; purchasing vehicles on the larger side of compact, with trucks maintaining their share of sales.
But history isn’t likely to repeat itself: During the past three decades, with no new standards, the preference for more size, power and accessories negated efficiency gains achieved by car engineers. Now, though, with the tougher regulations, absolute fuel consumption must drop. It won’t fall as far or as fast as if consumers moved en masse to the smallest vehicles, but it will decline.
“Thanks to a bumper crop of fuel-efficient models in the most-popular segments, consumers don’t have to choose between fuel efficiency and performance,” say Michigan-based auto analysts Baum and Associates in a recent commentary. “No matter what type of vehicle you want . . . carmakers are now upping fuel efficiency performance across the board.”
A national survey conducted in May for the Consumer Federation of America suggests substantial support for the fuel-consumption targets. As well, among the 1,000 respondents, those planning to buy new cars within five years expect they’ll consume 2.2 litres less per 100 km than with their current vehicle.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency divides vehicles into 10 fuel-consumption classes. In 2002, more than half of those sold were in the four highest-guzzling classes, with just 16 per cent among the four top-efficiency levels. This year, 31 per cent are among the guzzlers and 36 per cent are from the sippers.
Of course, the record could be better. And North American standards, current and proposed, still lag Europe, Japan and China.
Still, that’s an impressive change in a decade, with more to come.
Columns Everything you need to know about purchasing, maintaining and driving your car.
Become a member
Register now to access all features including:
- Save and ask friends to review vehicles
- Exclusive rebates & offers from local dealers
- Premium content, reviews and tools
- You can unsubscribe at any time. Please Contact Us for details.
All for free!
Already a member?
Registration 2 of 2
Welcome to Wheels!
As a final step we've sent a confirmation to your email address as a security measure. Please click the link in the email to complete your registration.
Terms of services
DISCLAIMER OF WARRANTIES AND LIMITATION OF LIABILITY
TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, TORONTO STAR IS PROVIDING THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES ON AN "AS IS" AND "AS AVAILABLE" BASIS AND MAKES NO WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, IN ANY CONNECTION WITH THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES, THEIR CONTENTS, OR ANY WEB SITE OR CONTENTS WITH WHICH IT IS LINKED. TORONTO STAR DOES NOT WARRANT THAT THE FUNCTION OF THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES OR THEIR CONTENTS WILL BE UNINTERRUPTED OR ERROR FREE, THAT DEFECTS WILL BE CORRECTED, OR THAT THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES OR THE SERVERS THAT MAKE IT AVAILABLE ARE FREE OF VIRUSES OR OTHER HARMFUL COMPONENTS.
TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW, UNDER NO CIRCUMSTANCES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, NEGLIGENCE, SHALL TORONTO STAR BE LIABLE FOR ANY LOSS OF USE, LOSS OF DATA, LOSS OF INCOME OR PROFIT, LOSS OF OR DAMAGE TO PROPERTY, OR FOR ANY DAMAGES OF ANY KIND OR CHARACTER (INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY COMPENSATORY, INCIDENTAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, SPECIAL, PUNITIVE, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES), EVEN IF TORONTO STAR HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES OR LOSSES, ARISING OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE USE OF THE TORONTO STAR WEBSITES, THEIR CONTENTS, OR ANY WEBSITE OR CONTENTS WITH WHICH IT IS LINKED. IN NO EVENT SHALL TORONTO STAR'S TOTAL LIABILITY FOR ALL DAMAGES, LOSSES, AND CAUSES OF ACTION, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, TORT (INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, NEGLIGENCE), OR OTHERWISE, EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU FOR ACCESSING THIS SITE.X