More

Obama Administration Unveils New Fuel Economy Labels For Vehicles, Drops Grades

Ray Lahood Lisa Jackson

First Posted: 05/25/11 03:26 PM ET Updated: 07/25/11 06:12 AM ET

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration on Wednesday announced new fuel economy labels for vehicles, including new ratings for plug-in hybrids and electric cars, but nixed a plan to assign vehicles "A" through "D" grades based on efficiency.

Announced this morning by Environmental Protection Agency chief Lisa Jackson and Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, the new labels offer consumers shopping for a new car information on expected savings over a five-year period, as well as a fuel economy comparison to other cars in the same class.

"These labels will provide consumers with upfront information about a vehicle's fuel costs and savings so that they can make informed decisions when purchasing a new car," LaHood said in a statement Wednesday. "This is one part of President Obama's plan to provide Americans with relief from high gas prices and break our dependence on foreign oil."

Vehicles are rated from one to 10, with 10 being the most desirable, across a variety of areas, including smog and greenhouse gas emissions.

The labels feature a QR code allowing consumers at a dealership to personalize fuel cost estimates and compare vehicle models based on fuel economy. By entering information about their commutes and driving behavior, consumers can obtain a more precise estimate of fuel costs.

"The EPA and DOT are creating a new generation of fuel economy labels to meet the needs of a new generation of innovative cars," Jackson said Wednesday.

The elimination of letter grades, which would have discouraged consumers from purchasing inefficient vehicles, is considered a victory for automakers. The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the industry's main trade group, has been an especially vocal opponent of the system.

"The addition of a large, brightly colored letter grade may confuse the public about what is being graded and it risks alienating the consumer who has a valid need for a vehicle that does not achieve an 'A,'" based on greenhouse gas emissions, said Auto Alliance spokesman Wade Newton in a statement on Thursday.

But when asked in a conference call with reporters on Wednesday why the grades have been dropped, Jackson insisted they were merely unpopular with American consumers.

"When we did focus groups it was split right down the middle ... which told us at least half the people wouldn't be comfortable with a letter grade," Jackson said. "It's all about the consumer here," she added, "and letter grades were something we wanted to test, but they didn't test so high that they were something we wanted to include."

The 2010 fuel economy rule, which covers model years 2012 through 2016, will save an estimated 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the life of the program and the average consumer $3,000 in fuel costs.

In July, the administration plans to finalize the first-ever standards for commercial trucks, vans and buses built from 2014 to 2018. The standards promote the development and use of alternative fuels and are expected to save hundreds of millions of barrels of oil over the life of these vehicles. The administration is also working on the next generation of greenhouse gas emission standards for model years 2017 to 2025 and plans to announce a proposal in September.

New passenger cars and trucks will be required to display the new labels starting with model year 2013, though automakers may voluntarily adopt the labels earlier for model year 2012 vehicles.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration on Wednesday announced new fuel economy labels for vehicles, including new ratings for plug-in hybrids and electric cars, but nixed a plan to assign vehicles "A"...
WASHINGTON -- The Obama administration on Wednesday announced new fuel economy labels for vehicles, including new ratings for plug-in hybrids and electric cars, but nixed a plan to assign vehicles "A"...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 164
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chucktheman
10:15 AM on 06/09/2011
If it reflects in the formula gallons saved per year for X miles driven over a similar model, it think it is a good idea and will make the competition of free market work for the consumer. Manufacturers will compete for market share based on real demand for savings by the consumer. Those who want Big can still get it, those who want small can also, and those driving either will have manufacturers who are making better fuel rated cars and trucks for all. It is a win-win. Big does not have to mean pig.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chucktheman
10:00 AM on 06/09/2011
I drive about 2 miles per day going each way to and from work. My wife has her car also. I could easily get  by on an E car that plugs in since I don't need the range  If I lived in a better climate, I could bike or ride motorcycle all year but that doesn't work in Buffalo NY. Snow on the roads and rain make it unrealistic to walk all days but I can do that on some. I have no need for a larger vehicle. If I really need one I can rent a small  U- haul for 19.99 a day + fuel.
01:17 AM on 05/27/2011
When you are splattered all over the road and your tiny little Eco Vehicle is too, Sorry!! Don't say we didnt warn you.
03:27 PM on 05/28/2011
yeah cause suv's are totally safe...oh wait
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
08:48 PM on 05/28/2011
So everyone will drive tanks, right?
01:12 AM on 05/27/2011
Smart car Vs Any other larger vehicle = Rubix Cube filled with cherry jelly Vs Sledge Hammer

Chance of survival = %0.038
BlackbirdHighway
Brawndo's got electrolites!
10:48 PM on 05/27/2011
So you are saying we need to outlaw large vehicles? That's goes too far.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sunmocker1970
Mocking the Sun since 1970...
05:49 PM on 05/26/2011
That's great. Not that any one I know can afford a new car, but that's great for those who can..
01:13 AM on 05/27/2011
Not worth the price!
11:46 AM on 05/26/2011
Honestly, if I had to choose:..... Think about your chance of Survival in a "Smart Car" vs Any vehical bigger than it. That's about â„¢.65 chance of survival.Yep
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
olitenup
10:50 AM on 05/26/2011
And in other news, the head of the EPA denies "fracking" has health issues, despite over whelming evidence to the contrary.
11:20 AM on 05/26/2011
The EPA only approaches an issue with the conclusion in mind. Fracking has been used for decades, how is it that its only bad when we have a solution to dependence on foreign oil. We will be using evil oil for the next several decades. My electric car needs to be charged so we will also be using coal for the next several decades as well, have you ever attempted to push your Yugo across Montana or Texas. It will make for an interesting vacation for me and my children....
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
08:53 PM on 05/28/2011
Fracking has been bad for decades, it's only recently that fit has been so ramped up. That's pretty much the story of unregulated capitalism: start small and dirty, but who cares, then it gets big and threatens us all. Rooftop pv solar, offshore wind and waste bio char bio fuels can supply all the worlds energy needs. No coal, oil or nukes needed. Green energy is cheaper than nukes.
04:19 AM on 05/26/2011
Why not put the Bloom Energy "Bloom Boxes" in cars? It makes perfect sense and you will have a viable electric/battery type car for the first time! BTW - a Bloom Box is a fuel cell made in Ca.
01:36 PM on 05/26/2011
That looks like a good way to use natural gas as a fuel.
This American
An end to all this nonsense
11:27 PM on 05/25/2011
Cafe standards are the real blood for oil program. The National Transportation Safety Commission estimated that in the in the years 1996-1999 13,000 people were extra people were killed per year as a result of the smaller cars that resulted from the CAFE standards. Something to think about when we are celebrating our "accomplishment"
11:40 AM on 05/26/2011
Agree =-)
photo
RealConservativeAmerican
Conservation is Key
11:56 AM on 05/26/2011
So we should all drive Hummers and tanks?
This American
An end to all this nonsense
07:34 PM on 05/26/2011
Hummers look stupid. I drive a full size pickup with the largest available engine. You can drive a "smart" car. On average we'll get pretty good mileage.
05:44 PM on 05/25/2011
leave it to a bureaucrat to take something as easy to understand as for example car A gets 30 mpg versus a letter grade? how is a letter grade going to make it easier, it isn't and the cost to implement these changes will be millions. we don't need this in so many ways, it isn't broke if my ten year old can understand mpg then we've simplified it sufficiently. how about spending the millions it will take to implement these changes and put those dollars to work repairing infrastructure, roads, bridges and the like. that is something broken that needs fixing and i would be happy to see them spend funds there. i also would like to know why they can sell VW's and Subarus for example that can get approx. 80mpg when we are struggling here to get vehicles to market that at best get half that? the two i mentioned are sub compacts similar to the golf in size, similar in terms of cost, why do we still have regs in place that prevent those vehicles from being sold here? they are diesel and even though what comes out of the tail pipe is cleaner than the air found in many large cities we still have regs for diesel vehicles from back in the day when they were nasty dirty, slow, loud, which they are not now. allowing those vehicles into our markets and onto our roads would make a significant impact to reduce our oil consumption.
05:57 PM on 05/25/2011
Let me give you an example of why an A really doesn't work. A prius gets rated an A (And for around town driving it deserves it), However for a long haul limited stop driver it probably mathes up fuel economy wise with several cars that might get B's.

And diesel VW's that they sell in europe can't meet pollution (not to be confused with GHG pollution) standards in parts of the US. Those regs where they apply are not from back in the day but were effectively made more stringent by a Bush Administration modification to the NAAQS for PM 2.5. And where they apply if you didn't get vehicles that could meet the standards you would need more fireplace restrictions , heavier regulations on industry and restaurants etc... to meet the clean air requirements triggered by Bush with that action.

Yes the cars are cleaner but there are alot more on the road today, driving further on average as well as many other sources of equialent pollutants emitting into the same finite air basins. Sure relax restrictions on diesel cars just don't complain when the result is much heavier regulation of business to compensate.
photo
saint bernard mom
and Newfie Gram ♥spay♥neuter♥adopt♥
11:55 PM on 05/25/2011
Nice post. I'm  techno challenged and understood your explanations. thx fnf
AlanInGA
Why Turn Around When You Can Just Pivot
05:35 PM on 05/25/2011
I get unlimited miles a gallon with my Yugo because I have to push it every where I go. It also creates a trim waistline. Obama should promote the Yugo as a GREEN technology.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
directfitz
06:24 PM on 05/25/2011
Sounds like my bicycle to me.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Uhgg
Just another Neanderthal
05:17 PM on 05/25/2011
If I wanted a car that got 50mpg or more I would Drive a Tin Can if I could fit in it, I purchase a vehicle for Function and Comfort
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
directfitz
06:25 PM on 05/25/2011
I'd say 100 mpg would be the ultimate function and with the gas I save I'd buy a big cushy chair.
firstwizard
Never trust anyone that says "Trust me.."
08:07 PM on 05/25/2011
So how's that Hummer working out for you? Still getting 8 mpg?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
05:10 PM on 05/25/2011
Excellent.
05:02 PM on 05/25/2011
Chrysler is making money, on SUV'S and TRUCKS!!!!!!!!!
05:19 PM on 05/25/2011
Ahhh the smell of cooking books.
photo
Bados
You know.... the beach cruiser.
06:01 PM on 05/25/2011
and cars.
avanteguard
Truth, Justice, and the American way
04:54 PM on 05/25/2011
Once again the Obama regime is doing all it possibly can to strangle our industries needlessly and destroy even more American jobs.
04:56 PM on 05/25/2011
Are there really that many people employed in the petroleum lifecycle?
avanteguard
Truth, Justice, and the American way
05:05 PM on 05/25/2011
The point is that there is no reason or justification for govt to be interfering or mandating these kind of things on or manufactureres or our free enterprise system, that only forces limited choices and higher costs on consumers, while establishing less freedoms and more big govt intrusions into all our lives.
05:03 PM on 05/25/2011
ah, please correct me, if I am wrong, but here in Europe the European Union requires stronger mpg standards and less carbondioxide emissions from all carmakers. And I haven't heard, that the european carmakers are going down, like the American ones. Actually, new requirements require new engineering ideas - and this creates jobs in research and hopefully also in production.
11:57 PM on 05/25/2011
Germany has an annual vehicle tax based on engine size and type (diesel or gas), type of vehicle, and emmissions. The tax is paid for the year, in advance. The larger the engine, the higher the tax. Germany also has some of the best maintained roads I've ever driven on-maintained by this same tax.

I can see the arguments against a tax like this in the U.S. Sounds like the government is telling us what to drive! Yet we do pay on average about $.47 per gallon of gas in state and federal taxes. Factor in toll roads if applicable and you are probably paying more than you thought to the govt in just the everyday operation of your vehicle.

Now the real rant and yes, I'm straying off topic. Approximately 60% of this gas tax goes back into maintaining our roads and bridges. The other 40%? Earmarked for other programs. Roads, bike paths, mueseums, light house restoration, etc...

And yes, the labeling is pretty ridiculous. I especially enjoyed the picture under the headline of this article of the suit explaining to the hapless consumer the rating of the shiny new car! Please Uncle Sam help me to decide which car is more desirable than the next. I need someone guiding my personal choices. Letter grades were found to be undesirable by the consumer? Really? Strong work Mrs. Jackson and Mr. LaHood. Did you think about color coding too? Whoops, should not have mentioned that.
09:13 AM on 05/26/2011
It's a mystery my friend. In the U.S. most people are bent on destroying the earth and burning as much fossil fuels as possible. If we sacrifice our dependence on oil we have no excuse for our imperialism, that's basically how it works. Whatever methods give the quickest short-term results, those are the best, regardless if it endangers our water supplies, our ecosystems, etc....The elitists are scared that going green will take away their power or their higher economic position. And their are a lot of elitist in America.