AD #3228 – EPA Raises Fuel Economy Target; Geely Hybrids Coming to the U.S.? Ford Offers Vehicle-2-Vehicle Charging

December 21st, 2021 at 11:49am

Audio-only version:
Listen to “AD #3228 – EPA Raises Fuel Economy Target; Geely Hybrids Coming to the U.S.? Ford Offers Vehicle-2-Vehicle Charging” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 9:09

0:07 EPA Raises Fuel Economy Standards
1:11 Rest of Economy Needs Help to Cut Emissions
1:59 Renault Wants to Cut Development Time
2:39 Renault Partners with Geely on Hybrids
3:49 Ford Offers Vehicle-to-Vehicle Charging
4:39 Grand Cherokee L Gets Passenger Front Screen
5:06 Next-Gen Mustang Coming in 2023
6:21 Honda Makes Electric Hospital Vehicle for Kids
6:50 MoonBike is an Electric Motorcycle for Snow
7:36 Mitsubishi Teases Electric Kei Car Concept
7:52 Nissan Tricks Out Caravans for Tokyo Auto Show

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone, Intrepid Control Systems and Schaeffler.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website: WardsAuto.com

22 Comments to “AD #3228 – EPA Raises Fuel Economy Target; Geely Hybrids Coming to the U.S.? Ford Offers Vehicle-2-Vehicle Charging”

  1. Lambo2015 Says:

    Totally agree with Sean that it seems, the auto industry takes on the blunt of environmental improvement burden. Seems like since it only accounts for 16% there should be more effort to improve ships, trains and such. Oh because its easier to put the burden on the people who will have to pay more for their vehicles. Rather than deal with lobbyists and corporations that fund their campaigns. Those items are bought by corporations while vehicles are mainly bought by the public. That’s the difference!

  2. buzzerd Says:

    The F150 charging got me thinking, could manufacturers include a plug in the trunk or box of their electric vehicles and also design a potable battery pack that would act like a jerrycan of gasoline? It wouldn’t be just for when you run out of juice but also as a range extender to get to that isolated fishing spot or hiking trail where there isn’t a place to charge…. like every spot around my neck of the woods.

  3. buzzerd Says:

    @1 part of the reason also is that countries can regulate vehicles on their ground but it’s no doubt tougher to regulate planes and boats that come from all over the world and spend most their time in international areas.

  4. Jim Haines Says:

    Biden is already doing all they can to ruin the energy sector so picking favorites using the epa is no surprise

  5. Robert Petrach Says:

    According to the UN 39% of CO2 emissions are from buildings. Seems as though there should be more of an emphasis in that area. Given the increasing severity of storms, a combined hardening buildings against storms and increased energy efficiency would seem a good place to focus.

  6. wmb Says:

    #1.) Adding to Sean’s point, these delivery ships, trains and a lot of the agricultural/construction equipment, are some of the oldest vehicles in transportation. Some of their most modern tech dates back 20 plus years when new, but the designs that they are using may have originated 30 to 50 years before then! While a number of the planes and semis may be new or newer, how new are the designs of the diesel engines used in trains, barges, cargo ships and other heavy equipment! If the auto industry is being asked/told to make these changes, these other industry heavy weights should too! Even the makers of buses are building hybrids and BEVs, so it doesn’t seem like a big ask.

  7. wmb Says:

    #5.) That does seem to make since, but the only problem is he current aging infrastructure. While new construction may be able to make in roads toward addressing this issues, what or how do you address this in these old cities and the buildings that make up them? Having been built using the latest technology of their day, in some cases they may be near 100 years old in major cities! Add to that, a lot of the new tech may not be able to be retrofitted to most of these old structures and, even if they could be, the cost would be astronomical. Especially, with building housed by municipalities and municipal offices space, schools and the like, they may bearly have the resources to do spots fixes on the structures they inhabit, let alone demolish and/or build new. So, for a cities like New York, Chicago, Detroit, London etc., what is a solution to the green house gases that they emit, is a very difficult question to answer.

  8. Drew Says:

    Does the new EPA fuel economy standard align with the One National Standard? If so, does CARB still need to exist, or will CARB target some other commodity to attack (CARB already ruined fuel cans)?

  9. MJB Says:

    So, I’m just now discovering that Nissan appears to have originated the Caravan name with it’s 1973 vehicle. Not having known this, I have to say I sat back quite baffled by the last segment in today’s show where you showcased another Nissan Caravan.

    I guess there was never grounds for Nissan take legal action against Dodge for poaching that name back in the ’80s, since the Dodge Caravan was never sold in Japan…?

  10. Lambo2015 Says:

    6 That being said; Seems regulation to boats and trains and other transport devices that stick around for 20-50 years should maybe be even more stringent. Knowing they wont be replaced for many years, means they will still be operating when 20 years of regulations/improvements have passed.

  11. Robert Petrach Says:

    #7 Not saying apply new rules to old buildings (though improvements can be made).
    But annual building construction cost in 2019 was 1.36 trillion versus 426 billion in new vehicle sales. Definitely room for improvement in the building sector.

  12. Warwick Rex Dundas Says:

    Sean

    I wish the Autoline Daily crew an enjoyable break. I will just have to cope with the withdrawal symptoms surviving without my daily fix of auto industry news.

    Regards

  13. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Trains and big cargo ships are already the most efficient cargo movers on the planet. The huge, low rpm diesels in the ships are the most efficient ICE engines around, though they are very dirty, given the “bunker oil” they burn. Still, there are no doubt possible efficiency gains for ships and trains.

    One thing that could save a lot of energy would be if restaurants would quit freezing you out with A/C when it’s 90 degrees outside.

    Also, decent alternatives to airplanes for medium distance travel would save a huge amount of fuel, and CO2 emissions. They have that in the form of fast trains in most of the developed world, but not in the US.

  14. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Better efficiency regulations are needed for appliances. Apartment operators save a few bucks by using low efficiency refrigerators, water heaters, etc., when a little more money spent on more efficient appliances would pay for itself in energy savings in a short time. The apartment owners don’t buy the electricity, though, so efficiency regulations need to be improved.

    Of course, our vehicle mix is absurdly inefficient, given how many people use huge vehicles to do the work of a small car, but still, as Sean said, “light duty” vehicles account for only 16% of emissions. Yeah, I’m contributing now, driving a Corvette most of the time, getting pretty bad city mpg, though it gets near 30 on the interstate.

  15. Lambo2015 Says:

    13 I doubt if any of the cargo ships use DEF or have any of the emission required equipment that is on trucks. Why not? Seems they could be retrofitted. A lot of these environmental problems can be solved. You just have to throw enough money at it. Doesn’t matter how much it raises the price of everything. Its not done because it affects corporations.

  16. Merv Peters Says:

    taking a break, good for you and your team,enjoy

  17. Kit Gerhart Says:

    15 In some places, ships use cleaner fuel near port, but probably don’t use DEF. I could be wrong, but in the middle of an ocean, 1000 miles from populated areas, the foul smelling, unhealthy to breath emissions of the ships probably don’t matter much, except to the crews.

  18. Lex Says:

    The Previous Administration was truly supporting US Manufacturing, Energy and Workers. You don’t know what you had until your loss it! The Green New Deal just means that there will be less green in the pockets of those who built this country. I have no pity for General Motors and other OEM’s that did not support the previous administration.

    TESLA is revolutionizing the automotive industry toward electric vehicles – Not General Motors! The current Administration has it all wrong and is perpetuating “Fake Narrative concerning Electrification”. This return to previous EPA regulations will cause the demise of General Motors and others. I only feel bad for the workers at General Motors.

  19. Kit Gerhart Says:

    18 Yeah, right.

    https://www.epi.org/publication/50-reasons/

    As far as Tesla, so far, they are dominating the EV business, in spite of substandard quality and awful controls, but the cars do drive well and have a cult following. Still, I wouldn’t count out Toyota, VW, Ford, and yes, GM.

  20. Fstfwrd Says:

    I wish a very Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all the Autoline staff. Enjoy your time off.

  21. Lambo2015 Says:

    18-19 As much as I agree that some of these green regulations just cost everyone more money and do very little in the overall scheme of things. I also don’t believe any of the traditional automakers are at risk of going under quite yet. Yea Tesla is leading in a market that accounts for 3% of US sales and 6.3% globally. Its growing rapidly and they are all releasing more EVs as demand picks up. 2035 seems to be the tipping point target for now and they all can have enough EVs to sell by then. I believe they (Ford & gm) are doing a fair job at balancing their ICE customers while launching some EVs to meet the current demand.

    When everyone finally realizes that the ICE is likely not going away completely and that EVs are only going to be a % of total sales for years to come then the realization will sink in that supporting both will need to happen. I believe some makers will go full electric and some may decide to stay fully ICE but many will probably need to support both for many more years.

  22. Lex Says:

    I smell another Government Bailout to the traditional automakers due to the reinstatement of the very strict EPA requirements!