Fuel efficiency standards set the required average fuel economy for vehicles, aiming to reduce fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions. Proponents argue that it helps reduce emissions, save consumers money on fuel, and decrease reliance on fossil fuels. Opponents argue that it raises production costs, leading to higher vehicle prices, and may not have a significant impact on overall emissions.
Narrow down which types of responses you would like to see.
Narrow down the conversation to these participants:
Voting for candidate:
Zipcode:
@ISIDEWITH1yr1Y
Yes
@B4NT7P53mos3MO
We are in the 6th mass extinction event. The world is in danger and we need to do everything we can to regulate our use of fuels.
@B4Y67N5Women’s Equality 2mos2MO
yes I agree because if we don't regulate the use of our fuels then everything could go bad
@B5G43LQIndependent2mos2MO
According the the US Department of Energy, increasing fuel efficiency could save drivers almost $6,000 over a car's lifetime.
@B3VGV2T 2mos2MO
Fuel efficiency requirements, or Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, are regulations set by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to improve the fuel economy of vehicles sold in the United States. These standards mandate a minimum average fuel economy for manufacturers' vehicle fleets, impacting the types of vehicles they produce and the technologies they incorporate.
Context:
Purpose:
CAFE standards aim to reduce fuel consumption and improve air quality, contributing to energy security and environmental protection.
Legal Basis:
The Energy Policy and… Read more
@B4LCGXH3mos3MO
If we incentivize fuel efficiency, there will be more of a draw for companies to regulate fuel efficiency, and penalties will keep them from relapsing and failing to meet requirements.
@ISIDEWITH3mos3MO
Yes, and also invest in high speed rail and public transportation
We need to address climate change. And also improve infrastructure to allow improved access to resources and connectivity between communities
@B5HMLG72mos2MO
Public Transportation is more efficient in multiple ways than private transportation and is better overall for the environment while having the chance to be cheaper than private transportation for the general population.
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
Is personal responsibility or government regulation more effective in reducing overall fuel consumption?
@9TZNVDB9mos9MO
fuel efficiency needs to be increased, or gas prices need to go down.
@9V39W94Republican9mos9MO
It’s personal responsibility, the government should not have a say to what we drive.
@9V39SCZRepublican9mos9MO
No, people don't want to spend more on vehicles because they're better on gas, especially not blue-collar workers when buying diesels and have to spend more on DEF
@9V39CJT9mos9MO
Should be a two thing, where the government sets a maximum which is mostly in favor, but by taxing the "speedier" car they could reduce transmission
@ISIDEWITH3mos3MO
No, provide incentives instead of penalties to create fuel alternatives
@B5HMLG72mos2MO
Incentives in many cases would not be enough to influence fuel alternatives, and instead penalties are required to make sure companies and corporations follow regulations.
@B4NSJMQRepublican3mos3MO
penalties offer a more direct and immediate impact on automakers' decisions, leading to quicker and more substantial fuel efficiency gains
@ISIDEWITH3mos3MO
No, and eliminate the EPA
@B5JYG9P2mos2MO
No money can be made if the Earth is destroyed. Without the EPA we lose oversight and without fuel efficiency requirements we run on a treadmill rather than move forward.
@B5G43LQIndependent2mos2MO
Stricter fuel efficiency will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and help control climate change. Transportation makes up 29% of US emissions and if we had more fuel efficient vehicles we could cut more pollution.
Vehicle emission cause air pollution which leads to negative health effects. Vehicle emissions emit carbon dioxide which leads to increased risk of natural disasters, sea level rise, and risks to agriculture.
Climate change is real. Corporations should not get to dictate whether future generations have a liveable world
@9RMHLM511mos11MO
Instead of imposing penalties they should provide incentives for companies that make fuel efficient/alternative fuel vehicles.
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
Can stricter fuel efficiency rules really make a difference in fighting climate change, or are there bigger issues at play?
@9YF7CDQIndependent8mos8MO
They can, but the logistics behind it is flawed. A mass overhaul would require to change the electrical infrastructure in our country.
@DavePascal8mos8MO
Make the fuel last longer and better so that it will cost less for everyone
@9WTZT3G8mos8MO
Yes but they are just the tip of the iceberg what we should be doing is setting up and making public transportation more accessible, affordable, and faster like Japan
@9WTF33V8mos8MO
Fuel efficiency requirements need to do more to ensure that there's not another wave of higher vehicle prices, causing voters to leave this issue alone, since there is no change whatsoever.
@9QR8JKT12mos12MO
The government should incentivize fuel alternatives and impose stricter standards for fuel distributors.
@9SH6CVS11mos11MO
Yes, the government should impose stricter fuel efficiency standards. Auto manufacturers will eventually catch up to the restrictions and produce better performing cars.
Yes, and invest in high speed rail and public transportation so there is less reliance on personal vehicles.
@ISIDEWITH10mos10MO
Do you believe people are more influenced by fuel costs or environmental impact when choosing a car, and what about you?
@9THBC9N10mos10MO
I think they are influenced by fuel costs when choosing a car, because it could be very expensive depending on which car you buy.
@9YFDPXY8mos8MO
Yes, we should limit the use of fossil fuels and non renewable resources when thinking of vehicular transportation.
@9TH9WTSRepublican10mos10MO
fuel costs, gas has increased in price over the last few years
@9TH9XN910mos10MO
I believe more people are impacted by the fuel cost like me
@9SN7NSGLibertarian10mos10MO
I think people with older vehicles should not be botherd but new cars that are being made should have stricter fuel efficiency standards on them.
@9RVY2YN11mos11MO
No, because the U.S has historically done a poor job of setting fuel efficiency and environmental standards as compared to the Europe, Japan, South Korea and many others - the system needs to be better not stricter. This only offers to further increase the cost of affordable economy vehicles due to increasing manufacturer requirements, and furthermore will hurt the enthusiast market. Instead, better incentives should be offered to Hybrid, EV & Hydrogen vehicles.
@9YLTPPK8mos8MO
Yes, as in create an eco-friendly fuel standard to stop climate change and encourage creativity in making an environmentally beneficial fuel
@9WQWRP38mos8MO
There should be incentives for developing new or more efficient technology, example combustion engines use only about 10% of energy to move the vehicle, if a better system can use 50% that would reduce fuel use by 5x, etc. innovation is key
@9TYYP739mos9MO
Maybe they should make it so that we rely less on personal vehicles. Providing cleaner, safer, more time-efficient public transportation and same-day delivery for things such as medications, groceries, personal goods, etc. These could be delivered by drones or electric cars that make daily rounds.
@9TNHGXT10mos10MO
The government should impose stricter fuel efficiency standards for newer vehicles while keeping older classics on the road.
@9PZ2HB51yr1Y
No, but it should impose only moderate standers/more of a hands off approach while the market/people want more efficient standards on vehicles. Although I am in favor of better fuel efficiency it just I don't trust the government to implement those standers because I don't want government over reach and for it to take away what ever freedoms that U.S. citizens still have.
@B5XSM8T1wk1W
Yes, first by forcing automakers to start producing more economical cars (Chevy Spark, Honda Fit type); stop producing gas guzzling trucks, SUVs & other large vehicles.
@B5XBB461wk1W
Just reform the current system to not incentivize large vehicles, same level of incentives but better aligned with its own goals
@B5WMMJV2wks2W
No. The penalties are never enough to match or threaten their profits...and it takes way to long to figure out they are cheating...incentives are better but also not a guarantee of anything...look what happened with the no polluting fines...did nothing
@B5W5Y6Q2wks2W
Yes and No. Again. We need a massive project of piston gas engine to hybrid engine conversions. Too detrimental for 300,000,000 NEW electric cars to be made. A conversion franchise or conversion update system would be the best way forward.
@B5VRCLS2wks2W
While I believe that ther should be standards, I don't believe they should be super high where it impacts the economy.
@B5VPRM32wks2W
Fuel efficiency on vehicles commonly used by most citizens, such as cars and trucks, should remain or slightly decrease from their current standard. However, larger vehicles such as private jets being used by one individual and not for commercial purposes should absolutely have stricter standards.
@B5VKK7Q2wks2W
Invest in more public transportation, incentives to create fuel alternatives, and incentivise better fuel efficiency standards rather than penalizing.
@B5V55R3 3wks3W
Incentivize fuel efficiency for manufacturers and individual tax breaks and tax less efficient manufacturers/owners, using that tax to improve public transit.
Somewhat yes since I love cars and bikes a lot and do believe we can cut emissions in half if we did invest in more public transport and walkability
@B5TKYFZ3wks3W
No, but add incentives instead of penalties and invest more into high speed rail and public transportation
@B5SW3H23wks3W
How would this help the environment? I would like to know more on how this would help the environment.
@B5SHDLY3wks3W
Eliminate regulations and let Americans decide what they want to buy. Whether is gas, diesel, hybrid, or an EV, Americans should have the choice on what they want to buy with no mandate.
@B5S6KQD4wks4W
Yes make people want to move away from fossil fuels and have company's make electric cars cost less and have more public transport around town like a high speed monoril system.
@B5RRQD44wks4W
On a high percentage of certain manufactures vehicles. Certain vehicles, such as supercars, are rare enough to not cause much pollution and should be allowed.
@B5RDB5J4wks4W
No, let the motive industry do that themselves and no subsidies that distort markets. Eliminate the EPA.
@B5QCTV54wks4W
Only on the companies, not the consumers. We should also invest in high speed rails and improve public transportation SIGNIFICANTLY.
@B5QB4394wks4W
No because it will cause chaos for nothing at this time because of course the number of cars running around at this time is huge and i have to limit the use of fuel. it will definitely cause chaos but if it can be done it will be very good (for nature).
@B5PP6BX1mo1MO
I understand that it is important that we use cleaner ways of transporting ourselves from place to place. Realistically though it is very difficult to afford a car or piece of traveling equipment that doesn't need fuel to operate. I also understand that you will still need fuel to produce the pieces of the material for a certain piece of transportation.
@B5NP4KP1mo1MO
Only on new vehicles. Existing ones are already out there, and it’s worse for the environment to remake them.
@B5NK2HG1mo1MO
Fuel efficiency standards are important but should be imposed only on the production of future cars and not present day one there for you will not have a economic collapse in the car industry
@B5N5JX71mo1MO
No, because that's forcing people and they won't be able to make a choice. I think they should make and promote electric cars more, also make them a bit cheaper because that way more people will buy them and we can help the environment more.
@B5MLV5RRepublican1mo1MO
No, but every American car brand needs to be fuel efficient, high performance, or have room for at least 5 passengers
@B5LRRL81mo1MO
I don't necessarily agree to impose stricter fuel efficiency, but I also want to see the country investing in public transportation
@B5L8F2P1mo1MO
Yes, for future vehicles, but also incentivise fuel alternatives and nationalize energy production to enact green reforms and get off fossil fuels.
@B5L3BRS 1mo1MO
Yes, but focus on rewarding innovation and offering tax incentives for companies and consumers, rather than punishing those who can’t afford upgrades.
@B5KL7PQ1mo1MO
Yes, but only on vehicles made after the law or regulation has been passed. Not effecting any prior made vehicles.
@B5KL2RB1mo1MO
determine the size and scale of a vehicle when determining fuel economy like the removing the exemption for truck leading to loopholes in classifications for light trucks in the "CAFE standards"
@B5K5TNF2mos2MO
No, the government should incentivize companies create more efficient technology including the production of public transportation
@B5JXWPV2mos2MO
The government should incentivize diesel electric trucks, diesel engines powering electric traction motors
@B5HQHZP2mos2MO
No this was tried and created an issue of less effective and larger cars when Obama did this in his administration
@B5HMK3Z2mos2MO
These standards need to be completely overhauled. Auto manufacturers have gotten around this by building bigger vehicles exempt from these standards, and also made less reliable turbo 4 cylinder engines, increasing consumption and resource net drain, with higher consumer cost for less quality. Make smaller fuel efficient vehicles, make diesel popular again, and make more walkable, bikeable infrastructure reducing car dependency.
@B5H2FVS2mos2MO
Competition will take care of this problem because nobody likes paying more than they have to, especially for fuel, as vehicles increasingly get better, so will the mileage and the price.
@B5GYVX22mos2MO
Yes, Stricter definitions of what is classified as a truck so companies can't get away with lower fuel efficiency by saying its a truck
@B5G5JR82mos2MO
Provide incentives instead of penalties to create fuel alternatives while investing in high speed rail and public transportation
@B5FZJGH2mos2MO
try to come up with a political understanding with how each can affect one and other and try to resolve it without harming the environment as much and not have as high of prices
ban personal road motor vehicles. keep buses, trains, planes, boats, and commercial transport vehicles
@B5F92TL2mos2MO
The government should increase regulations on SUVs and large trucks, or anything that qualifies as a "lightweight truck," as companies have been finding loopholes to get around emission, safety, and fuel efficiency regulations with no repercussions
@B5D5WXN2mos2MO
No but the EPA should implement more realistic standards so our auto manufacturers can get back to building common sense engines and cars again.
@B5CSP9SWomen’s Equality2mos2MO
Yes, they should crack down on using so much fuel. While also understanding that people already can't afford a lot of basic needs. They should find a plan to where everyone can benefit and still be able to keep afloat money wise.
@B5CSJ4M2mos2MO
I think there should be more advocacy for vehicles that require less fuel, but I don't think that everyone needs to be required to use these vehicles.
@B5CL6J92mos2MO
Yes, for newer transportation services and models. But, they should also invest in public transportation.
@B5B75KR2mos2MO
While fuel emissions are harmful to the environment, a few major corporations produce a majority of the carbon emissions on earth so impose stricter regulations on them. Also build high speed rail and public transportation and make it free.
@B5B3B8Q2mos2MO
Yes but provide an incentive to reimagine the future of transportation to reduce the dependence on personal transportation.
@B5B2YGT2mos2MO
In the early 2000s toyota made a car that was 91mpg exon/mobile along with other companys sued toyota and were forced to recall these cars and were replaced by a 38mpg car. Consumers should have a choice and this should not have happened but also understand a large part of the economy is maintained by fuel... so no but auto makers should be allowed to offer high mpg cars but also sports cats and utility cars that dont have the same standards. They should be allowed to own vanity cars and utility vehicles.
@B59V5842mos2MO
I'd rather not see increased efficiency control, as CAFE standards just provide incentives for larger and larger vehicles and I would consider it a failure.
No, there is a limit to how efficient you can make an engine, but we do need more public transportation.
@B594WTF2mos2MO
Electric cars shouldn't become mandatory as they are extremely inefficient where as, with gasoline, you can just fill the tank up.
@B5925GW2mos2MO
Yes, so we can try and aim for cleaner fuel. We should also invest in public transportation and high speed rails
@B58ZTD7Women’s Equality2mos2MO
They should be a little more stricter but at the same time until provided with the necessary transportation
@B58STSY2mos2MO
Yes, and they should fund public transportation to limit fuel use and harmful chemicals in our atmosphere.
they should have free usage of it, if proven to be excessive in any situation a small fine would do the trick
@B576FNH2mos2MO
I think that Fuel efficiency will come with people wanting more fuel efficient vehicles and companies competing with each other.
No, I don't think there should be stricter fuel efficiency standards. Provide incentives on fuel alternatives. Consider and invest in high speed rail or magnetic transportation. Could allow a more greener country than it is now.
No, there are already market incentives for cars being fuel efficient, unlike carbon emissions which have less market incentives
@B55PYCK2mos2MO
No. Investing high speed rail and public transportation along with providing incentives to create alternative fuel alternatives.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion
Loading data...
Join in on more popular conversations.
