EPA, DOT Propose New Fuel Economy Labels

[Bruce Nunnally]

The US Department of Transportation (DOT) and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are jointly proposing changes to the fuel economy labels consumers see on the window of new vehicles in dealer showrooms. The proposed rule seeks public comment on label design options and related issues.

Read More: http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/08/labels-20100830.html#more

<img src="http://bioage.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef0133f36af0e5970b-800wi">

Four samples of the first proposed label design with the letter grade. From left to right: EV, PHEV, gasoline/diesel, gasoline/diesel. Color is integral to the new schemes. Source: EPA.

<img src="http://bioage.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef0134868f1f6e970c-800wi">

A sample of the second proposed label for an extended range electric vehicle.

[Cadillac Jim]

This makes me feel like my 1997 model year car is getting old. But, it has 300 hp and gets 23 mpg on the road, and I love to drive it, so I plan to keep it as long as I can get parts for it.

[firefoot0315]

I do not like this. It turns objective fuel economy information into a biased subjective system. Note the 5 year fuel cost bit. On the first three it tells you how much you will SAVE over "average vehicles," whatever that means. On the last one it tells you how much more you will SPEND over 5 years, again compared to "the average vehicle." I am a big proponent of better fuel economy and greener cars, but influencing people with colors and grades and skewed biased 5 year cost figures is not the way to bring about that change. They should leave the fuel economy labels well enough alone. Their job is to OBJECTIVELY INFORM the customer of the average fuel consumption of the vehicle, and leave it to the customer to make an informed decision. The new ones, with their color associations and grades, are attempting to malign the prospective buyers of, say, the CTS-V. That is not the EPA's place.

[Cadillac Jim]

I do not like this. It turns objective fuel economy information into a biased subjective system. Note the 5 year fuel cost bit. On the first three it tells you how much you will SAVE over "average vehicles," whatever that means. On the last one it tells you how much more you will SPEND over 5 years, again compared to "the average vehicle." I am a big proponent of better fuel economy and greener cars, but influencing people with colors and grades and skewed biased 5 year cost figures is not the way to bring about that change. They should leave the fuel economy labels well enough alone. Their job is to OBJECTIVELY INFORM the customer of the average fuel consumption of the vehicle, and leave it to the customer to make an informed decision. The new ones, with their color associations and grades, are attempting to malign the prospective buyers of, say, the CTS-V. That is not the EPA's place.

Yeah, it needs work. Updating the window sticker to deal with hybrids and electric cars is good. Letter grades with associated colors, and dollar amounts are BS and don't belong on a window sticker. I like the second one. I would like a rationale for the "cost per year" figure; better to put down kWh and gallons for a given mileage and city/highway mix -- or at least give it as a basis for the dollar figures.

[firefoot0315]

I agree that making it more relevant to hybrids is good. I also agree that they need to post a standard for their fuel costs IF they include them--something more substantial than "the average vehicle." Something, say, like the cost of driving 5k highway miles and 5k city miles per year at $3 a gallon, a basis that people can estimate up or down from based on local gas prices and their driving habits. Such a figure is something I'd be interested in knowing--an objective cost estimate specific to that vehicle.

[Cadillac Jim]

One big problem with the letter grades it that they represent a value judgement. For example, a Chevy Volt gets an A+ while a CTS-V coupe gets a D. I would want either vehicle or both vehicles, plans and finances permitting. I would think that both get an A+. But somebody who is not buying, driving, or living with a CTS-V is giving it a bad grade and putting it in six-inch-high colored letters on the window sticker in the showroom. Uh, excuse me???

[coolnesss]

Why in the world is that agency spending money on this? And I bet it was ALOT.

[Cadillac Jim]

Because they think that it is the right thing to do.