Study: MIT Brains on America's Car Future

Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology recently released a study describing how the United States should move forward in developing cleaner automobile technology. Here are some of the highlights from their findings:

• The rapid introduction of hybrids and diesel vehicles will likely not make a major impact in emissions before 2025, and it will take a major increase in consumer interest in fuel efficient vehicles to truly lower emissions and oil dependency. MIT found that if 55% of vehicles on the road were hybrids, emissions would shrink by 20% in the next 30 years. Without improvements in vehicle efficiency, fuel use will rise 35% in that span of time.


• It's more important for car manufacturers to focus on short-term improvements like introducing more hybrids and using light-weight materials to increase efficiency than it is to try to introduce technologies that aren't ready for widespread use (like hydrogen fuel cells).

• The recent CAFE legislation mandating vehicle fleets to reach 35 mpg by 2020 is weak when compared to the progress that needs to be made. That said, the study does also speculate that the market forces of rapidly rising fuel costs could push consumers to abandon SUVs and other gas-guzzling vehicles at an extreme clip.


• The government can best support fuel efficiency by offering broad tax credits to consumers and automakers for fuel efficient vehicles. It also suggests ending costly agricultural subsidies and putting the money into funding for biofuel research, which is likely to decrease the emphasis on ethanol.

Mix of Gas and Hybrid Cars to Slash Fossil Fuel Use: MIT Study (Green Tech)

Comments

[ziggy]

Not a very optimistic outlook... but it is the reality of it all. And just think that the last 8 years have been wasted while W and his friends got fat. Just makes you sick.

"The government can best support fuel efficiency by offering broad tax credits to consumers and automakers for fuel efficient vehicles..."

The fact is that we need cut down use of oil not because it is expensive now but because we may change our natural habitat and kill ourselves, besides that we were poisoning ourselves for while now.
The government can and should best support fuel efficiency by cutting down ethanol and penalizing heavily non-business owners of large vehicles and dealers who sold them. Also, government can regulate engine output and number of cylinders in a vehicle. And who cares if it is slow when all are slow?
In Denmark their government cut down on cars in a simple way - 100% tax.
The government needs to promote urbanization plans or we will never stop driving great distances.

[duey]

Ziggy like it or not gas at $4 per gallon is finally the first time the american public is starting to abandon their SUV's for other perfectly safe modes of transportation. And, let's not forget why we were driven to those hulking masses fear of getting killed in our little cars, a fear largely driven by Ralph Nader and our liberal media. I drive a vw passat that averagees 30 mpg per tank. If people would start to really challenge what they are driving and why they are driving it, the national average would greatly increase. We live in a market society and I for one am in favor of higher gas prices because it is the only way we as a society will begin to use less of a non renewable resource. And, some of us do not want to live in an urban setting.

[Gary R]

It's unfortunate that gas prices continue to rise considering we have become a nation that wastes the resource. That waste comes in many forms. One of them, the single occupant, large SUV or light/heavy duty truck. It's sad that those vehicles have become a status symbol as much or more so than a luxury passenger car. As long as the auto manufacturers continue to produce those behemoths, people will buy them. They may be concerned with the price of operation but will carry on as usual "because they can afford it". I say tax the hell out of those vehicles that are not used efficiently in commerce. Give that money to those who embrace the need to "reduce the use" and purchase the most fuel efficient vehicles available. I think that would spawn a change in buying habits. If you don't need to haul a crew or tow a trailer, there's no need to buy a full-size SUV or large light/heavy duty truck.

We need a greater selection of safe, lightweight vehicles for errands and commuting and that's what most of it comes down to. Weight. The manufactures have done about as much as they can do in regard to fuel and emission efficiency of the engines they produce. Now they just need to focus on ways of reducing the weight of the vehicles those engines power.

[Infosaur]

"Those who trade liberty for security will get neither"

It sickens me that this country is spiraling towards socalism. The SUV thing has been going on for almost 20 years yet this is somehow Bush's fault (actually it can be traced to a Bush the First era luxury tax on cars over $30k, trucks were exempt. The rest is history.)

I'm so tired of Bush and the Bush bashing (is he an evil mastermind or a village idiot? Think hard people, he can't be both.)

So now in the face of $4 a gallon oil, the same people who thought it was so cool to drive a Range Rover or Grand Cherokee to the grocery are DEMANDING that somebody DO SOMETHING! Like force us all to drive Yaris's.