EPA Fuel Economy Myth: Too High, Too Low?

ThosLives asks: "I have seen here on Slashdot , and just about every other publication, numerous articles about fuel cells, hybrid vehicles, and the inaccuracies of EPA fuel economy stickers. For instance, today there is a review of the Toyota Prius that had the famous line 'Since no car really achieves the EPA estimated mileage...' I happen to drive a car with an EPA sticker of 21 city 25 highway (all figures in miles per gallon). I've driven the car for 47000 miles and the lowest I've ever seen is 23 and some change; the highest, 36.3 (I'm probably about 60% highway 40% stop-and-go and yes, the high was on a long highway trip). My all-time average is about 28.5. As most people get less than the EPA mileage, how does the Slashdot readership fare when it comes to EPA sticker vs actual experience, and on what type of vehicle?" "Am I a rare breed that can drive my car (2.0L I4, 170 HP, 6-speed manual) aggressively (I've had coworkers and friends say 'woah!' more than I'd like to admit *grin*) and still stomp the EPA sticker? Did I get lucky with a phenomenal car? Am I enough of a counter-example to thwart the belief that the EPA figures are 'too liberal'? Are fuel economy issues just FUD from [insert lobby group of choice]? Or is the answer simply 'it depends on how you drive, what you had for breakfast, and the color of your neighbors' cat?'"

Comments

Not a scam, just outdated

[green pizza]

The whole system should be dumped in favor of vehicle choice, not artificial limits put on cars by the government.

The truck exemptions (that allow for SUVs to have pretty much any fuel economy [or lack there of]) came from the late 1970s when most trucks were used by farmer and construction workers. The idea was to help those people, who generally are involved in small business and make peanuts anyway.

Times have changed, now everybody and his brother has an SUV or pickup truck (even if they don't admit it). The regulations haven't changed, not because of a scam, but because the federal beaurocracy is a mess. Sure, the oil-loving administration isn't going to hurry along any changes, but they aren't doing anything actively to prevent such changes either.

Driving Habbits

[NetMasta10bt]

I drive a 2001 Audi S4. It has a V6 twin turbo manual 6-speed. EPA says 17 city, 24 hwy. I drive mostly highway. During the summer months here in FL (lots of A/C), I tend to get around 20mpg average with my normal, very aggressive driving.

Altough, around 2 months ago I performed a 'test'.

During the whole tank of gas, I accelerated as slow as I could never pressing the gas more than 1/4 of the way. I knew the lighs were going to turn red, so why accelerate? I eased on slowly and came up to the red using as little break as possible (a waste of energy)... maybe even rolling into the light as it would turn green and _then_ slowly accerlerating.

On the highway, I would stay in the right lane (insane for me). The speed limit is 70, but I would hold 63.

For the tank I averaged 35mpg.

Moral of the story. The car you choose does have a lot to do with your final MPG. But your driving habits also have a huge amount to do with your fuel usage.

Economical?

[Captain_Chaos]

36.3 miles per gallon is the most economical mileage you got? And that's supposed to be especially economical? What kind of cars do you Americans drive?!

I get twenty kilometers per litre, that's about fifty miles per gallon, on average, and that's with a very ordinary turbodiesel, nothing fancy or especially fuel economic (and a pretty quick driving style).

Re:All these SUVs are beginning to embarrass me...

[internic]

According to Time Magazine, gasoline accounts for 44% of US oil consumption. Diesel fuel, heating oil account for another 19%. Plastics procution is buried somewhere in the "other products" category, which accounts for only 15%. So while I can't say off hand exactly how much petroleum is used for plastics, I CAN say that at least about three times as much is used for gasoline.

Look, you're right that it's a multifaceted problem. Probably heating and electricity production (in which oil plants play a non-negligable roll) are even bigger concerns than plastic; however, gasoline is the largest single contributor.

More over, gasoline consumption is probably one of the easiest areas in which to make significant improvement. Unless you build your home or make major, costly, renovations, efficient heating and cooling can be fairly difficult. There are some simple things you can do, but you can only make so much headway. Electricity consumption is much the same situation, and effecting how it's produced is a more long term project.

On the other hand, it's quite easy for most people (who don't need to do major hauling for construction or farming) to buy a vehicle with nearly twice the fuel efficiency of many SUVs, so realistically this is the best way to attack the problem in the short term on an individual level. So, to me saying "oh what about plastics and heating, etc." still is a pretty flimsy excuse for making such a wasteful choice.