Why Fuel Efficiency Advances Haven't Translated To Better Gas Mileage

greenrainbow tips an article about a research paper from an MIT economist that attempts to explain why technological advances in fuel efficiency haven't led to substantially better gas mileage for the average driver. Quoting: "Thus if Americans today were driving cars of the same size and power that were typical in 1980, the country’s fleet of autos would have jumped from an average of about 23 miles per gallon (mpg) to roughly 37 mpg, well above the current average of around 27 mpg. Instead, Knittel says, 'Most of that technological progress has gone into [compensating for] weight and horsepower.' ... Indeed, Knittel asserts, given consumer preferences in autos, larger changes in fleet-wide gas mileage will occur only when policies change, too. 'It’s the policymakers’ responsibility to create a structure that leads to these technologies being put toward fuel economy,' he says. Among environmental policy analysts, the notion of a surcharge on fuel is widely supported. 'I think 98 percent of economists would say that we need higher gas taxes,' Knittel says."

Comments

Re:Statistics

[PopeRatzo]

Raising gas taxes would significantly increase the cost of all goods and possibly bump us toward recession.

So, only raise the gas tax for passenger vehicles. It's not that hard. You can rebate gas taxes for truckers, you can have truckers show a commercial license and have the tax waived. It could be done with a keychain fob the same way you get a discount at the grocery chain with your little card with the bar code.

Here in Chicago, the streets are clogged with people driving alone in SUVs the size of locomotives. All day long, you can drive up and down Ashland Ave and there will be one Suburban or Nissan Armada or Navigator or some other ridiculously huge vehice with a single person driving all by herself. Those drivers need to pay a higher gas tax to cover the externalities they are forcing the rest of us to pay.

Better yet, maybe it would be a good thing when people start realizing there is a great benefit to living closer to where you work. How much of societies productivity and time and expense is thrown down the drain in daily 2-hour commutes?

I think people may already be starting to learn a little bit. You want to go to the exurbs of any major metropolis, you'll find that housing prices have dropped a lot faster out there than they have closer in to the city. And let's be clear: most of us live in cities. The term "flyover country" is actually pretty accurate.

Not Nonsense. weight and options == profits

[jageryager]

Car companies make money on big cars and inefficient features. It's hard to buy a car w/out electric windows and air conditioning. Go shop for one. The are hard to find.. Electric motors in windows are heavy. AC is heavy. Costs milage.