While the majority of automakers have officially chosen to back the proposed 2025 Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, Volkswagen blasted the requirements, alleging that rules are biased.
Since the proposed 2025 CAFE standards are, well, proposed, VW still hopes to negotiate some modifications before the fuel economy guidelines become official. Jonathan Browning, chief executive officer of Volkswagen Group of America, told Ward's Auto (sub. req.) that, "We still have a dialogue going on with the administration in terms of how we think the policy needs to be adjusted."

VW says the current proposed rules allow "special compliance flexibility for heavier light trucks" while placing too high a burden on passenger cars. More specifically, VW cries foul, stating, "The proposal encourages manufacturers and customers to shift toward larger, less-efficient vehicles, defeating the goal of reduced greenhouse-gas emissions."

Diesel engines, according to VW, are ignored by the proposed rules. Clearly, that statement isn't true, but the German automaker argues that since diesels are growing at twice the rate in terms of U.S. sales compared to electric and hybrid vehicles, oil-burning mills, "should be part of the landscape going forward." As we see it, even though VW says its diesel mills should be given preferential treatment for being superior to an equally fuel-efficient gasoline engine, that's just not how CAFE works.

[Source: Ward's Auto – sub. req.]


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 25 Comments
      Peter
      • 3 Years Ago
      While blatantly self serving they are right in that there is too much fudge in the CAFE standards 1) CAFE mpg are inflated compared to EPA which though better is inflated compared to real life so 54.5 in 14 years isn't 54.5 mpg its much closer to somewhere in the 40's 2) No (realistic) credit for real life stop start savings in urban cycle so no incentive to sell those things that mitigate city consumption (and pollution) elsewhere in the world 3) No penalty for Diesel (diesel CO2 > petrol CO2 per volume fuel). CO2 is one of the reasons... no? 4) Why do "trucks" escape "car" rating when those "trucks" don't look like trucks and seat more than 3 people abreast 5) Extremely funny math for inflating MPG for "flex fuel" even though people burn E10 not E85 even in those vehicles. Give it credit for the proportion that it actually reduces consumption. 6) Ditto funny (I think proposed) for CNG. Its an alternate fuel, OK but its not renewable
      fefifofum
      • 3 Years Ago
      Why should we let a foreign automaker try to dictate terms in our domestic market. Makes no sense. Don't like it, don't sell your crappy cars here VW, I won't miss you.
        Noz
        • 1 Day Ago
        @fefifofum
        Bit too late for that....your countrymen sold your own country out a LONG time ago...don't blame VW for that.
        2 Wheeled Menace
        • 1 Day Ago
        @fefifofum
        Hear hear! I don't think they even make their cars here, most are made in Mexico.
      DMason
      • 3 Years Ago
      Are the hybrid/EV manufacturers getting some benefit from the proposed CAFE standard that the diesel producers don't get? What's VW's beef? What do they want?
        Rotation
        • 3 Years Ago
        @DMason
        VW wants to sell a lot of Diesels. It's really that simple. They've spent money on Diesel R&D and so they want to see a big future for Diesels. It doesn't come from some altruistic concern for the environment, but a business perspective. It's fine they want to ask for this consideration, but in my opinion they shouldn't be granted it.
      Dan Frederiksen
      • 3 Years Ago
      raise it to 80
        TruthHertz
        • 1 Day Ago
        @Dan Frederiksen
        That's awesome Dan. I can't wait until the next entry level Civic I look at costs $40,000. Douche...
          Spec
          • 1 Day Ago
          @TruthHertz
          " you can just go out and buy one of the super lightweight, aerodynamic, $12000 high quality popular models DF, motors produces! I'm sure you can find an excellent model at his factory at Trollhaven! " This post is made of win.
          Marco Polo
          • 1 Day Ago
          @TruthHertz
          How dare you call DF, a douche!!, it should be raised to 100! If you are worried about a little Civic costing $40, 000 , you can just go out and buy one of the super lightweight, aerodynamic, $12000 high quality popular models DF, motors produces! I'm sure you can find an excellent model at his factory at Trollhaven! What? I see.....y'mean ..he's just fool who's never made good on a single boast? Damn....sorry, yeah, yeah, sorry y'right, ...just throw a cover over his cage and he might STFU!
      Rick Wright
      • 3 Years Ago
      The "dirty little secret" of CAFE standards for gasoline automobiles is that they run on 100% gasoline for the test even though you can only purchase the 10% ethanol gas in the real world and vehicles so tested seldom achieve their EPA figures. If nothing else, diesel vehicles should not be penalized like this. There is also the matter of the CAFE credit that a vehicle receives for being a Flex-fuel vehicle. Chevy Tahoes & etc get a CAFE credit for figures that are completely unrealistic. It is a fraud. One of the best ways to reduce fuel consumption is to get the heavy trucks (e.g. 18 wheelers) off the highway (specifically in the case of long haul trucking). Rail transport of cargo is at least 12 times more energy efficient than transporting a given weight of cargo by truck. It also would have the benefit of getting the trucks off the highways which are too congested, at least in part, because of the truck traffic which also causes inordinate damage to the roadway itself because none of them were designed to carry the numbers of trucks and weight of the truck traffic presently on them. There is also the matter of natural gas, which, by the way, is produced in North America in substantial quantities. If diesel engines for trains and heavy trucks were converted to natural gas (as well as fixed point users of so-called "home heating oil) it would reduce the dependence upon foreign oil even further and free up refinery capacity for production of diesel fuel for consumption by smaller engined diesel vehicles which, by the way, are typically 30% more fuel efficient than a comparable gasoline powered vehicle to begin with. (Oh, did I mention that it is not uncommon for diesel powered vehicles to exceed their EPA mileage figures?) The problem with diesel powered vehicles is that the administration has permitted the states to individually regulate exhaust/greenhouse gas emissions which, when eventually effected, will create an unsustainable regulatory environment for manufacturers. Even smaller vehicles could be manufactured for use of natural gas in the future. As to the matter of corn based ethanol, it is neither sustainable nor a sound energy source. Anything that takes more energy to produce it than it yields is not a wise choices. The best place for corn based ethanol is in oak barrels for aging for a period of years.
      EVSUPERHERO
      • 3 Years Ago
      Lead is dead VW. So are your antiquated petrol vehicles as far as I am concerned. Go pedal your inefficient pollution machines elsewhere.
      mylexicon
      • 3 Years Ago
      Everyone, even US manufacturers, are switching to the global car concept. I don't see how CAFE standards would encourage a manufacturer to build more land yachts for the US market; especially with the current gasoline prices.
      Rotation
      • 3 Years Ago
      Just because we're selling more Diesels doesn't mean they should get special treatment. They are currently not being penalized for their higher emissions (primary) per gallon, they should quit while they are ahead. I agree with the other part, it's time to stop rewarding companies for replacing sedans and wagons with light trucks (crossovers) to take advantage of the less rigorous mpg standards for trucks. If it's made to carry people, it should be measured under the car portion of CAFE, not truck. IMHO, all 2 and 3 row trucks (which means mainly crossovers, SUVs) should be classed as cars, not trucks.
      RC
      • 3 Years Ago
      I want to see Volkswagen try to pull something like this in China. I bet over there they're all about the electric avenue.
      2 Wheeled Menace
      • 3 Years Ago
      Lol, used to be that GM, Chrysler, and Ford were the primary foot draggers.. How things have changed. Play the game like everyone else or pack your bags, VW.. your fleet efficiency is awful. That's YOUR fault.
      DMason
      • 3 Years Ago
      Sorry about the double post! Can someone from Autoblog Green delete the duplicate?
      vwfailagain
      • 3 Years Ago
      Diesel is superior? Compared to what... the steam engine... a coal plant... a superfund site... what?
    • Load More Comments