<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd">
<channel>
<title>Autoblog</title>
<link>http://www.autoblog.com</link>
<description>Autoblog</description>

<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>Copyright 2013 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only.</copyright>
<generator>Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/</generator><item><title><![CDATA[DOT sued over legality of digital billboards [w/poll]]]></title><link>http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/24/dot-sued-over-legality-of-digital-billboards-w-poll/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/24/dot-sued-over-legality-of-digital-billboards-w-poll/</guid><comments>http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/24/dot-sued-over-legality-of-digital-billboards-w-poll/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/government-legal/" rel="tag">Government/Legal</a>, <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/marketing-advertising/" rel="tag">Marketing/Advertising</a>, <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/safety/" rel="tag">Safety</a></p><a href="http://www.scenic.org/billboards-a-sign-control/digital-billboards/scenic-america-lawsuit-on-fhwa-ruling"><img alt="digital billboard" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2013/01/digital-billboard.jpg" style="margin-top: 4px; margin-bottom: 4px; width: 628px; height: 375px;" /></a><br />
<br />
Tired of seeing those bright, digital billboards on the side of the road while driving (especially at night)? Well so is a group called Scenic America that recently filed a lawsuit in an attempt to get the <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/tag/federal+highway+administration/">Federal Highway Administration</a> to reverse a 2007 ruling that allowed these billboards to pop up along US roadways since. The advantage of digital billboards is that companies can sell multiple advertisements that change frequently, and it's this part of the billboards that are at the heart of this debate.<br />
<br />
According to an article in <em>Ad Week</em>, Scenic America contends that the FHWA (a division of the <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/tag/department+of+transportation/">US Department of Transportation</a>) issued a "guidance memorandum" that circumvented the usual chain of law allowing "intermittent" messages, which was a part of the Highway Beautification Act. On the opposite side of the argument, the Outdoor Advertising Association of America said that digital billboards follow the rules since there is no flashing or animation involved.<br />
<br />
What do you think about digital billboards? Let us know in the poll below.<br />
<br />
<p><a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/24/dot-sued-over-legality-of-digital-billboards-w-poll/#poll80290">View Poll</a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/24/dot-sued-over-legality-of-digital-billboards-w-poll/">DOT sued over legality of digital billboards [w/poll]</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.autoblog.com">Autoblog</a> on Thu, 24 Jan 2013 19:20:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/24/dot-sued-over-legality-of-digital-billboards-w-poll/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.autoblog.com/forward/20438029/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2013/01/24/dot-sued-over-legality-of-digital-billboards-w-poll/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>billboards</category><category>digital billboards</category><category>federal highway administration</category><category>scenic america</category><category>us department of transportation</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeffrey N. Ross]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 19:20:00 EST</pubDate>
  <comments-url>http://www.autoblog.com/feed/20438029/article-comments.xml</comments-url>
  <rss-url>http://www.autoblog.com/feed/2013/01/24/dot-sued-over-legality-of-digital-billboards-w-poll/20438029/article-detail.xml</rss-url>
  <postid>20438029</postid>
<thumbnail>http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2013/01/digital-billboard_thumbnail.jpg</thumbnail>

</item><item><title><![CDATA[Move to mandate rearview cameras could boost car prices by $200]]></title><link>http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/move-to-mandate-rearview-cameras-could-boost-car-prices-by-200/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/move-to-mandate-rearview-cameras-could-boost-car-prices-by-200/</guid><comments>http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/move-to-mandate-rearview-cameras-could-boost-car-prices-by-200/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/government-legal/" rel="tag">Government/Legal</a>, <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/safety/" rel="tag">Safety</a>, <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/tech/" rel="tag">Technology</a></p><img height="415" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/12/backup-camera-body-630.jpg" vspace="4" width="630" /><br />
<br />
It looks like we don't have much longer to wait to find out if rearview cameras will become the next safety device to become standard on new cars. <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/tag/ray+lahood/">Ray LaHood</a> and the <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/tag/department+of+transportation/">US Department of Transportation</a> could put this legislation to the vote by the end of the month to require all new vehicles in 2014 to be equipped with cameras in an effort to make cars safer. <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2012/02/29/nhtsa-ready-to-submit-rearview-camera-mandate-to-congress/">LaHood delayed this vote back in February</a>.<br />
<br />
According to <em>The Detroit News</em>, adding such a camera would cost up to $203 to install on vehicles without an appropriate display screen and up to $88 for cars that already have a useable display. This relatively small cost could help reduce the number of people backed over each year, which accounts for around 300 deaths (including 100 children under the age of five) and injure close to 16,000 people annually.<br />
<br />
If passed, backup cameras would join features such as airbags, electronic stability control and tire pressure monitoring systems as recently added standard <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/safety/">safety</a> equipment.<p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/move-to-mandate-rearview-cameras-could-boost-car-prices-by-200/">Move to mandate rearview cameras could boost car prices by $200</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.autoblog.com">Autoblog</a> on Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:30:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/move-to-mandate-rearview-cameras-could-boost-car-prices-by-200/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.autoblog.com/forward/20404014/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2012/12/17/move-to-mandate-rearview-cameras-could-boost-car-prices-by-200/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>backup camera</category><category>ray lahood</category><category>rearview camera</category><category>standard backup camera</category><category>us department of transportation</category><category>vehicle safety regulations</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Jeffrey N. Ross]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2012 18:30:00 EST</pubDate>
  <comments-url>http://www.autoblog.com/feed/20404014/article-comments.xml</comments-url>
  <rss-url>http://www.autoblog.com/feed/2012/12/17/move-to-mandate-rearview-cameras-could-boost-car-prices-by-200/20404014/article-detail.xml</rss-url>
  <postid>20404014</postid>
<thumbnail>http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2010/12/backup-camera-body-630_thumbnail.jpg</thumbnail>

</item><item><title><![CDATA[Fed proposes new fuel economy standard: 54.5 mpg by 2025]]></title><link>http://www.autoblog.com/2011/11/16/fed-proposes-new-fuel-economy-standard-54-5-mpg-by-2025/</link><guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.autoblog.com/2011/11/16/fed-proposes-new-fuel-economy-standard-54-5-mpg-by-2025/</guid><comments>http://www.autoblog.com/2011/11/16/fed-proposes-new-fuel-economy-standard-54-5-mpg-by-2025/#comments</comments><description><![CDATA[<p>Filed under: <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/category/government-legal/" rel="tag">Government/Legal</a></p><a href="http://www.freep.com/article/20111116/BUSINESS01/111160444/1014/rss13"><img alt="Sunoco gas station line" src="http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2011/11/gas-station-line-ap.jpg" style="margin-top: 4px; margin-bottom: 4px; width: 628px; height: 394px; " /></a><br />
<br />
The <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/tag/department of transportation">U.S. Department of Transportation</a>, <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/tag/epa/">Environmental Protection Agency</a> and the White House have announced new fuel economy standards for model year 2017-2025 vehicles that will require cars and light trucks to yield <a href="http://green.autoblog.com/2011/07/29/official-2025-cafe-target-set-at-54-5-mpg-everyones-apparentl/">a combined 54.5 mpg</a>, as was proposed back in July.<br />
<br />
According to the government, these new Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards will help save as much as 2.2 million barrels of oil per day by 2025, reducing our dependence on foreign oil and saving vehicle owners plenty of money at the pump. In fact, the fed says that a consumer purchasing a new car in 2025 will save $6,600 in fuel costs over the lifetime of that vehicle. Of course, the technologies required to achieve these new targets will make vehicles more expensive too, but the agencies claim that consumers will still save $4,400 over the life of a vehicle <em>after</em> factoring in those extra costs.<br />
<br />
The new CAFE rules will follow current 2011-2016 standards that call for cars and light trucks to hit 34.1 mpg combined by 2016. The rule is backed by over 100 members of Congress, and if adopted will undergo a 90-day comment period before becoming official.<br />
<br />
Some members of Congress believe that the rules haven't been evaluated thoroughly enough, however. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) has <a href="http://green.autoblog.com/2011/10/04/house-to-probe-54-5-mpg-rule-public-will-have-input/">expressed concerns</a> about the technical feasibility of the new standards. While most automakers have backed the 54.5 mpg goal, <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/volkswagen">Volkswagen</a> has been <a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2011/07/29/vw-blasts-new-cafe-standards-alleges-bias-towards-truck-makers/">vocally against the plan</a> in the past. While the new standards are strict, the plan does provide one single national standard for the industry to follow, unlike before where automakers met a minimum national standard as well as separate, tougher standards adopted by individual states led by California (the dreaded "patchwork" of regulation).<br />
<br />
We're all for better fuel economy, though the tight time frame likely means that automakers will resort to costly hybrid and alt-fuel options over the next 18 years to boost their fuel economy figures, and those substantial research, development and production costs are sure to get passed on to car buyers. It will be interesting to watch how eager shoppers are to hop onto this new, greener bandwagon.<p><a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2011/11/16/fed-proposes-new-fuel-economy-standard-54-5-mpg-by-2025/" rel="bookmark">Continue reading <em>Fed proposes new fuel economy standard: 54.5 mpg by 2025</em></a></p><p style="padding:5px;background:#ddd;border:1px solid #ccc;clear:both;"><a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2011/11/16/fed-proposes-new-fuel-economy-standard-54-5-mpg-by-2025/">Fed proposes new fuel economy standard: 54.5 mpg by 2025</a> originally appeared on <a href="http://www.autoblog.com">Autoblog</a> on Wed, 16 Nov 2011 16:09:00 EST.  Please see our <a href="http://www.weblogsinc.com/feed-terms/">terms for use of feeds</a>.</p><h6 style="clear: both; padding: 8px 0 0 0; height: 2px; font-size: 1px; border: 0; margin: 0; padding: 0;"></h6><a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2011/11/16/fed-proposes-new-fuel-economy-standard-54-5-mpg-by-2025/" rel="bookmark" title="Permanent link to this entry">Permalink</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.autoblog.com/forward/20107715/" title="Send this entry to a friend via email">Email this</a>&nbsp;|&nbsp;<a href="http://www.autoblog.com/2011/11/16/fed-proposes-new-fuel-economy-standard-54-5-mpg-by-2025/#comments" title="View reader comments on this entry">Comments</a>]]></description><category>54.5</category><category>54.5 mpg</category><category>cafe</category><category>cafe standards</category><category>congress</category><category>corporate average fuel economy</category><category>department of transportation</category><category>environmental protection agency</category><category>epa</category><category>fuel economy</category><category>fuel economy standards</category><category>mpg</category><category>us department of transportation</category><category>usdot</category><dc:creator><![CDATA[Zach Bowman]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2011 16:09:00 EST</pubDate>
  <comments-url>http://www.autoblog.com/feed/20107715/article-comments.xml</comments-url>
  <rss-url>http://www.autoblog.com/feed/2011/11/16/fed-proposes-new-fuel-economy-standard-54-5-mpg-by-2025/20107715/article-detail.xml</rss-url>
  <postid>20107715</postid>
<thumbnail>http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2011/11/gas-station-line-ap_thumbnail.jpg</thumbnail>

</item><pages>
  <prev>-1</prev>
  <next>2</next>
</pages></channel></rss>