« Why Amis have replaced Germans as the new Nazis | Main | German Media's Anti-Americanism Sinks to New Lows »

Comments

I wouldn't be so sure they really realize how big America is.

I've read too many stories on the web of instances where Europeans looked at maps thinking they could hit the highlights in a short period of time.

My neighbor said another employee came in from Europe, and thought NY for breakfast, DC(?) for lunch and then hop over/drive to DisneyWorld for a couple of days. It's almost 1000 miles - man was clueless.

And the woman whose British father-in-law spent 2 days just watching the Weather Channel cos he couldn't believe the range of weather.

Yep. I had an American friend who lived in Essen for awhile. She was introduced to 2 fine German lads just about to hit the U.S. for a week. They planned to drive from Miami to Los Angeles. She didn't say anything.

Three weeks later she saw them again and asked about their trip.

They never made it out of Florida.

Maybe they don't realize when looking at American maps a mile is 40% longer than a kilometer.

Or something.

A little perspective:

Paris, France to Berlin, Germany: 875 km

London, England to Berlin, Germany: 927 km

Berlin, Germany to Rome, Italy: 1,187 km

Paris, France to Moscow, Russia: 2,495 km

London, England to Moscow, Russia: 2,838 km

London, England to Tel Aviv, Israel: 3,572 km

New York City, New York, USA to Los Angeles, California, USA: 3,961 km

Miami, Florida, USA to Los Angeles, California, USA: 4,405 km

Miami, Florida, USA to Seattle, Washington, USA: 5,415 km

Oh, I forgot...

Miami, Florida, USA to Pensacola, Florida, USA: 1,045 km

Miami, Florida, USA to Atlanta, Georgia, USA: 1,070 km

I had mycousin visit me a couple of months ago and he immediately started with the fact that Germany had the toughest emissions control on the planet.
Of course I had him research that on my computer and he found out to his horror that the toughest laws are in california, ny and several other states. The federal guidelines are the same as the EU (EU5).
The German media is at fault for not educating their citizens properly. Most Germans are under the assumptio that the US does nothing to combat co2. WRONG! The US is also one of the few countries that has a decrease in co2. The Germans sure would look bad if they had used the year 2000 as a measuring point instead of 1990. They knew that the East German factories would be destroyed and thus the difference between 1990 and subsequent years would look favorable.
I am so tired of the germans /Europeans constantly belly aching about the mean USA. To them diplomacy is as follows: Agree with us and we will call it a victory for diplomacy. Disagree with us and we will call you uneducated, arrogant and we will throw a temper tantrum.
Watch the latest about Data transfer on Flights. They are already calling us arrogant for wanting data on passengers before the negotiations have started into their meaningful phase.
Well, bring it on. Maybe we won't have any flights coming and going for a while. At least we put our money where our mouths are. Example: we don't trade with Iran, Cuba North Korea. It isn't always for the mighty buck like the Germans.
If the German press produced stories about Russia like they do AMERIKA, they would soon find their energy shut off. We are just too nice.......

Eh, let's throw these in there, too...

New York City, USA to Orlando, Florida, USA: 1,758 km

New York City, USA to London, England: 5,585 km

Provide the data or don't come. Simple.

I for one could care less if any euro's ever come to America again.

Or Chicago to FLA - 20 hours straight driving, that doesn't necessarily mean you arrive at the city you want to be in, Miami is longer.

Yesterday the Financial Times had a piece saying Chirac is telling the U.S. if we don't sign the carbon emissions trading schemes for airlines, they'll slap a tax on U.S. flights in the EU.

I don't know why he doesn't realize that crap works both ways. To say nothing of total ignorance of Econ 101. Consumers will simply fly to and from Europe less because of the higher ticket prices.

Does Kyoto apply to the burning of automobiles?

When I was a grad student, I taught ESL (English as a Second Language). Students from China, Venezuela, and Brazil were the only ones who realized how large the US is. I always heard students claim they were going to drive to LA in a day -- from over 4,000 km away, except that they didn't know it was that far to California from the midwest. Most Americans don't live in the inner city, and an hour commute to and from work, even a two hour commute, isn't unusual.

americanbychoice,

Assuming the subject came up with you cousin after he returned to Germany, do you think he told what he found about U.S. standards?

just wondering if he could even get away with it.

i don't think so. lol

My three trips to the US were fun. Just why did you have to put so long distances between the national parks. ;-)

@ americanbychoice:

The US is also one of the few countries that has a decrease in co2
I beg to differ (at least up to 2004):
http://epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads06/06Trends.pdf
See fig 2-1 and 2-4. CO2/capita is more or less constant since 1990, population has increased and so has the total CO2. Only CO2/$GDP has gone down. If you have other data I would be interested. TIA. However, you are perfectly correct in your assessment that Germany is lucky with the choice of 1990 as a reference point. We don't do enough.

[off-topic]
@Pam, Helian
I watched the documentary on the Indian trek to Wounded Knee. No Gitmo, no Bush-bashing, no anti-americanism IMHO. Read more ...

P.S.: All of you, have a nice weekend.

"...you are perfectly correct in your assessment that Germany is lucky with the choice of 1990 as a reference point."

Luck has nothing to do with it. This was by design. They lobbied hard to have 1990 as the base year. Before the treaty was ever signed, Germany knew they would make their initial target just by shutting down eastern German industry -- which they did by 1992. The treaty was ratified in 1997 and took effect in 2005. Kind of a "thanks for nothing" event, huh?

However, like the song says, the first cut is the deepest -- unfortunately, not deep enough. I have the figures around here somewhere and I'll post a link as soon as I find it (so I'm shooting from the hip on this), but I believe Germany and several other EU countries have already fallen far short of their eventual targets with little hope of ever making up the difference. The EU as a whole had signed on to an 8% decrease in greenhouse gases. Even with the help of Germany's 17% cut (due almost entirely to the above mentioned actions in eastern Germany), they will most likely not make that goal. Some EU countries have actually *increased* production of greenhouse gases and will be over their limit by up to 77%. Germany's target, I believe, is a 21% cut from 1990 levels -- a goal not likely to be met after the government recently decided to exempt new coal-fired plants from emissions restrictions (imagine that).

@ Blue,

Not all native Americans live on reservations, nor do they live in poverty. My girlfriend is one fourth Lakota. Her grand father left the reservation in the 1930s and worked for the rail road. The grandfather got her father a job with the rail road after he left the Navy ten years after WWII. The father worked for the Long Island Rail Road, which uses Grand Central Station in New York as its main terminal. He retired has Bahnhofmeister of Grand Central Station. She grew up in the lower Hamptons in Long Island which is a very affluent part of the U.S. She grew up with the Baldwin brothers: Alec Baldwin was her highschool friend.

Her father tried to down play his Lakota heritage. However, she is very much in to her Lakota heritage and often attends Pow-Wows, eventhough there are not many Lakota in New Hampshire. She gets a discount to the Indian-owned casino at Foxwoods, Connecticut, which also happens to be the largest and richest casino in the world. She speaks some Lakota, which she learned from her paternal grandfather. She can also speak decent German which she learned from her mother and maternal grandparents. Her mother’s family is from the Rhine area.

She also routes for the Indians while watching Westerns;-)

When I attended the big motorcycle rally at Sturgis, North Dakota, not too far away form Wounded Knee and the larger Lakota reservations, I saw a few Native Americans working in the hotel business. Many work for the U.S. Park Service. However, most of the restaurants and hotels employed Russian and Polish students for the summer. If 4 out of 5 Lakota are unemployed, which I do not deny, then it is a life-style choice, not a lack or unavailability of jobs.

Read a few years ago that Indians of the tribes which owned casinos were starting to become financial advisors since the average net worth was $400K per tribe member and someone has to manage the money we white people throw into their machines.

How about trucks/SUVs? I somewhere heard that they are in a different "category" regarding taxation in mileage requirements. Especially, that these vehicles (that are a HUGE share of the US market) do not require Gas Guzzler Tax and such fines.

Is this true? Or is Cadillac Escalade treated the same as small Saturn xyz?

In other words, if what I remember is true, your arguments that the US market is the same/better than Germany goes right out of the window due to the extreme amount of the low-mileage SUVs....?

Sometimes I wonder if part of the anti-American problem is the age of the US "State". The US Government is one of the world's oldest existing States, having existed since the time of the Holy Roman Empire, and was almost a century old by Bismarck's day. And unlike pretty much all of continental Europe outside Switzerland, it hasn't been overthrown or conquered in that time. So, much of the badness of the 19th century (in particular) is not deferred or dismissed as it appears to be in much of Europe, since some people seemingly regard the current US government as "owning" this badness in a way that, for instance, the German government is not for WWII, since it was set up in the middle of the 20th century.

After all, Wounded Knee happened in 1890, or several "German Reichs" ago.

Keneda
How about trucks/SUVs? I somewhere heard that they are in a different "category" regarding taxation in mileage requirements

I don't know the details, but you are correct. SUVs are classified as 'trucks' not 'cars' for which the standards are different. But as for the actual numbers, someone more knowledgable than I will have to post.

blue, I've posted my response on that thread

-- And unlike pretty much all of continental Europe outside Switzerland, it hasn't been overthrown or conquered in that time--

We're the original rogue nation, we're the 1 that got away and proved them wrong.

That and we surpassed our betters.

As of 2005 all domestic manufacturers in the US(including Canada and Mexico), all Japanese and Korean imports and only a few exotic car makers in Europe(Lamborghini, Bentley/Rolls Royce and Maserati for example) met the CAFE requirements. The companies that didn't meet CAFE standards and paid the fines were Daimler-Chrysler(imports), BMW, Ferrari, Lotus and Porsche. Porsche and VW also had to pay the fines for their SUV imports.

Oops, Volkswagen and Audi both passed CAFE standards and both are not exotic car makers.

@Kaneda
First of all, I did not write any “arguments that the US market is the same/better than Germany”.
I wrote: “…judging from my acquaintances...most Germans know practically nothing about the fuel efficiency policies of the US…Here’s a little background information...”
In fact, as a precaution, I even went out of my way and wrote: “Diese Verbrauchswerte sind nicht genau vergleichbar, weil sie unterschiedlich ermittelt wurden..“ so that no one would think that I was trying to prove anything solely on the basis of only these facts alone. (Perhaps you should ask yourself why you would jump to such a distorted misperception of what I actually wrote.)

Secondly, your question “How about trucks/SUVs?” is indeed a good question, and is answered on the very same page that is linked to under the gas guzzler info in my comment. I was really hoping that you would follow these links yourself to inform yourself more about the US policies. But apparently not, so here it is, extra special cut and pasted just for you:

“Vans, pickup trucks, and sport utility vehicles (SUVs) weighing more than 8,500 pounds gross vehicle weight are classified as heavy-duty vehicles. Fuel economy regulations do not apply to these vehicles, so they are not tested and fuel economy labels are not posted in their windows. Additional information is available at” http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/which_tested.shtml

Also, from the CAFE link above:
“Light truck fuel economy requirements were first established for MY 1979 (17.2 mpg for 2-wheel drive models; 15.8 mpg for 4-wheel drive). Standards for MY 1979 light trucks were established for vehicles with a gross vehicle weight rating (GVWR) of 6,000 pounds or less. Standards for MY 1980 and beyond are for light trucks with a GVWR of 8,500 pounds or less. The light truck standard progressively increased from MY 1979 to 20.7 mpg and 19.1 mpg, respectively, by MY 1991. From MY 1982 through 1991, manufacturers were allowed to comply by either combining 2- and 4-wheel drive fleets or calculating their fuel economy separately. In MY 1992, the 2- and 4-wheel drive fleet distinction was eliminated, and fleets were required to meet a standard of 20.2 mpg. The standard progressively increased until 1996, when the Appropriations prohibition froze the requirement at 20.7 mpg. The freeze was lifted by Congress on December 18, 2001. On March 31, 2003, NHTSA issued new light truck standards, setting a standard of 21.0 mpg for MY 2005, 21.6 mpg for MY 2006, and 22.2 mpg for MY 2007.”

Actually what you wrote was "Diese Verbrauchswerte sind nicht genau vergleichbar, weil sie
unterschiedlich ermittelt wurden, aber sie sind ungefähr vergleichbar." which is a funny construct itself, since in the end (which you forgot to quote) you almost take away your own precaution you made in the first place.

But my statement was not so much in respond to your post, but more in general.
I agree with this blog and even this topic, that most Germans have a quite distorted view. But sometimes I think the view of this blog and some comments go the same way, just against Germans (or to say, a little too "Pro-American"). I think almost nobody in Germany thinks that the average Saturn car uses so much more gas than an average German Opel. The point is, that in the US a lot more SUVs and trucks are sold (a LOT MORE), and that these use an extreme amount of gas. This, of course goes as well for the SUVs from Mercedes, BMW, Audi and Porsche, but they just don't sell so much SUVs here in Germany (the biggest market for the Porsche Cayenne is the US)

The point is: If somebody throws statistics into the battle about how much gas in average which cars use, it should also be mentioned how much of these cars are actually driven in the respective country, and what "cars" mean. As to say, it is good to provide many sources as you did, but honestly I have no time to read them all, and I think almost nobody else has. But it is just irresponsible to compare US statistics and German statistics without directly going into detail how these where created and what some aspects of them mean. Just by providing some sources and saying "read it up yourself" is not quite the best way, since most people will just read your post because of a lack of time.
And this problem I saw many times on this blog (comparing the official US-Unemployment numbers to the German ones, or directly comparing the US "poverty" numbers to the Germans, without checking WHAT exactly "poverty" means in each of those statistics). In this case, about the average fuel consumption in a year in Germany and the US: Does it include the fact that in Germany there is no speed limit (which uses more gas)?
I really like the intention of this blog, but too many times I think it goes to far, or using the same "media tactics" that brought up criticism in the first place (to make an extreme example: complaining about spiegelonline is fair and just, doing this with quotes from FoxNews is idiotic).

Btw.: Even in Germany SUV profit from some cheap tax-trick as far as I know, but they make a much smaller market share.

Kaneda, I think you make a fair argument. I have some experience with SUVs as we have to rent one when we need to take a road trip with the dog (the back is transformed into a beagle playpen - ;) ).

THE MILEAGE SUCKS.

And we do have a lot of them on the road. People with families tend to like them because they can carry everybody and everything and women LOVE them because of the visibility provided by the height.

But those of us who drive 'normal' cars despise them. They obstruct our views. And if you have ever been rear-ended by one, as I have, an already negative opinion tends to be transformed to something approaching hate.

My solution is to make minivans safer. But nobody asked me.

@ George M.
It's good to get information on this more personal level, rather than just always statistics. Thanks for sharing.

@ Sandy P.
Nice to see that others fared better. It was not implied in the documentary that the situation was typical of all Indians in the US.

@ Pamela
Thanks, I have responded on that thread, as well.

@ Scott H.
Poor wording on my part. There is little in international treaties that can be chalked up to pure luck. I don't recall that lobbying for 1990 on our part was reported, but I would not be surprised either if it happened, so I will take your word. I am aware that Germany and the EU are probably going to fail their Kyoto goals. It it as I wrote: "We [read Germany and EU] don't do enough."

I am still curious about CO2 emissions as a whole. Not so much about the exact numbers, but where the differences come from.

The CO2 emissions per capita in the US is roughly twice as high as in Germany; the GDP per emissions in thousands USD per metric ton is about 3600 for Germany and 2100 for the U.S. . Part of that might be due to e.g. air-conditioning in the US (difference in climate). However is that really all or where do the huge differences come from. Does anyone here have data?

Kaneda: “"Diese Verbrauchswerte sind nicht genau vergleichbar, weil sie unterschiedlich ermittelt wurden, aber sie sind ungefähr vergleichbar." which is a funny construct itself, since in the end (which you forgot to quote) you almost take away your own precaution you made in the first place.”

Yes, you are absolutely correct, and that is exactly what I intended. Thanks so much for clarifying that.

You say you have no time to read my sources. Well I don’t have time to spoon-feed you all the details about all the statistics.
You can chose to take my word for it, or not take my word for it, or click on the link and see for yourself, or provide the information which you believe to be lacking, or waste our time bitching about it. “Excellent choice sir”

The tax regulations, the CAFE regulations, and both the US mileage figure and the German mileage figure I listed in my first comment are for passenger cars (PKW) only, and exclude light trucks.
It is the passenger car regulations that are the subject of Porsche CEO Wiedeking's remarks concerning the current European argument about CO2 emissions. That’s why I listed passenger car policies and mileage.

Like I said before, the question of SUVs is good one. If you want to compare light truck mileage and sales a bit more concretely than by just saying “The point is, that in the US a lot more SUVs and trucks are sold (a LOT MORE), and that these use an extreme amount of gas.”, then you can find the US data on light trucks (2005: 21.8 mpg (10,8 l/100km), sales 2004: 8,380,031) just one click away. If you can find comparable data on light trucks in Germany, I would love to see it, if that doesn’t violate your own principles by being “...just irresponsible to compare US statistics and German statistics without directly going into detail how these where created and what some aspects of them mean.”

@blue
Are you looking for something like this? http://library.iea.org/textbase/papers/2000/emtrends.pdf

@ Germerican
Yes, that's about the right direction and it helps as a starter. Thanks. It is always hard to find the info you want, if you can't come up with the proper search terms.

Ok Kaneda... I'll add some balance here for you.

The tax credit for hybrid vehicles from a particular manufacturer gets phased out as soon as that manufacturer has sold 60,000 of them. For example, someone who buys a Toyota Prius between October 1, 2006 and March 31, 2007 just gets 50% of the allowable credit.

Since the "gas guzzler tax" only applies to vehicles which weigh less than 6000 pounds, people can avoid it by purchasing a heavier vehicle (like an SUV). Additionally, small-business owners (and anyone else who can claim that an SUV is used at least 50% for business) can receive massive tax deductions.

The SUV tax deduction was originally intended to help farmers and construction workers buy vehicles which are genuinely necessary for their work. The problem is that the tax code defines industrial vehicles by weight instead of function, which has the unfortunate effect of encouraging SUV sales.

Several attempts have been made to introduce legislation that would redefine SUVs as luxury automobiles under tax law, but they didn't have enough support to pass. It will be interesting to see if something can be done in the current congress.

By the way, Kaneda, these additional facts don't throw any arguments out the window (as you so charmingly asserted in an earlier post).

This thread is full of facts that the average German might not have seen before. But you've already seen some version of the facts that I just wrote, haven't you? Why would you be more familiar with negative information about the US than with positive information? Could it be that the sources that you usually read are... perhaps... a little biased?

I have had a look at the Germericans links and found the time to do some reading. I would like to put the data presented into perspective.

The 7.9 l/100km and 8.4 l/100km cited for the German fleet correspond to 28-30 mpg. Keep in mind this is the real life average for all model years in the mix as they are currently driving on the streets in Germany.

Now the US situation. The 29,1 mpg number you cite is the CAFE value. This is not real life performance. EPA itself deams CAFE values unrealistic and estimates real life values to be about 15% lower. Here is the respective cite:

The fuel economy values in this report are based on ‘real world’ estimates provided bythe Federal government to consumers and are about 15 percent lower than the values used bymanufacturers and the Department of Transportation (DOT) for compliance with the CorporateAverage Fuel Economy (CAFE) program. Because it has been over two decades since the current procedures for determining real world fuel economy estimates were established andbecause both vehicle technology and vehicle driving patterns have changed, EPA has proposedchanges to the methodology for calculating real world fuel economy estimates and expects tofinalize a new methodology by the end of 2006.
Source: Light-Duty Automotive Technology and
Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 Through 2006
, page i.

The following cites are from the same document.

  • light-duty vehicles account for approximately 40 percent of all U.S. oil consumption (page ii)
  • MY2006 cars are estimated to average 24.6mpg and are near the high end of their mpg range since 1996. (page iii) (This is passenger cars(!), excluding SUVs)
  • SUVs have an average of 18.5 mpg
  • The SUV market share increased by more than a factor often, from less than two percent of the overall new light-duty vehicle market in 1975 to over 25 percent of vehicles built each year since 2002. (page iv)
The weighted real life average of SUVs and passenger cars for MY2006 is (market share from fig on page iv):
(0.5*24.6mpg + 0.3*18.5mpg)/(0.5+0.3) = 22.3 mpg

Market shares by vehicle type (graphics)

So now finally we are down to numbers that we can actually compare, we are comparing all model year values from Germany being 28-30 to MY2006 values of 22.3 in the US.

BTW, the German manufacturers are in trouble because the will not meet their pleged 140 gCO2/km in 2008. In MY2006 German car makers were at about 160 gCO2/km, the EU intended to impose 120 gCO2/km and the compromise seems to be 130 gCO2/km in 2012. The gCO2/km values may be the theoretical values, however it is my experience that in Germany these do closely match real life values. Now let us see how these numbers translate to milage, shall we?

    gCO2/km    l/100km    mpg
      160              6.7       35.2
      140              5.9       40.2
      130              5.4       43.3
      120              5.0       46.9

So for MY2006 it is 35 mpg for Germany vs. 22.3 mpg for the US. I think, at least part of the higher German fuel efficiency is due to our cars being smaller on average.

@blue
As they say here in Bayern, Respekt. (taking notes Kaneda?)

Thanks for providing more info on the question of SUVs.
I think that shows fairly well in concrete terms how much the SUVs are responsible for lowering the average fuel economy.
So theoretically, according to your calculation, if all SUVs could be replaced with passenger cars, then the average fuel economy for personal transportation could be increased by about 10% from 22.3 to 24.6 mpg.

You’re right, the EPA’s real world estimates are better for comparing to the data from the Umweltbundesamt and Shell sources. I overlooked that when I listed the CAFE standard and conveniently also listed the CAFE data for fleet average.

For a comparison I had searched for fleet data on Germany, but all I could find were those two sources.
So where did you find this figure of 160g CO2/km for the German fleet average?
I saw a figure in the newspaper today that was 161 g/km, but that was for the EU fleet average.
Sorry, but until you can give me better sources than the ones I found, I’m going to stick with them.

So, when I use the Umweltbundesamt and Shell data from 2004 and the EPA’s real world estimates from 2006, I get:

US passenger car + SUV .. 22.3 mpg
US passenger car .......... 24.6 mpg
German passenger car .... 28-30 mpg

And when I use the Umweltbundesamt and Shell data from 2004 and the EPA’s real world estimates from 2004 (appendix D http://www.epa.gov/otaq/cert/mpg/fetrends/420r06011d.pdf), I get:

US passenger car + SUV .. 22.0 mpg = (24.8 x .444 + 17.9 x .300) / (.444 + .300)
US passenger car ........... 24.8 mpg
German passenger car ..... 28-30 mpg

I took the about 160 g CO2/km figure from mainstream media, no primary source, but I am confident in its veracity. There was quite a bit of coverage on the CO2 emissions of cars during the last days, and how German manufacturers are going to fail to meet the 140 g CO2/km they pledged for 2008. It was widely and consistently reported, but I do not have primary sources just yet. I will try to find some, but it may take weeks until I come back to you on that. However there is a list on spiegel.de with the emissions by individual manufacturer (Source: Centre for Automotive Research, FH Gelsenkirchen). Those ought to be 2006 numbers, not quite sure. The numbers of the German carmakers are consistent with the 160 g CO2/km estimate, if you consider the market share that VW and Opel have.
Fuel efficiency from the list, converted to mpg:
    Porsche .............. 18.9 mpg
    Mercedes ............. 30.2 mpg
    VW ................... 34.9 mpg
    Opel ................. 35.8 mpg
    Fiat ................. 40.2 mpg
    Smart ................ 48.5 mpg
I put in Fiat and Smart for comparisons sake, their models are much smaller than your average car.

And I would like to stress once more: the 28-30 mpg quoted from the Umweltbundesamt and Shell are fleet averages of all cars currently on the road in Germany, i.e. a mix of many model years. The EPA's real world estimates on the other hand are specific by model year, i.e. MY2006 covers the brand new cars made and sold in 2006 only. So to be fair you need to compare EPA MY2004/2006 values to the 160 g CO2/km (35.2 mpg), or the values from the list linked above.

Conversion between the units:
Divide gCO2/km by 23.884 to obtain usage in l/100km. [*]
Divide 235.55 by usage in l/100km to obtain mpg.
[*]I did not find a source for the conversion factor. Therefore I took the Mercedes data provided on "It's the Profits, Stupid!" and performed a linear fit (you can do it in e.g. Excel, make sure the fit goes through zero, i.e. no offset allowed). My value may be off by about 1%.

Found more info, I think this one is as close as I will get. Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament - Implementing the community strategy to reduce co2 emissions from cars: fifth annual communication on the effectiveness of the strategy {SEC(2005) 826 }. Estimated from figure 1 in that report, MY2003 fleet average of new cars sold in Germany was about 175 g/km (31.9mpg). That number can be directly compared to EPA MY2003 figures of 20.8 mpg (EPA420-R-06-011, table 1, trucks and cars, ADJ 55/45) and 24.7 mpg (passenger cars only, no SUVs).

Addendum>
An older report quotes conversion factors for l/100km to g/km for petrol as 23.7 (I have adopted it for this post already) and for diesel as 26.6. So my 23.884 value is off by 0.7% and I slightly overestimated European mpg by about 0.1mpg per 10mpg milage (e.g. 160g/km is 34.9 mpg, not 35.2 mpg as calculated in prior posts). That difference is negligible when comparing US and EU fuel efficiencies. I go with the petrol value as American cars for the most part use petrol.

Updated conversion table (conversion factor 23.7)
g/km ... mpg .... l/100km
300 .... 18.6 .... 12.7
280 .... 19.9 .... 11.8
260 .... 21.5 .... 11.0
240 .... 23.3 .... 10.1
220 .... 25.4 ....  9.3
200 .... 27.9 ....  8.4
180 .... 31.0 ....  7.6
160 .... 34.9 ....  6.8
140 .... 39.9 ....  5.9
120 .... 46.5 ....  5.1
100 .... 55.8 ....  4.2

Thank you for tapping the numerical wilderness beyond the SI.

And now for something completely different... The Autobahn Song in 1990 e-guitar remake.* Have fun!

The background of the background info: That list of US fuel efficiency policies is written in German because I originally wrote it a while ago for the benefit of a German acquaintance. When he had learned that I was from the US, he had “informed” me that American cars use three times as much gas as German cars because the US government is paying the auto manufacturers to build cars that use more gas in order to increase the profits of their friends in the oil business.

Back to the original topic: In addition to Wiedeking's earlier comments about the US, the fact that Porsche and other German auto manufacturers have been selling cars in the US in violation of the CAFE standards for years makes Wiedeking's vehement opposition to the similar proposed EU regulation seem even more curious.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Mission

The Debate

Blog powered by Typepad

December 2018

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30 31