This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In a study published in the journal Energy Economics , MIT researchers have found that a fueleconomy standard is at least six to fourteen times less cost effective than a fueltax when targeting an identical reduction in cumulative gasoline use (20% by 2050). —Karplus et al. Paltsev, M.
Sivak found that while the vehicle fueleconomy of the entire light-duty fleet improved by 40% (from 13 mpg US to 21.6 l/100km), because of the decrease in vehicle load, the occupant fueleconomy only improved by 17% (from 24.8 Combining these two effects yields a reduction of about 14% in the amount of fuel used.
According to the Federal Highway Administration, the average fueleconomy for all light vehicles on the road today is 22.3 The Federal tax on gasoline is 18.4 cents per gallon, and each state has a gasoline tax, ranging from 8.95 Based on a vehicle with an average fueleconomy of 22.3 cents in Alaska to 58.7
Meanwhile, significant gains in vehicle fueleconomy over the coming decades are possible and very much needed globally in order to address pressing issues of climate change, energy security and sustainable mobility. carbon fuel vehicles will be needed to continue to decarbonize LDVs and reduce oil use out to 2050 and beyond.
The IEA and ITF have developed a range of projections of possible “business-as-usual” scenarios around this, indicating the potential for a doubling (or more) of vehicle kilometers travelled (VKT) combined with modest improvements in vehicle fueleconomy. Vehicle taxes and incentives. Component standards, taxes and incentives.
To that end, following on Biden’s campaign promise to “end fossil fuel,” policy and investment signals are being sent by various federal agencies and allied state governments to the market about the refining industry: EPA just finalized a light duty vehicle standard that incentivizes at least 17% electric vehicle sales by 2026.
The National Research Council has released a prepublication edition of a new congressionally mandated report that evaluates various technologies and methods that could improve the fueleconomy of medium- and heavy-duty vehicles (MHDVs), such as tractor-trailers, transit buses, and work trucks.
Among the transportation-related elements of US President Barack Obama’s new climate action plan, which he is outlining today in a speech at Georgetown University, is the development of new fueleconomy standards for heavy-duty vehicles post-2018. Climate Change Emissions Fuel Efficiency Fuels Heavy-duty Policy'
IEA fueleconomy readiness index status, 2010. New propulsion systems requiring new fuels, such as plug-in electric vehicle systems and fuel cell systems, are beyond the scope of this technology roadmap and are treated in separate roadmaps. Average fueleconomy and new vehicles registrations, 2005 and 2008.
users pay for the construction and maintenance of roads via a federal fueltax. Revenues from the tax go into the federal Highway Trust Fund, which is independent of the General Fund; every five years or so Congress passes an authorization bill to allocate these revenues. States use similar mechanisms. —Huang et al.
There may be one negative knock-on effect of improving the fueleconomy standards of our vehicles: fueltax revenues could slump massively. According to a report by the Congressional Budget Office (logo, pictured), fueleconomy standards proposed for 2017-2025 would cut revenues from petrol tax by 21 per cent in 2040.
As sales of electric vehicles begin to reach significant numbers across the US, states are exploring approaches to replace lost tax revenue since EV drivers don’t pay fueltaxes as drivers of gas-powered cars do at gas stations. Unfortunately there is currently no simple and agreed upon best replacement for the fueltax.
The economy-wide CO 2 prices applied increase the cost of driving only marginally with respect to the business-as-usual case. Direct transportation (fuel) taxes generate the greatest reductions in CO 2 emission from transportation, achieving CO 2 emissions at 86% of 2005 levels by about 2025.
Increased sales of electric vehicles allow automakers to sell more low-fuel-economy vehicles and still comply with the federal standards that govern the average fueleconomy of the vehicles they sell (known as CAFE standards). Indirect effects. That effect may be large. Cultivate local PEV clusters.
He points out that because of high fueltaxes and the resulting high cost of gasoline in Europe, the existing fleet of passenger cars there is already more efficient than the US fleet, so implementing stringent fuel efficiency standards would be more costly for Europe.
Since some 36% of diesel is used off-road, such as on farms, by manufacturing, industrial and commercial ventures, and boats, a fueltax for road use would impose an unfair burden onto these sectors, the government says.). In New Zealand, diesel and electric-powered vehicles pay for their road use through road user charges.
Member states should consider strategies to compensate for the taxation shortfall from fuels due to higher fueleconomy by, for example, gradually adapting the minimum fueltax level in the EU to increase incentives to shift to higher fueleconomy and to keep total tax paid constant in real terms for both the consumer and the state revenues.
Strong economy-wide pricing measures (such as a $5.00 per gallon fueltax by 2050) could result in an additional reduction of 28% in GHG emissions. The Moving Cooler baseline extrapolated these projections further to 2050, resulting in a potential doubling or greater of fleet fuel efficiency. Land use and smart growth.
Based on average annual miles traveled, the estimated fueleconomy, and the gas tax rate, we can determine that the average car in Arizona contributes about $82.90 a year in gas taxes. To address these, state legislatures can adjust gas taxes to make up funding gaps and index them to inflation.
The recommendations include: Improving the fuel consumption of mainstream vehicles is the primary nearer-term opportunity for reducing fuel use and GHG emissions. Market-based incentives should be implemented to support the US Corporate Average FuelEconomy (CAFE) LDV requirements.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content