The Inefficiency of Producing "Efficient" Cars.

2011-06-29T13:06:00.000-07:00

It is generally agreed that we must let go of our beloved petroleum-burning automotive engine. Resorting to drilling in wildlife preservation areas, living with constantly inflating gas prices, and relentless wars over the world's waning oil supply are all evidence that we won't be pumping our cars full of gasoline for too much longer. A change is necessary.

Automakers seem to feel that the solution is to manufacture more efficient cars; ones with higher MPG numbers on the window sticker. Ford has begun using its "EcoBoost" technology on several of its vehicles. The company is able to replace the thirsty V8 engines in its trucks and sports cars with turbocharged and direct-injected V6 engines. The newer, smaller engines are more fuel efficient (1). Mazda recently unveiled its new "SkyActiv" technology, a similar efficiency-improving system (2). Hyundai is direct-injecting its engines and getting MPG numbers higher than ever obtained from a typical combustion engine (3). The list goes on as almost every auto manufacturer attempts to raise its MPG ratings as dramatically as possible.

It may seem like it's all a marketing ploy, with automakers just trying to one-up each other on fuel economy, and that's probably the case to some degree. But the government is encouraging the competition, and even mandating manufacturers to constantly improve MPG numbers with Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) regulations. These regulations require automakers meet a fuel economy benchmark. The average gas milage of a manufacturer's fleet must be above a certain miles-per-gallon figure. These benchmarks are constantly increasing year to year, requiring automakers to eek more efficiency out of their engines (4).

The big question is: why are automakers spending so much time, money, and other resources trying to improve an unsustainable engine? Why is even the federal government supporting something so wasteful? Everyone knows we won't be able to use gasoline for much longer, yet advancing the engine powered by gasoline is still the prime focus of auto manufacturers. One can only imagine the progress that could have been made in hydrogen fuel cell technology, or in battery and electric motor mechanics had research time been spent there. Instead, engineers improved a doomed powertrain. Even solar car technology (which at this point isn't at all a viable alternative to fossil fuels) might have been a feasible solution by now. If Toyota had skipped developing Hybrid Synergy Drive and the Prius and had instead gone straight to developing an all-out electric car, time and money would have been saved, and we would be closer to eliminating our oil dependency. The same goes for Ford and EcoBoost, Mazda and Skyactiv, etc. If these technologies hadn't been developed, then yes, we'd be driving less efficient vehicles today, but there would likely be long term solution in store for tomorrow.

I would consider myself an environmentalist. Though CAFE regulations were enacted with the right idea, to preserve the environment, they miss the point. Improving the gasoline engine is simply impractical considering its imminent death. I am opposed to the race to slightly improved gas milage at the great cost of pursuing real solution. It is necessary to step back and consider whether an idea really is a long-term, sustainable solution, or just an expensive, short-term fix.

Sources:
1. http://www.ford.com/technology/ 06/28/11
2. http://www.mazda.com/mazdaspirit/skyactiv/ 06/28/11

3. http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-13746_7-10399881-48.html 06/29/11

4. http://www.nhtsa.gov/staticfiles/rulemaking/pdf/cafe/CAFE_2012-2016_FRIA_04012010.pdf

Thinking Sustainable Thoughts

The Inefficiency of Producing "Efficient" Cars.