I Noticed more Notices than I care to notice.

So, your telling me in a round about way that my next new car will cost more, maybe get 1MPG more that my last one, all for reducing one days worth of oil and carbon over a 20 year period...AND...that new car will likely be completely indistinguishable from all other models and makes due to cost savings needed to somehow save a thimbles worth of energy, a mere drop in the bucket, one grain of sand on the beach, and depriving plant life of what it needs to survive to boot ...wow, now that's progress.
Did these idiots realize that they just deprived themselves of tax money on the savings?

The New and Unabridged Federal Dictionary: Fact sheets - conjecture based on fiction. Also see "lies" and "deception" and "mass-delusion (federal)".
Wonder how many freight trains it would take to replace these environmentally monstrous trucks? (Assuming someone could build roads for rails.)

Fuel efficiency standards for commercial vehicles are a waste of time. Operators of these vehicles have always looked for the most efficient vehicles because fuel consumption directly impacts their bottom line. It's all about expanding government power.

Manufactures of any product will always be driven to make their machines more efficient while delivering the required power to do the work. Making demands that a machine meets a certain standard and expecting that somehow the market will invent the means is unrealistic. There is a finite amount of energy in any fuel and the requirement for power to accomplish the work will remain constant, a foot pound is still a foot pound. Commerce usually finds a method for sidestepping the requirements which often defeats the objective and the added cost of placting the beauracrat adds cost to the equipment; i.e. the requirements for trucks is not as stringent as family vehicles so the industry invents the SUV on a truck frame which the public purchases foregoing the more efficient smaller vehicles required to meet the mileage standards with the result of more gas consumption than if thevernment stayed out of the business of people control. More whales were saved by Rockefeller developing kerosene which replaced whale oil than all of the efforts of the "green' movement.

More regulations means more costs. More costs mean higher prices. Higher prices means fewer buyers and more debt. In many cases people are forced to lease a car in order to keep the payments low. That translates into eternal debt since no equity is ever accrued nor ownership attained. One more way for government to gain control of our lives. The question is fast becoming, " are we too far down into collectivism to ever turn around no matter who gets elected?"

I think you misunderstand the intent of the interstate commerce clause. It was intended that the Fed's be able to prevent trade wars between the states, using tariffs and such. It was never intended to allow the Fed's to regulate everything that either crosses state lines, or affects the markets for things that do.

States are already shifting to a mileage-based road tax, and away from a gasoline/diesel consumption tax, in anticipation of higher mileage cars. There's even some talk of a special "premium" tax on electric cars, since the perception is that they create a greater demand on the electric power grid.

There ain't no free lunch.

NHTSA's notions of vehicle safety have always been backward as far as I'm concerned. Their main emphasis, from their beginning in 1973 to now, has been to insist that vehicles be made less and less sturdy, because they believe that the biggest hazard on the road is a driver who can be confident that his vehicle can make it through a crash without taking expensive damage. Thus even big rigs nowadays are made of fiberglass. This is idiotic. As far as I'm concerned a safe vehicle is a Sherman tank, just as it always has been.

And EPA's fuel economy standards are worse than unnecessary. They kill thousands every year by forcing drivers into smaller, lighter weight vehicles where they will die in crashes they would otherwise survive. I doubt that the reduction in pollution saves even 1/10 as many lives. If it saved more, then I'd be for it.

The one good thing I can say about federal vehicle standards is that at least they're not an unconstitutional power (to the extent that vehicle sales are interstate commerce).

The first sentence ends with climate change etc.
that was as far as I would read. What if the Farmers Almanac is correct about the coming winter and if it does come to pass that tells me the next winter will be as cold or colder and if so will these people who dream up these rules will continue to preach global warming, probably yes and will do so until they find themselves living in an igloo. When you hear the term "no brainer" you are hearing about these people because they haven't one.

We have energy security...it exists in North Dakota!

The Obama administration would prefer to force us to buy from his Arab/Muslim buddies, yet make it look like it's they who are doing the forcing.

these political hacks are determined to enrich AlGore
in any way they can, as fast as they can. . still bitter
over the election in 2000, this is revenge; yes?! -- j
.

I dont believe anything our government claims nowadays. Its all politics that somehow I am going to have to pay for in increased vehicle costs one way or the other. Not to mention all the government money that will be spend developing and enforcing the regulations.

If I was king, this would be one of many alphabet agencies I would simply immediately close down. I might not get through them all before I was assassinated, though, by the special interests.

In a truly free society, Underwriters' Laboratories should handle this. And some of those standards, as their own text points out, have nothing to do with safety.