The Day the V8 Died

It is well known in my circle of friends that while I am employed in an engineering profession, I also have a good deal of interest in politics and public policy. A number of years ago, when I was still in school, my father bought a book for me entitled Beyond Engineering: How Society Shapes Technology. While the concept is not new, the detail with which the author explains how some of the most indirect policy decisions can affect the whole course of a certain technology's development path is new. Things that we take for granted, like the internet and the microprocessor, and we suspect are great technological achievements of the "free market" are actually the product of heavy investment by the government that helped an immature market that could not survive by free market principles alone. While we often recognize how much technology can change society, we often don't fully recognize how much society can change technology.
An interesting case study can be found in the automotive industry. Few industries are as heavily regulated and require as much innovation in a short period of time as the automotive industry. What started as a vehicle occupant safety crusade via Ralph Nader's Unsafe at Any Speed has now spawned into an entire industry of regulation that shaped most of the major technological breakthroughs in the last 30 years of automaking. The catalytic converter, air bags, roll stability control, engines with variable valve timing, exhaust gas recirculation, electronic fuel injection, crumple zones, lightweight materials, 3 point harnesses for all passengers, anti-lock brakes, and on board diagnostic systems (that troublesome "check engine light") are all either a direct response to regulations or the spirit of the regulations (often the case with safety innovations).
So it is with much sadness that the American public should know that they have 13 years to buy V8 engines and then bid them farewell. President Bush signed a bill on November 19th that will require all automakers to achieve 35 miles per gallon (fleet average) by 2020. To give some perspective to this requirement, the current requirement is 27.5 mpg for cars and 22.2 mpg for trucks and SUV's. While the increased cost of fuel has certainly driven more consumers to fuel efficient vehicles, they are still buying V8's and V6's that get well below the current average. The purchases of those engines are offset by automakers selling smaller, 4-cylinder powered cars at production costs or a loss. And this last point is the key to why, in this case, the governments regulation of fuel economy is not addressing the root cause of the problem - automakers are being forced to sell a product that consumers don't want to satisfy a fuel economy target that consumers don't want to achieve. But when the target shifts from 27 mpg to 35 mpg this will no longer be an option - their simplify aren't enough consumers willing to buy 50+ mpg cars to offset 20 mpg or less V8-powered vehicles.
What is really driving the purchases of V6's and V8's that lower our national fuel efficiency? The continued access to relatively inexpensive fuel, even with $3 per gallon gasoline. Europeans pay between $6 and $7 per gallon of fuel, and the result is much better fuel
economy than we have here in the states (see graph below). Ultimately, the effects of the fuel tax go well beyond the design of the vehicles and how well they do on the standard fuel economy tests. Paying $6 per gallon of gasoline also encourages drivers to accelerate slowly, brake earlier, and take mass transit or walk more often - all behaviors that cut down on fuel consumption and pollution in the real world and not just on some laboratory test.
So while some might hail this week's passage of the new fuel economy bill as being a landmark, it is one only because it continues the behavior of the American public to pass the buck for their gluttonous behavior to the companies that are only making vehicles that the American public wants to buy. The right thing to do would be to force the American public to take a long, hard look in the mirror for the true source of gas guzzler vehicle purchases, and to change the behavior by instituting a European style fuel tax. The revenues from such a tax could be poured back into mass transit, alleviating some of the effects of higher transportation costs.