this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2026
177 points (98.4% liked)

Technology

87805 readers
6724 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
177
US to announce sharply lower vehicle fuel economy requirements (www.reuters.com)
submitted 2 days ago by stumu415@lemmy.zip to c/technology@lemmy.world
79 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Allero@lemmy.today 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

US be like:

-Let's build our entire economy around massive trucks for everyone!

oil depletes

surprised Pikachu face

-Sir, could we maybe scale down on gas-guzzling monstrosities?

-NO. We just need more oil!

wars all over the world, massive oil conflicts with huge civilian casualties

-Sir...

global military control on oil supply, attempts to artificially increase oil prices to make shale profitable

abducting an acting president

-Sir!..

-I SAID MORE DAMN TRUCKS!

Like, it is basically undermining strategic security of the country with the added benefit of razing an entire planet. Is oil business so lucrative to justify both? Or do, you know, certain people pile up money at the expense of everyone else?

[–] Nightsoul@lemmy.world 18 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Who's even going to buy a NEW gas guzzling car in this economy ?

[–] 4grams@awful.systems 4 points 16 hours ago* (last edited 16 hours ago) (1 children)

I actually replaced my suv with a full sized truck last year. Funny enough my average mileage went up from 17 to 28mpg. Hybrids rule.

(Yes, 28 is still shit, but much better and more useful shit than I had before).

[–] Nightsoul@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago

Oh neat, I didn't even know hybrid trucks existed.

[–] AstralPath@lemmy.ca 9 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Men whose entire identity is tied with what truck they drive. Its absolutely insane how pervasive this shit is.

A friend of mine is has super restricted finances because he has a kid and a truck. He wants a house but can't afford it because his truck costs him almost $1k/month. I've hinted that he should ditch the truck but he just can't bring himself to do it. Everyone at work drives big trucks so he feels like he has to as well to fit in.

It's completely fucked.

[–] Squizzy@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago

I met a guy with a chevy tattoo in Indiana, just shat on ford for an hour like it meant anything to me

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] floofloof@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 day ago

Republican fools.

[–] nyan@lemmy.cafe 16 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Thus making their vehicles even more difficult to sell outside their own country.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 day ago

No one takes US vehicles seriously outside the US anyway. They don't even fit on most roads.

[–] MidwestSolarpunk@slrpnk.net 56 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (25 children)

Bought a PHEV earlier this year and my “old fashioned” family quickly moved from “that boy ain’t right” to “you get HOW MANY miles per gallon??” And they still can’t compute that I can drive 50 miles on less than $2 of electricity and not a drop of gas.

The numbers make sense, people just need to be shown. It’s where the market is headed, no one should really be considering anything less than hybrid. When my wife’s old Civic dies, it’ll be replaced by a full EV.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 14 points 1 day ago

hey still can’t compute that I can drive 50 miles on less than $2 of electricity and not a drop of gas.

That sounds suspiciously like math, liburul.

[–] BassTurd@lemmy.world 12 points 2 days ago (3 children)

I hope for my next vehicle to be an EV, but I won't take anything less that 300 miles range. I know that 90% of my driving can be comfortably done in under 200 range, but I do go on longer trips. I know that recharging has come a long way, and I have no problem hanging out for 15+ min at a station, but I won't do it every 2-3 hours because that's all I've got.

I'm hoping to get many more years out of my current ride before it dies or becomes too costly to repair vs replace. That gives ample time for battery tech to further improve, and hopefully more and cheaper EVs to the market.

I'm not a car snob by any means, but currently the only EV that really piques my interest is the ionic 5 n, but it's range is just way too low. I've been driving a WRX for a little over 6 years now, and love pretty much everything about it. I hope to someday have an EV equivalent of it.

[–] MidwestSolarpunk@slrpnk.net 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (5 children)

Range anxiety is partially what pushed us to go PHEV. We really only use gas if we leave our immediate area, and on longer trips it’s the same as a full ICE car (just with much better efficiency).

I too hope for better batteries and cheaper EVs before my next purchase! Would love to see Chinese cars in the American market to humble these MSRPs.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] confuser@lemmy.zip 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

On long driving trips it is reccomended to stop every 2-3 hours for 10 minutes anyways so I don't see the stopping to charge as an issue tbh.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (23 replies)
[–] Prairie_Madness@lemmy.world 60 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

What's funny is with the cost of gas spiking I don't think it'll honestly have a huge effect (not saying I agree with rolling this back). People are tired

[–] Ilovethebomb@sh.itjust.works 32 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Yeah, that's exactly what I thought as well. Fuel economy has been a major selling point for as long as cars have existed, because it's always been a major part of the cost of running a vehicle.

[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Fuel economy hasn’t been a selling feature for a majority of buyers in the US since the 1970s. If it was, Ford wouldn’t have stopped shipping sedans here, and EVs wouldn’t need incentives and rebates.

A large section of the US market prefers to take out huge loans to buy an Escalade or a Ford F150 and then bitch about it when gas prices go up.

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 15 points 2 days ago

Yet, hybrid vehicles and EVs continue to gain market share. Sure theres a lot of idiots who just want a big truck to stroke their own ego but even those are starting to become hybrid or electric. There's been a downturn on full EVs after the tax credit expiration but hybrids are still growing strong and the only real benefit to a hybrid vs generic ICE is fuel economy.

EVs need incentives and rebates because they are an extra consideration for other reasons, primarily range and charging availability remaining a concern. Also media scares of EV car fires and battery life, etc.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Ford stopped selling sedans because they couldn't build good ones to outcompete the Japanese and SK brands economy wise or German/Japanese luxury and performance wise. It isnt because people want worse gas mileage.

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 1 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

Ford stopped selling sedans because

They had the number one and two world sellers with the Focus and Fiesta, all sourced with Getrag Chinese transmissions that 100% failed. They killed their customer base.

They make far more money on pickups because pickup buyers don't think too hard.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 1 points 10 hours ago

When were those vehicles the best sellers in the world? The Toyota Corolla is the best selling vehicle in the world and has been since 2005 and most years prior to that dating all the way back to the 1970s. Ford did take the top spot with the Escort but that was in 1983.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] frongt@lemmy.zip 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

F150? What am I, a teenager? F250 super duty at least, please.

[–] gnate@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

And even the F150 is much larger than it used to be.

[–] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 days ago

Apparently all the F-series trucks share the same cab now.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bluemellophone@lemmy.world 36 points 2 days ago (1 children)

What this article doesn’t mention is that California is such a massive market that their state-specific regulations often dictate the behavior of car manufacturers country-wide. Why?

Nobody wants to buy a car in TX that cannot be bought or sold in CA. No car company wants to sell a CA-only model vs. a 49-other-state model of the same car, so they meet the California standard for the entire product. There is a national ripple effect that causes the federal fuel standards to become functionally redundant.

Good luck getting the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to go along with these changes, let alone the 17 other states that have adopted the same CA-leading standards.

[–] gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works 14 points 2 days ago

I think part of what they’re trying to do is to declare federal supremacy and scrap CARB standards altogether. And the Tribunal of Six will probably give it to them. Idk why we even bother with courts anymore tbh

[–] RamRabbit@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

And here I am hoping they are finally killing the fuel economy requirement that killed small trucks.

From the article, it doesn't sound like that is the case, though.

[–] stumu415@lemmy.zip 42 points 2 days ago (1 children)

So instead of promoting more green energy, more EV's and less greenhouse gasses, the US is hurling backwards in every single policy.

[–] tidderuuf@lemmy.world 20 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

the ~~US~~ MAGA cult is hurling backwards in every single policy.

Ftfy

[–] phdepressed@sh.itjust.works 25 points 2 days ago

Since MAGA is the majority of US governance MAGA is the US to anyone outside of the country. Same as Russia or Israel can be blamed for the wars against neighbors, no one cares that there is internal resistance unless it can actually do something.

[–] Sims@lemmy.ml 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Yeah, keep believing that you are not ALL controlled and pitted against each other by the same Oligarch/fascist pscho class !

Keep believing that 'Merica GREAT' and everything that is happening is all just the dumb maga's fault !

Keep believing that merican peeps had ever had any actual 'democratic' say in what internal/foreign policies was enforced !

That'll teach your fascist oligarch rulers for good !!

Good thinking !!

[–] phutatorius@lemmy.zip 9 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Gotta burn that oil or daddy Putin won't have money to fight his imperialist war.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Professorozone@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

A government for the people.

[–] magnue@lemmy.world 8 points 2 days ago

America is propped up by reliance on oil.

load more comments
view more: next ›