2020 Volkswagen Tiguan S Sport Utility 4d on 2040-cars

Auto blog

1 in 7 Americans say they might buy an EV next, as sales of electrics surge

About one in seven driving Americans may likely purchase an electric vehicle as their next car, according to an AAA poll, meaning that as many as 30 million Americans may pony up for an EV within the next three to five years. While some of the motivation is environmental, survey recipients say that lower maintenance expenses and solo access to high-occupancy-vehicle lanes are also among the factors behind potentially going electric. Take a look at the AAA press release on the study here. The poll indicates that about as many people are planning to buy an EV for their next car as are looking to buy a pickup, which is impressive given that the best-selling US vehicle is the Ford F-150. And things should only improve, as about 20 percent of millennials polled said that their next car would probably be an EV. The results are all the more encouraging, at least among green-car advocates, because gas prices have fallen about 40 percent within the past five years, meaning that there's less of an incentive to go electric from a purely economic perspective. Through the first quarter of this year, US plug-in vehicle sales were up about 63 percent from a year earlier to about 39,000 vehicles. Meanwhile, when it came to AAA's annual green-vehicle awards for this year, Tesla's Model S and Model X took the large car and SUV categories, respectively, while the Chevrolet Bolt and Volkswagen e-Golf were listed atop the subcompact and compact lists. The Lexus GS 450h hybrid and the Ford F-150 took home AAA's best green vehicle in the midsize and pickup truck categories. Related Video:

Scott Pruitt unfiltered: EPA administrator talks climate science, car emissions

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt gave Reuters a wide-ranging interview on Monday at his office in Washington, discussing issues from climate science to automobile emissions. The following is a full transcript of the interview: REUTERS: You have said the EPA will focus on a "Back to Basics" approach under your leadership. What does this mean for how EPA enforces polluters? You have been critical of the idea of regulation by enforcement. PRUITT: I think what I'm speaking about, there is a consent decree approach to enforcement, where you use judicial proceedings to actually engage in regulation. Enforcement should be about existing regulations that you're actually enforcing against someone who may be violating that, very much in the prosecutorial manner. As attorney general [in Oklahoma], I lived that. There was a grand jury that I led. Being a prosecutor, I understand very much the importance of prioritization, of enforcing the rule of law, of addressing bad actors. That's something we are going to do in a meaningful way across the broad spectrum of cases, whether it is in the office of air or the Superfund area, or otherwise. REUTERS: Do you want to see states play a bigger role in enforcing polluters, even though some have less of a capacity to do so – financially and personnel wise? PRUITT: I think the state's role is really, when you look at this office working with states, it should be how do we assist, how do we engage in compliance and assistance with states. The office [at EPA that deals with enforcement] is called OECA, the Office of Enforcement, Compliance and Assistance, so those are the tools we have in the toolbox to achieve better outcomes. So what we ought to be doing is working proactively with state DEQs [Departments of Environmental Quality] to get their state implementation plans [for federal regulations] timely submitted, provide assistance and technical support, drive a draft of state implementation plans, and then actually work with them on how to achieve through those plans better outcomes and air and water quality. As far as enforcement is concerned, we will actually work with states. We actually did that recently with Colorado. There was an oil and gas company that was emitting some 3,000 tons, is that what it was, it was quite a bit of ... it was an ozone case. In any event, we joined with Colorado in that prosecution. So sometimes states will do it, sometimes we will join with them.

VW Jetta TDI dyno shows HP loss trying to recreate cheat mode

Volkswagen is working on a fix for diesel-engined vehicles that are out of compliance with emissions regulations in the US and other countries. We're told that engineers will be presenting a solution internally sometime this month, but that doesn't mean we'll actually see it in the wild this month. One big question we have about the coming fix is, will it affect the car's performance? That question relates to another we have about the engine as it is: How much performance would the 2.0-liter diesel lose right now if it were turned down to pass US emissions? The Fast Lane Car tried to sketch some answers by going to a shop in Denver, Colorado to run a 2011 Jetta TDI with a six-speed DSG transmission on an all-wheel-drive dyno. The thinking was that if you ran all four wheels the car would think it was on the road, whereas if you ran only two the car might think it's being tested. We'll get straight to the numbers: the stock sedan is quoted at 140 horsepower and 236 pound-feet of torque. When run with all four wheels turning it produced an uncorrected 114 hp and 214 lb-ft at the wheels. When run with just two wheels in motion the Jetta got 113 hp and 188 lb-ft at the wheels. Reading the graph, we're told that power differences between the two runs were as much as 15 hp and 32 lb-ft. You'll need to take some salt with these numbers, though, because the dyno and test protocol in the video are nothing like those used by the EPA. The shop attempts to trick the Jetta into 'emissions testing mode' by using the front wheels only for the two-wheel-drive run, but we have a feeling the software code at issue is far more sophisticated than that, since the ICCT, UVA, the EPA, and CARB investigated the situation for more than a year and couldn't figure out. Also, the technician adjusts for being a mile above sea level with a correction factor of 1.2 applied to horsepower and torque, which inflates the disparity in the final power differences over the two runs. Go to YouTube and read the lengthy comments on the video left by Andrew Price for a more thorough dissection of what could explain TFL's disparities. You can watch the video above, and feel free to try and dissect the results yourselves in the comments below. Related Video: