Skip Links

Network World

Michael Cooney

Feds to offer cash for your clunker

By Layer 8 on Thu, 01/15/09 - 12:22pm.

The government is trying to stimulate a lot of things, the economy, Wall St., the mortgage industry, and now it wants to motivate you to get rid of your clunker of a car for the good of the country (and the moribund car industry).

A "Cash for Clunkers" measure introduced this week by US Senators Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) would set up a  national voucher program to encourage drivers to voluntarily trade in their older, less fuel efficient car, truck or SUV for a car that gets better gas mileage.

Car owners could get only one voucher in any three-year period. Dealers and scrap recycling companies could get payments of $50 per vehicle. And the overall program could cost as much as $2 billion a year.

Should the bill pass, the "Cash for Clunkers" program would reimburse drivers with a credit of $2,500 to $4,500 for drivers who turn in fuel-inefficient vehicles to be scrapped and purchase a more fuel efficient vehicle.

According to the senators the program could save between 40,000 to 80,000 barrels per day of motor fuel by the end of the fourth year.

The bill could also educe greenhouse gas emissions between 6.6 million metric tons to 7.6 million metric tons, or the equivalent of removing 1.1 million to 2.2 million vehicles from the road in one year. It should also reduce nitrogen oxides, which cause ground-level ozone (a leading cause of respiratory health problems, like asthma), by 3,043 short tons (2,761 metric tons) by 2013.  All of those promises could come true if an estimated 500,000 to 1,000,000 vouchers are issued per year, the senators said.

The catches:

  • The traded-in vehicles must have a fuel economy of no more than 18 miles per gallon;
  • Auto needs to be in be in drivable condition, and have been registered for at least the past 120 days;
  • The voucher needs to be used towards the purchase of a vehicle that has value of less than $45,000, is model year 2004 or later, and meets or exceeds federal emissions standards;
  • Vouchers could also be redeemed for transit fares for participating local public transportation agencies.

For traded-in vehicles that are model year 2002 and later, drivers would receive a voucher for: The purchase of a new vehicle: $4,500; the purchase of a used vehicle: $3,000; a transit fare credit: $3,000.

For traded-in vehicles that are model year 1999 - 2001, drivers would receive a voucher for: The purchase of a new vehicle: $3,000; the purchase of a used vehicle: $2,000; a transit fare credit: $2,000.

For traded-in vehicles that are model year 1998 and earlier, drivers would receive a voucher for: The purchase of a new vehicle: $2,000; the purchase of a used vehicle: $1,500; a transit fare credit: $1,500.

Layer 8 in a box

Check out these other hot stories:

Air Force: More unmanned aircraft than manned in 2009

Apple's Steve Jobs takes leave of absence

Paybacks: Telescammers to fork over $50 million in restitution

Will bats inspire future micro unmanned aircraft?

Government spends over $30 million to sharpen cyber security saber

Watchdogs bite IRS for continued security lapses

FBI/DOJ warns of economic cybergeddon

Beam up my shape shifting robot Scotty: Layer 8's Best of 2008

Ducks, dorks and deviants: Wackiest stories of 2008

Typical..

0

2005 study - " traffic congestion costs the U.S. economy $78 billion a year, wasting 2.9 billion gallons of fuel and robbing commuters of 4.2 billion hours" Turn that to barrels of fuel and compare the differences! Maybe getting rid of inefficient traffic could be more rewarding, safer, saving not just in fuel, pollution, etc but in time also? Traffic grids have to be changed anyway all the time - why not make it right?

Why do governments(?) always seem to think that more money will solve all problems instead of thinking and even common sense? Or maybe it is a way to get more voters who can't calculate what is good and what is not so? Or maybe we just love sitting hours in our huge cars in traffic calling everyone how late we will be again because of the traffic?

Not a significant change

0

Impact of 1% is too low to be measurable... 3% population growth overtakes the gains of this bill.

The bill should require individuals to purchase vehicles at 50+ mpg. It's all too obvious that it doesn't because of lobbyists and greed.

A little socialism won't hurt...

0

It does seem like the math on this one is a little off, even if the intent is sound.

Seems to me that we could look to a country like Singapore for some ideas. There, you can only register a car less than 10 years old. You're simply not allowed to drive around old gas-guzzling beaters. New gas-guzzlers cost a fortune. Well, all cars there cost a fortune, since on top of the purchase price and taxes, there's also the very expensive "certificate of entitlement" you have to buy (usually bought from the car dealer with the car). But the gas-guzzlers cost even more.

I'm not saying the Singapore system is perfect, but it seems to me that here in the US we treat motor vehicle operation and ownership much too much like it's a right, rather than the privilege it really is. Society has a vested interest in discouraging vehicle ownership, and ownership of inefficient vehicles, and it's government's place to simply regulate things to meet those goals. Forget paying people to give up their old cars; just tell them they have to.

With what money? I certainly

0

With what money? I certainly can't afford any car less than 10 years old. :P You must be rich and doesn't know how life for poorer people is like.

My car is 12 years old

0

And is environmental friendly (Ford Mondeo, 1.8liter petrol engine, drives a remarkable 40MPG when driven in a decent style) (at least compared to SUV and even many same size modern compacts). Only the same model from the same manufacturer is able to beat the 12 year old model in a size and weight comparison.

Make and model, driving style & traffic jams have much more influence than age of the car.

Old != Bad

0

Ditto. I regularly get 35mpg from my 18-year-old Civic, and have been able to push it near 40mpg if I consciously try to drive efficiently. That's city driving, not cruising the highway. I've even purposefully driven it like a maniac and could not get it to use more than 33mpg.

My wife's car is a 2005 Taurus. It averages 19mpg.

Okay, sure. I'm comparing a compact 3-door to a sedan. So lets look apples to apples, shall we? A brand new Civic rates 25/36mpg, with a 29mpg average. You have to get a hybrid to get an estimated 40/46mpg from a Civic - and that comes at an $8000 premium.

No thanks. I'd rather get a second Civic, not have to throw it away because it's "just too old."

Um... it is a right. We

0

Um... it is a right. We just stopped defending it, and thereby lost it to an overreaching government which feels that the right to freedom does not include the freedom to move about the country without requiring the government's permission to do it.

Case precedent that driving is a right, and not a privilege:

"The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."- Thompson v Smith 154 SE 579

"The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the 5th Amendment." - Kent v Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 125.

"Undoubtedly the right of locomotion, the right to remove from one place to another according to inclination, is an attribute of personal Liberty, and the right, ordinarily, of free transit from or through the territory of any State is a right secured by the l4th Amendment and by other provisions of the Constitution." - Schactman v Dulles, 96 App D.C. 287, 293.

I would love to drive a

0

I would love to drive a newer car. Would you like to buy one for me?

It seems to me that this program is actually a smart way to help auto makers. If the congress really wants bang for its buck, use some of the "auto bailout" $$ and give MORE of a voucher to those willing to purchase more efficient US-made vehicles.

stay in singapore

0

stay in singapore

Up the fuel tax as well.

0

Match the rate per quantity with other 1st world countries.
Make it apparent that yes, this is expensive, it might be easier to move to something cheaper to run.

This is the only way these shifts occur.
Dont squander the shift that occurred recently; reinforce it.

Also, it makes a LOT more sense from the govt's perspective.
An extra 20c per gallon, 5c/litre x the volume of the oil used per day in the USA = a LOT of tax.
Maybe even enough to pay off the stupid deficit you've racked up over there.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Welcome, visitor. Register Log in
About Layer 8
Layer 8 is written by Michael Cooney, an online news editor with Network World