Most Americans want better fuel economy, however it's achieved

Most Americans want better fuel economy, however it's achieved

While nearly all American drivers are at least somewhat concerned about fuel economy, a majority don't care how a vehicle saves fuel—just that it does, say University of Michigan researchers.

In a new survey of 674 owners across the country, Brandon Schoettle and Michael Sivak of the U-M Transportation Research Institute examined several topics related to fuel economy and advanced vehicle technologies (continuously variable transmissions, cylinder deactivation, diesel engines, gasoline-hybrid vehicles, stop-start engine systems, supercharging, turbocharging, twincharging)

A little more than half (52 percent) of respondents said it didn't matter to them how a vehicle saves fuel and reduces emissions. However, 24 percent listed engine improvements and 20 percent cited alternative fuels as their preference for improving fuel economy.

Men and drivers over 45 were more likely to favor engine improvements, while younger motorists preferred alternative fuel sources (diesel, electric, hydrogen) as the primary means to save fuel and reduce emissions.

About 73 percent of those surveyed said they would be less likely to own or lease a vehicle that requires more expensive premium fuel.

"Overall, fuel economy is important to consumers, and they generally do not care specifically how fuel savings can be achieved," Schoettle said. "Knowledge and opinions were mixed, with older respondents and males being more likely to have stronger opinions—both positive and negative—and to claim to know more about the technologies covered by the survey than younger respondents and females."

While about 90 percent of respondents indicated that they basically understand how diesel engines and gasoline-hybrid vehicles work, a majority also said they had never heard of twincharging, cylinder deactivation or continuously variable transmissions.

Regardless of knowledge, a majority said they felt very or somewhat positive about advanced vehicle technologies, with the exception of continuously variable transmissions. In addition, stop-start engine systems received the most negative ratings, although more than 60 percent of respondents viewed them as at least somewhat positive.

The U-M survey also asked vehicle owners which advanced technology they would prefer at two different gasoline price points: $2.50/gallon and $5/gallon. At both prices, gasoline-hybrid vehicles were the most preferred technology, while twincharging was the least.

Among powertrains, gasoline hybrids ranked first at either price point, while diesel internal-combustion engines were the least preferred. Gasoline internal-combustion engines rated second-most preferred at $2.50/gallon, ahead of electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles—but below them at the higher price point.

Finally, Schoettle and Sivak asked respondents about their willingness to pay for improved fuel economy. The results indicate that 25 percent would be willing to pay at least $300 for a 5-percent improvement in , $1,000 for a 10-percent improvement and $2,500 for a 25-percent improvement.

Explore further

Fuel economy of new vehicles continues to rise: report

Citation: Most Americans want better fuel economy, however it's achieved (2015, June 19) retrieved 22 April 2019 from
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.

Feedback to editors

User comments

Jun 19, 2015
Not -however- it is achieved.

The largest determinants of fuel economy is the size, weight, and power of the vehicle. None of the three were on the list of options that you could change to achieve greater fuel economy.

You can get almost arbitrarily high fuel economy by making a vehicle that is smaller, lighter and slower. 200 MPG - absolutely no problem. You just got to give something else up.

Jun 21, 2015
Brown's gas, as an application, to a petrol powered vehicle, does indeed improve performance, and drops emissions to almost exactly zero.

Car makers don't want it, as it cause the engines to live longer, and work more efficiently,

Petrol suppliers don't want it as it drops fuel consumption,

Governments and power structures don't want it as is raises serious questions in the world of science. It also kills the 'carbon agenda' (societal shaming control agenda), by being a functional solution that can be implemented quickly and easily.

I will now await the ignorance of the basher and shill to emerge in the comments section..and try an whittle me down, in order to keep the ignorant.... ignorant.

They will use derision, or bad humour, or maybe obfuscation...or all three at the same time. Typical shill tactics.


(Hint: don't conflate 'brown's gas' with oxyhydrogen, properly made brown's gas IMPLODES at over 21 psi, oxyhydrogen does not.)

Jun 22, 2015
Brown's Gas" is oxyhydrogen with a 2:1 molar ratio of H2 and O2 gases, the same proportion as in water. It is named after Yull Brown, who claimed that it could be used as a fuel for the internal combustion engine.[4][13] It's also called "HHO gas" after the claims of fringe physicist[14] Ruggero Santilli, who claims that his HHO gas, produced by a special apparatus, is "a new form of water", with new properties, based on his fringe theory of "magnecules".[13]
Many other pseudoscientific claims have been made about Brown's Gas's pretended ability to neutralize radioactive waste, help plants to germinate, etc.[13]
Oxyhydrogen is often mentioned in conjunction with vehicles that claim to use water as a fuel. The most common and decisive counter-argument against producing this gas on board to use as a fuel or fuel additive is that more energy is needed to split water molecules than is recouped by burning the resulting gas.


Jun 22, 2015

Page No. 37
Chapter 12

12.1 Advantages of HHO gas as a fuel in Diesel engine

HHO gas mixture burns nearly 10 times faster compared to gasoline air mixture.

HHO ignition limits are much wider
than gasoline's. So it can burn easily and give
considerably higher efficiency.

High self ignition temperature but very little energy is required to ignite it.

Its clean exhaust is the most attractive feature of all.

No green house effect.
12.2 Disadvantages of HHO gas as a fuel in Diesel engine

Produces toxic emission of NO

One of the major practical difficulties using HHO as car fuel is its very low densityeither in gas or liquid form.

The handling of HHO gas is more difficult and storage requires high capital andrunning cost


Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more