Fuel economy standards for passenger cars In a country, the average fuel consumption of new…


Fuel distribution models for tourist cars In a empire, the mean fuel decay of new tourist cars has been completely faithful since the year 2000 at a flatten of 5 litres per 100 km (measured subordinate standard conditions). Assume that the calculate of cars is faithful aggravate space at 1 darling. On mean, cars propel 12,000 km per year. The lifespace of cars is 15 years. a. In the year 2020, a corporate-average-fuel-economy model is introduced requiring car manufacturers to minister cars that on mean do not use over than 4 litres per 100 km from 2020 ahead and not over than 3 litres per 100 km from 2025 ahead. How abundantly gasoline conquer be saved in 2025 and 2030 compared to a constant fuel decay flatten of cars? b. How abundantly should the fuel figures bear been increased to reach the selfselfsame impression as this fuel distribution model? Assume a figure elasticity of –0.2. c. If the calculate of cars is not constant but growing, would the savings in 2030 be larger or smaller than conducive in (a) in absolute and in referring-to stipulations? d. It turns out that there is an increasing discrepancy between explicit fuel decay and fuel decay measured subordinate standard provisions. For cars that use 5 l/100 km the explicit decay is 10% loftier than decay according to the standard, for 4 l/100 km cars this is 20 per cent and for 3 l/100 km cars this is 30 per cent. How abundantly conquer the fuel savings be smaller than conducive subordinate (a)? How can such contraction consequence be countered? e. A spring-back consequence of 20 per cent occurs (see Section 10.7). How abundantly does this subject the fuel savings conducive subordinate (a)? How can such a spring-back consequence be countered?