Automakers using cylinder deactivation to trick EPA?

Does real world fuel economy matter?

An article in USAToday notes that many automakers are now using cylinder deactivation to increase fuel economy.

Great news right?

"Every little bit helps. But I think it's for marketing reasons," says David Champion, director of auto testing for Consumer Reports magazine. He figures the systems are tuned to deliver their biggest benefits during the federal fuel-economy test cycle. That's the test that generates the mileage numbers posted on new vehicles' window stickers.

"We've found that in most driving conditions, it's always in full-cylinder mode, not cutoff," Champion says. "It's a sub-10% improvement, maybe 13 mpg instead of 12" on a big pickup.

Consumer Reports gets fuel-economy readings by splicing a meter into a vehicle's fuel line to "measure the exact amount of fuel consumed in three very strictly controlled tests," he says.

Fuel economy tearing Congress apart?

Can she lead the House on fuel economy?

Forcing automakers to develop significantly more fuel efficient automobiles is proving to be no easy task - something which should be a surprise to no one.

According to Reuters, "The U.S. Senate struggled on Wednesday to reach a compromise on proposals to increase vehicle fuel efficiency, a major sticking point in broad-based energy legislation." In addition, " Unable to reach a consensus among Democrats, a House of Representatives committee said this week it would delay consideration of its fuel economy and global warming proposals until autumn."

Hillary's Detroit play - Will taxpayers win?

Who pays?

"Hillary Rodham Clinton on Saturday offered a double-barreled campaign message for the struggling U.S. auto industry: accept tougher fuel economy standards in exchange for federal help with the costly burden of retiree health care."

"Clinton said negotiating health care should not be the UAW's responsibility, saying she favored steps that would "lift some legacy costs from the auto industry."

According to the article, Clinton didn't offer any details on the plan.

So, the taxpayers would pay for it?