June 1, 2014

Better Car Labeling Could Pump Up Fuel Efficiency

When gas mileage cost was explicitly revealed on new car window stickers, potential consumers were more likely to choose the most efficient vehicle. David Biello reports.

By David Biello

SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Earth

Apple | Spotify | RSS

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Quick: which saves more fuel? Boosting miles per gallon from 10 to 11? Or from 33 to 50?

Neither. They both save the same amount—one gallon of gasoline every 100 miles. And that's why some behavioral scientists think gallons per mile is a better metric. Because it tells you exactly how much fuel your car will burn per mile traveled. As a result, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency added gallons per 100 miles to fuel economy labels in 2013.

Now new research suggests that's not the only way to better inform new car buyers of the fuel efficiency of their vehicle.

To test what works best, management researchers at Duke University's business school offered would-be car buyers a host of labeling options in an experiment. The labels ranged from gallons of gas used per 100 miles to cost of gas over 100,000 miles.

When consumers saw that cost-of-gas label, they picked the most fuel efficient car every time. The research appeared in the Journal of Public Policy & Marketing. [Adrian R. Camilleri and Richard P. Larrick, Metric and Scale Design as Choice Architecture Tools]

The finding suggests that cost is the main driver for people to opt for fuel efficiency. And if lifetime fuel cost is what matters, maybe that ought to be on the new car labels, too.

—David Biello

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American