View Single Post
Old 05-27-2009, 02:26 PM   #26 (permalink)
Frank Lee
(:
 
Frank Lee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: up north
Posts: 12,762

Blue - '93 Ford Tempo
Last 3: 27.29 mpg (US)

F150 - '94 Ford F150 XLT 4x4
90 day: 18.5 mpg (US)

Sport Coupe - '92 Ford Tempo GL
Last 3: 69.62 mpg (US)

ShWing! - '82 honda gold wing Interstate
90 day: 33.65 mpg (US)

Moon Unit - '98 Mercury Sable LX Wagon
90 day: 21.24 mpg (US)
Thanks: 1,585
Thanked 3,555 Times in 2,218 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by theunchosen View Post

back on topic, If we look around the government mandates haven't really improved fuel economy. They have done it several times in the past and it really didn't get us anywhere. High prices and taxes also didn't really get us anywhere considering not one car manufacturer did the obvious, make an enormously cheap, lightweight, basic ICE from a 500cc engine that has basic protection(body paneling) and sells for less than 10K. No one did it. The windfall profits that could have been had from a car like that would have been astounding.

Also If you look at states and countries that have domestic manufacturers and no safety regulations to speak of, they have alot of the safety equipment we do. JDM cars have enough equipment to keep fatalities down, but they don't add an extra 1000 lbs to every car to make sure that a glass vase would survive getting hit by a dump truck.

Regulations rarely if ever accomplish anything good.
unchosen's soapbox is all good.

Re: govt efficiency mandates: I noticed that they've had a similar failure amongst the electric utilities. For decades they've been preaching conservation, handing out rebates for "energy star" appliances and the like, and what has that gotten us? Double the household electricity use of 20 years ago?!?

The bottom line is people will be slobs until they can't afford it, and by can't afford I mean they don't have access to credit or a govt lifeline either.

Re: excessive safety equipment: totally agree. Today's motorist expects the car to do it all for him/her- no onus on them for safety as they careen along the highway at 80 mph with phones stuck to their heads in thier overloaded SUVs with half-flat tires.

Related to efficiency:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090527/...rgy_forecast_1

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP — The amount of heat-trapping carbon dioxide seeping into the atmosphere will increase by nearly 40 percent worldwide by 2030 if ways are not found to require mandatory emission reductions, a government report said Wednesday.

The Energy Information Administration said world energy consumption is expected to grow by 44 percent over the next two decades as the global economy recovers and continues to expand. The biggest increases in energy use will come from economically developing countries such as China and India.

Substantial growth is expected in the use of renewable energy sources such as hydropower, wind and solar, the report said. But it also said overall growth in demand will require continued reliance on fossil fuels, especially oil and coal.

As a result, the analysis predicted a steady increase in emissions of carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas that scientists say threatens a serious warming of the Earth later this century. Between now and 2030, Wednesday's report said, global carbon dioxide pollution is expected to increase by 39 percent. That translates to 33 billion metric tons in 2015 and 40 billion metric tons by 2030, compared to 29 billion metric tons in 2006, the report said.

The EIA report emphasized that its analysis is based on current regulatory and legal requirements and does not assume enactment of laws or international treaties requiring reductions in greenhouse gases. Any such action would force shifts away from fossil fuels and less carbon pollution being released.

Congress is considering legislation that would reduce greenhouse gases by 17 percent by 2020 and about 80 percent by mid-century. President Barack Obama has called for mandatory limits on greenhouse gases. An international conference is scheduled for December to try to work out a treaty requiring such emission reductions.

But the EIA analysis provides an indication of how difficult such reductions might be to achieve given the expected increase in future energy growth and continued heavy reliance on fossil fuels without some international, mandatory action to address climate change.

The EIA report said that "much of the increases in carbon dioxide emissions is projected to occur among the developing nations" including China and India.

It said 94 percent of the world's expected increase in industrial energy use between now and 2030 is expected in the economically developing countries, with Brazil, Russia, India and China expected to account for two-thirds of that growth.

The EIA report projected continued growth in demand for oil, although unconventional resources such as biofuels, oil sands and liquid coal are expected to increase as well and account for nearly half of the projected increase in overall liquid fuel demand.

The report declined to project future oil prices, noting that "recent experience demonstrates that world oil prices can be extremely volatile." Instead it provided a broad range of possible future oil prices, depending on future production and demand of oil and other liquid fuels.

Crude oil prices could range from $50 a barrel in 2030 or as much as $200 a barrel in 2007 dollars, the report said, depending on available supplies of oil, biofuels and other liquid fuels.

Crude oil prices increased to about $63 a barrel on Wednesday, the highest since last November. Oil prices reached a peak of $147 a barrel last summer.

Last edited by Frank Lee; 05-27-2009 at 02:41 PM..
  Reply With Quote