|
Rationally speaking.
Moody proved a point, that cars could be built to be much more efficient, but he is a long way from the only one who did that.
The 1984 Honda CRX HF was good for 73 MPG at 55 MPH, from the factory, without any emission problems. Diesel cars followed Moody's model from many manufacturers, and Europe today is building many Diesel powered cars that get fantastic mileage.
Look up the Audi A2 diesel versions. Modern European diesels are clean and powerful enough for any highway in the US. Why don't they come here? Some do come here.
Another obstacle to diesels in the US, at least until recently, was high sulphur content in the fuel, because the truckers wanted cheap fuel.
Diesel particulate emissions are a problem, maybe overstated, maybe not. Emission legislation has always been a political football, and there will always be the battles of the stronger lobbies, with the vast resources of the conglomerates.
Maybe one of these days the US will actually embark on the new Manhattan Project, where efficiency is the priority. While clean emissions are now the top priority, progress continues on engines that are so clean they need no after treatment. Compared to the Perkins engine in Moody's car the difference can be measured in tens to hundreds of times lower emissions, partially due to the fuels used at the time and partially due to the ability of computer controls, while preheated hypercritical fuel delivery brings the internal combustion engine into the future with efficiencies of 60% on the threshold of realization.
The development of power trains also promises to increase overall efficiency by 80% with no other changes. I still see the hydraulic option as a key component regardless of the energy supply used for fuel.
Every time the price spikes in the US (never saw $4 a gallon, in the 70s, and I was driving in 1966) after the original oil embargo. The manufacturers have responded with efficient vehicles. The real problem is the fact that Saudi Arabia can pump oil out of the ground for $2 a barrel. We in the US have become accustomed to gas at $3-3.50 per gallon. The spikes have just made us complacent with higher average prices.
The sad thing is there are solutions here right now, that need no further development. The corporate average fuel economy requirements should be 50 MPG today in the US, with the priority on economy, with safety and emissions very close behind. This is the exact opposite of what is being done. I can take a 3 cylinder Kubota and stick it in a 84 CRX shell, add some aero, and get 100 MPG at 50 MPH. Like Iaccoca said, it's not rocket science.
Eventually the situation will be resolved, but expect resistance to continue in every aspect when it comes to any dramatic advancement.
"Do you want to wipe out employment in the transportation infrastructure and kill millions of jobs."
That is what I was told at my US Senators office.
"Do you want the used car market value to collapse."
Same office.
My father was a pioneer in computerizing the payroll of the US Air Force, starting in 1955. He had to fight every inch of the way to get the base comptrollers to move from hand punched pay checks to automated payroll systems. They tried everything including prostitutes to get him in a compromising situation and destroy his credibility.
The same status quo inertia in the current industry is identical.
Look at the history of gas prices and you can see, when OPEC saw a direct threat to their monopoly they responded by destroying the competition with lower prices. They did it the last time in the winter of 09 when prices here dropped below $2 a gallon. Factor in inflation and that's about the same price it was in 1972 at 32 cents a gallon.
regards
Mech
|