View Single Post
Old 03-05-2013, 01:41 AM   #26 (permalink)
redpoint5
Human Environmentalist
 
redpoint5's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Oregon
Posts: 12,439

Acura TSX - '06 Acura TSX
90 day: 24.19 mpg (US)

Lafawnda - CBR600 - '01 Honda CBR600 F4i
90 day: 47.32 mpg (US)

Big Yeller - Dodge/Cummins - '98 Dodge Ram 2500 base
90 day: 21.82 mpg (US)

Mazda CX-5 - '17 Mazda CX-5 Touring
90 day: 26.68 mpg (US)

Chevy ZR-2 - '03 Chevrolet S10 ZR2
90 day: 17.14 mpg (US)

Model Y - '24 Tesla Y LR AWD
Thanks: 4,207
Thanked 4,387 Times in 3,361 Posts
The Prius was among the final vehicles I considered purchasing when I started looking in 2008. While I've only had 1 test drive, I still admire the technology that is employed by the Prius. However, I also favor diesel vehicles over gasoline due to the 30% greater work done per volume of fuel.

Diesel engines are more efficient, more reliable, more easily turbo-charged, and more easily fueled (diversity of fuel). I am among the few that enjoy the sound and smell of a diesel engine. Sometimes I turn the radio off just to hear the music of the turbo spool.

That said, I don't see the point of comparing a specific hybrid (Prius) to all diesel vehicles. It's like comparing a hand grenade to a cruise missile.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cobb View Post
Id hope the environment is considered in everyones quest for mpg.
I don't consider the environment at all in my quest for MPG. Economics and an interest in efficiency are my only concern. That's not to say that environmentalism is not important to me. Quite the opposite; but I realize the counter-intuitive reality that efficiency and conservation are often not correlated. The economics of energy consumption is such that reducing consumption (demand) also reduces prices, which in turn increases consumption.

The earth doesn't care if someone conserves a gallon of petrol, and it certainly isn't a reason to feel morally superior to anyone else.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diesel_Dave View Post
I think the big issue is that accuratly defining terms like "clean", "green", and "eco-friendly" is not an easy task--even by people who are trying to be honest, fair, and objective.

This is particularly true since most to these definitions involve comparing something that does exist to some alternative that is assumed would have existed in it's place.
This reminds me of an interesting article I just read that challenges the definition of nature, of good environment, and who manages the environment.

Quote:
“Do humans impose costs on nature or just on other humans? Can we think of nature in any other way than imposing costs on other people?”
Quote:
Ecosystems have no preferences about their states. How do we know whether or not an acre of land would “prefer” to be a swamp or a cornfield?
__________________
Gas and Electric Vehicle Cost of Ownership Calculator







Give me absolute safety, or give me death!
  Reply With Quote