# Senate Passes New Mpg Standards



## kjdj (Sep 14, 2004)

Let me add some logic to this issue.

I buy a 30 mpg car. I have 6 in my family. So I have to buy 2. So to take my family to dinner I need 2 cars effectively giving me a net of 15mpg. Correct?

Another thought... a hybrid gets 45 mpg. It seats 2 adults ( the back seat isn't safe for a dog). So to haul 6 people I need 3 hybrids. That would be effectively 15 mpg.

If I drive a 15 mpg SUV loaded with my family what's the difference?

If you add the fluid changes and manufacturing wastes for 3 hybrids the SUV is defiantly more ECO-friendly.

I'm not for trashing the planet but what do the environmental folks want?
Fuel economy or car pooling? Where's the gain car pooling in a 2 passenger cars?

Ethanol??? This is the least efficient idea yet.

Hemp oil is the way to go! It can be efficiently burned in any diesel engine with out modification. Mr Diesel originally designed his engine to run on Hemp oil.

Boy we are an arrogant bunch in this world. Who are we to think we can affect climate change?

One single volcano eruption spews more ozone depleting gases than nan has since he has existed.

China who is exempt from the Kyoto treaty is the largest producer of CO2 in the world.

Greenland is iced over, Iceland is greened over. It's Thor's fault! His kin discovered these countries the other way around a thousand years ago!

The 1959 picture of the Navy submarine Nautilus at the north pole is in water not ice. The pole is now ice.

The NOAA temperature sensors that were set-up 40 years ago are now located in parking lots and within 3 ft of air conditioner exhausts. I see where one is mounted next to a burn barrel.
Here's an enlightning link on what we base increase temperature measurements.

Even the Swiss author/professor of the first book about Global Warming in 1968 has re canted his words. He now say man doesn't have the power to change the global climate.

The new MPG rule should make the 3/4 ton and up truck/SUV prices soar because of their exempt status!

Thanks I feel better now.


----------



## Thor (Apr 7, 2004)

Do feel bad....In Canada we now have a Gas tax based on the milage your vehicle gets. Some cars can get a $2000 rebate while other get a $4000 premium

Thor


----------



## Doft (Jul 9, 2006)

Amen brother!

















Jim


----------



## kjdj (Sep 14, 2004)

Thor said:


> Do feel bad....In Canada we now have a Gas tax based on the milage your vehicle gets. Some cars can get a $2000 rebate while other get a $4000 premium
> 
> Thor


We're right behind you in the states.

See, my main point is passenger capacity should play a role.
A single 6 passenger vehicle with 15mpg is more efficient than 3 2 passenger 40mpg vehicles. 
The 3 40 mpg cars have a larger impact on the environment than the 6 passenger SUV.

I think 6 passenger and above vehicles should get the discounts since they have a lesser impact per passenger on the environment and consume less gas per passenger.


----------



## Nathan (Jan 2, 2007)

First of all, I wouldn't mind better fuel economy, but I do recognize there are technical challenges for large scale improvements (Like that 7000 lb sail I drag behind my truck







).

In the 60's you could buy a very large wagon that could hold a large family and tow a trailer. Well, Congress passed the CAFE deal, and everything gets smaller. Eventually, the automakers stumble upon the SUV that has the capability of the old big wagons, and is not a "car" and therefore can get by with lower fuel economy. No one forced people to buy them, but the auto companies couldn't build enough to satisfy the demand. So now Congress is mad because everyone is buying trucks, so they have decided to include light trucks in the tightened CAFE. Well, just like kjdj said, the only recourse will be to buy 3/4 ton trucks and SUV's. Something tells me that this legislation is counterproductive.









A stepped fuel economy proposal would have worked a lot better because it would allow those who only need a 1/2 ton truck to keep buying them, instead of pushing them up into a 3/4 ton truck.

Of course everyone knows what happens if the big bad automaker can't sell enough fuel efficient cars right???? They pay a fee to the government. Sortof sounds like another tax to me







!

Of course I hope everyone recognizes that Sir Issac Newton is to blame for all of this. His basic laws of physics keep preventing engineers from accomplishing what politicians consider to be easy!!!


----------



## Ghosty (Jan 17, 2005)

And what's even harder to believe -- is that with all the giant leaps in electric technology, battery research, fuel cell development and the efficiency of electric motors --

that even 100 years after the gasoline engine was invented -- we still do not have an electric car...

We can harness the power of a nuclear atom, we can put a man on the moon, we can develop means for humans to circle the globe in a space station, we can develop aircraft technology that can fly 3 or 4 times faster then the speed of sound -- but we're not smart enough to hook a rechargeable battery to a motor and four wheels and make it work....

Yes i am being sarcastic.

When the US Govt finally stops allowing the interest of its people to be bought by large fuel and Motor companies, and allows electric vehicles to be developed, and once developed, some folks start buying electric vehicles which causes less gas to be used, then more gas will be available, then gas prices will fall becuase there is more of a supply, and thats how we break the foreign oil dependancy.

And with more gas avail then prices come down --

But that means oil companies won't continue to make billions off of our backs --

so as long as you have companies like Exxon and the others continue to make 4 Billion dollars a quarter profit this will never happen --

Years from now our kids are going to look back on all of this and ask themselves "What the heck were our parents thinking and why did you continue to elect folks that catered to their own needs"...

(Yes i'm having a rough day)


----------



## NobleEagle (Jul 8, 2006)

How about HHO fuel? where did this guy go? I saw this on the news about a year ago. He is from my town and no one has heard of him since the story broke.....

HHO Fuel​


----------



## CamperAndy (Aug 26, 2004)

kjdj said:


> Greenland is iced over, Iceland is greened over. It's Thor's fault! His kin discovered these countries the other way around a thousand years ago!


Kevin, would love to agree but several of the statements were false. I want to address one of the silliest. When the islands of Greenland and Iceland were found they were the same 1000 years ago as they are today.

There was a deception at the time intended to get people to move to Greenland as it was not a very nice place (80% glacial ice), there were only a few southern areas that were inhabitable on Greenland. Iceland is not much greener (about 11% glacial ice) but is greener then Greenland and when Iceland was found it was covered by forest 40%.

I know that some of the stuff you hear about saving the planet seems counter intuitive but if you had a hybrid in the garage as your daily driver (where most of your driving is being done) when you are by yourself you do save gas as compared to the Suburban that you need to drive the family to dinner or camp. So you have the vehicle you need for each type of driving.


----------



## kjdj (Sep 14, 2004)

Ghosty said:


> And what's even harder to believe -- is that with all the giant leaps in electric technology, battery research, fuel cell development and the efficiency of electric motors --
> 
> that even 100 years after the gasoline engine was invented -- we still do not have an electric car...
> 
> ...


Sorry about your day. Just a few more hours.

Careful, it took 100 billion in sales to net a 4 billion profit. That's allot of gas!
The Fed makes the killing at 37 billion profit from that 100 billion. Who's winning off our backs?
At least that 4 billion went back into my pocket I mean retirement stocks.
Most Teachers retirement funds are in oil stocks.

I'm for Hybrid electrics. An electric motor develops it's torque almost instantly. Wouldn't that be great for towing!
Oh wait we already have that technology. Locomotives.... Why can't we downsize a locomotive power plant into a Suburban?


----------



## kjdj (Sep 14, 2004)

CamperAndy said:


> Greenland is iced over, Iceland is greened over. It's Thor's fault! His kin discovered these countries the other way around a thousand years ago!


Kevin, would love to agree but several of the statements were false. I want to address one of the silliest. When the islands of Greenland and Iceland were found they were the same 1000 years ago as they are today.

There was a deception at the time intended to get people to move to Greenland as it was not a very nice place (80% glacial ice), there were only a few southern areas that were inhabitable on Greenland. Iceland is not much greener (about 11% glacial ice) but is greener then Greenland and when Iceland was found it was covered by forest 40%.

I know that some of the stuff you hear about saving the planet seems counter intuitive but if you had a hybrid in the garage as your daily driver (where most of your driving is being done) when you are by yourself you do save gas as compared to the Suburban that you need to drive the family to dinner or camp. So you have the vehicle you need for each type of driving.
[/quote]

Greenland and Iceland can't possibly look the same as they did 1000 years ago. The US has destroyed everything in the past 30 years. I see it in the news everyday. The 70's I was told we were going to freeze to death within 30 years.

I own a 2005 Escape Hybrid. It is my daily ride. I love it. I've got 31k mi. on it. But had I known the mileage was not a good as advertised I may have saved the $$$ and bought a regular Escape. What's weird is it gets better mileage city driving than interstate. I guess that's because the mean interstate speed around Atlanta is 75mph!


----------



## Nathan (Jan 2, 2007)

kjdj said:


> I'm for Hybrid electrics. An electric motor develops it's torque almost instantly. Wouldn't that be great for towing!
> Oh wait we already have that technology. Locomotives.... Why can't we downsize a locomotive power plant into a Suburban?


Ahh, but most locomotive have no batteries. That is where the problem is. Finding a battery bank that can power these things. Lithium looks promising, but then again, didn't the laptops with lithiums tend to catch fire??









As for Hybrids like the Escape, they get better fuel economy in the city because that is where you are wasting most of the energy with a standard vehicle. On the highway, your energy consumption is wind resistance and rolling friction (If you want better fuel economy, slow down!!!







). In the city it is all of the starts and stops. This is where the hybrids excel.


----------



## CamperAndy (Aug 26, 2004)

kjdj said:


> Greenland and Iceland can't possibly look the same as they did 1000 years ago. The US has destroyed everything in the past 30 years. I see it in the news everyday. The 70's I was told we were going to freeze to death within 30 years.


You know that your statement is not based on fact. The written historical accounts of what what the ice cover was of these two islands was like in 920 AD are what we see today. So your very first statement that they changed one to green and the other to ice is wrong.

BTW everything written in the media in the 70's (and even today) is not true. You must separate the wheat from the chaff. It sounds like you are having a bad day also and just need to vent but since it sounds like you were a teacher you know a little research never hurt anyone.

Also the reason that Train engines went Diesel/Electric is they are infinitely variable in speed as compared to diesel only and allow the diesels to operate at their best rpm at all loads. Transmissions can not handle the range of speeds needed or handle the load or let the Diesel operate at the optimum speed. Fuel economy is only a minor factor in the Diesel/Electric configuration. Just for a bit of more on that configuration, modern war ships in the Destroyer class are going Gas Turbine/Electric to allow better weight distribution and silent operation.


----------



## Nathan (Jan 2, 2007)

It sounds like EVERYONE needs the weekend. Have a good one everyone. We can worry more about these details next week


----------



## NobleEagle (Jul 8, 2006)

Ok after reading a few replies, I have to ask....100 miles on 4oz of water doesn't qualify to compete with your battery/gas/diesel debate....They have the technology...But I guess it's more fun to debate with the "regular" types of fuel...sorry to interrupt...back to your regularly scheduled debate....continue...


----------



## OregonCampin (Mar 9, 2007)

CamperAndy said:


> Greenland and Iceland can't possibly look the same as they did 1000 years ago. The US has destroyed everything in the past 30 years. I see it in the news everyday. The 70's I was told we were going to freeze to death within 30 years.


BTW everything written in the media in the 70's (and even today) is not true. You must separate the wheat from the chaff. It sounds like you are having a bad day also and just need to vent but since it sounds like you were a teacher you know a little research never hurt anyone.
[/quote]

I think CamperAndy was being factitious - at least I hope he was cause I was laughing!









Hybrids are not the answer - haven't you read the article about how a Hummer is more enviromentally friendly than a Hybrid? Comes down to nickle mining, processing and disposal....I have a friend that had a Hybrid Escape, it was totaled in a car wreck and she (the owner of the vehicle) had to pay to have that battery disposed of to a tune of some $600 (ouch!) Her insurance would not pay for the disposal.

The other problem with Hybrids is most people don't realize that you only get the "great" gas milage under 30 MPH so if you are truly a Urbanite that only travels under 30 MPH, it's a great commuter car - it pays to purchase a Hybrid. Of course when you have to replace the battery and dispose of the old one (which costs around $3,500 depending on where you live), you just wasted your gas savings. I looked at the Hybrid Escape and realized that 90% of my driving is done over 30 MPH, so it was not worth the extra $10,000 in purchase price because I was not going to see much savings. I have a Mercury Mariner - I average 22 MPG for my day to day driving - put me out on the highway and I will get 25 MPG.

I agree that we need to find a better alternative to oil / gas I just don't think that battery powered cars are the answer - gotta mine the nickle, process it and then dispose of it. Bio fuels of any kind are better than the oil fuels - my grandpa made "gas" or bio fuel out of scotch broom in the early 70's - we ran our lawn mower off of it for years! Solar? Hydrogen? (hear that's up and coming) Propane?

It would be great if we could all afford two cars - one for pulling and one for a commuter, but the reality is that a lot of us barely skim by with what we have. My DH drives our F150 as a daily driver. I have a more fuel effecient car, but we don't have children, so my car doesn't have to do anything but get me, my DH & the dog around.

Now maybe if the government would give us some tax breaks for having a vehicle that was achieve (REALLY ACHIEVED) over 30MPG we might be able to afford a second vehicle for commuting....

Just my two cents.... now throw me under the Outback!


----------



## Drac (Apr 26, 2007)

NobleEagle said:


> Ok after reading a few replies, I have to ask....100 miles on 4oz of water doesn't qualify to compete with your battery/gas/diesel debate....They have the technology...But I guess it's more fun to debate with the "regular" types of fuel...sorry to interrupt...back to your regularly scheduled debate....continue...


I seriously doubt there is enough chemical energy in 4 oz of water to power a car more than a few miles, even if the hydrogen and oxygen were already split up for you. That's the whole problem, spliting out the two elements is what's so difficult/costly. There is some work going on to address this that has some promise: Hydrogen generated from Water and Aluminum


----------



## Carey (Mar 6, 2012)

Dont worry all!

Camless engines, both gas and diesel are just a short time away. These new engines will use solenoid(spelling) powered valves, making an engine infinitly varible. It will always be in its sweet spot regaurdless of road speed, load, and rpm...

The engine will be half the size we have now and make more torque and hp.. They will get the mpg the gvt wants.. they have been invented and are in testing right now.

Also injectors mounted in the combustion chamber are coming along with camless..

I bet in 10 years, we will be able to buy a 1/2 ton truck/suv that can get 30+ highway.. Your avg car will get 40+... And yes a vehicle that seats 6 will get 30-40 mpg...

Gas prices will be 5 bucks a gallon then. So money wise for the avg joe, will feel the same as now. What we are driving now will be ancient technology, comparred to what is just around the bend. This goes for cars, trucks, trains, semi's, buses, and anything that is powered by an engine................ Its all going camless...

If you make me, I will back this up with facts, just too lazy tonight to go prove it. lol

Carey


----------



## hatcityhosehauler (Feb 13, 2004)

Just thought I would point out another inaccuracy in the original post.

The USS Nautilus (SSN 571) was the first US Submarine to perform a Trans-Arctic navigation, crossing the North Pole (N90 00.000) on Aug 3, 1958.

The USS Skate (SSN 578) was the first submarine to surface at the North Pole (March 17,1959), and the photo's that I was able to find clearly show that the ship surfaced through ice.










photo depicts crew members of USS Skate perform memorial ceremony and spread the ashes of Australian born, Sir George Hubert Wilkins at the North Pole.

Wilkins was a pioneer the study of the role the Poles place in climate, and in trans arctic navigation. For more information, check this link Ohio State University Library Exhibits of Sir George Wilkins

Tim


----------



## stapless (Feb 20, 2005)

i think hybrids are overrated for their 'environmental friendliness'. I think it's more of a political statement to drive one than anything else. Is it a step in the right direction? - maybe. Even ethanol as a fuel source is questionable. I've read that it takes 1.1 gallons of gas to make 1 gallon of ehtanol.

heck, there is even a suggestion that a hummer might be the way to go if you believe this guy.

http://www.katu.com/news/7561002.html

scott

(wonder if that scion can pull my TT?)


----------



## CamperAndy (Aug 26, 2004)

stapless said:


> (wonder if that scion can pull my TT?)


No and neither will the Hummer H3.


----------



## MJRey (Jan 21, 2005)

That's a great website about the weather monitoring stations. It shows just one of many reason why I'm suspicious about the global warming scare mongers. Global warming is a theory that is based on dubious data managed by "scientists" who have a vested interest in making people believe there is a problem. If their research showed that everthing was fine or simply due to natural variations then they would never get their research funded. I don't know if there is a real problem or not but I'm certain that the data is highly suspect.


----------



## NobleEagle (Jul 8, 2006)

Drac said:


> Ok after reading a few replies, I have to ask....100 miles on 4oz of water doesn't qualify to compete with your battery/gas/diesel debate....They have the technology...But I guess it's more fun to debate with the "regular" types of fuel...sorry to interrupt...back to your regularly scheduled debate....continue...


I seriously doubt there is enough chemical energy in 4 oz of water to power a car more than a few miles, even if the hydrogen and oxygen were already split up for you. That's the whole problem, spliting out the two elements is what's so difficult/costly. There is some work going on to address this that has some promise: Hydrogen generated from Water and Aluminum
[/quote]
The link I porvided in my previous post definately supports the idea that there is PLENTY of power generated from water to power a car, weld, cut, etc...See for yourself


----------

