sdgregory 0 #26 May 16, 2004 QuoteWhat I cannot grasp is why an industrialized and highly technological society such as ours continues to power its transportation system with distilled DINOSAUR GUTS. mh . There is a ton of research and developement going into more feul efficient form of transportation. I am a member of The Ohio State Universitie's Challenge X team. The EPA, DOT, General Motors, Ford and many other companies have partnered with 15 Major Universities to sponsor developement of Hybrid electric vehicles. The work is being done to lessen the amount of feul being used by vehicles. Challenge X specifically focus on the SUV market. We currently have designed a Ford Explorer that is getting 32 miles to the gallon with our hybrid system and are trying to attain higher efficiency. For more information on Challenge X go here. This kind of problem is not easy to solve. Integrating motor systems, developing inexpensive feul cells, etc. is a monumental engineering task. And as far as all electric vehicles, the sonsumer market for them is minimal. No one wants to plug their car in everywhere they go and having enough feul cells to last would make the car so heavy and expensive it is impractical. Everyone thinks that nothing is being done to find better forms of transportation energy, but your wrong. You would not believe the resources being poured into it. A simple google search before making your statement might have enlightened you. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
squirrel 0 #27 May 16, 2004 this is reply to all here... IMHO, fuel prices have not kept up with other items when it comes to inflation. we just got used to the prices. and, if you dont like to spend that much of your income on fuel, go make more money. ________________________________ Where is Darwin when you need him? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #28 May 16, 2004 >Why did you not ask, "What's responsible for the outrageous prices > I pay for gasoline?" Cause the US uses more gasoline than anyone else on the planet. It is reasonable to assume our demand causes more fluctuations in oil price than anyone else's fluctuations. >People -- especially those in Europe -- love to knock the U.S. for its > consumption; I wonder if everyone considers how much larger the > U.S. is than typical European countries, and how much greater the > population. US population: 280 million EU population: 446 million US oil usage: 20 million barrels a day EU oil usage: 13 million barrels a day >So it's our fault that our aunt lives 1300 miles away instead of 130? >That's gonna take more gas. No, it's just our fault that we drive instead of fly or take the train, and we do it in a 12mpg SUV. > And even if we DO cause them, hey, that's life and there really isn't > something to blame us for, because you'd be doing the same thing > if you lived in our country, too. Sounds like you answered the question right there. We do cause higher oil prices and we don't much care (other than the fact that it raises our gasoline prices, that is.) >Why don't we talk about pollution? Do a Google search on Donora, Pennsylvania. We've been much worse than Europe; we have just made more progress in reducing pollution, and we've done it more quickly. >European cars are made, it is my understanding, with lesser pollution > control than those allowed in the U.S. and therefore have to be > modified before they may be imported. Correct. Of course, cars made and sold in Detroit do not have the emissions controls required for California, so it's not just a European problem. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #29 May 17, 2004 Quote>So it's our fault that our aunt lives 1300 miles away instead of 130? >That's gonna take more gas. No, it's just our fault that we drive instead of fly or take the train, and we do it in a 12mpg SUV. Most people wouldn't take city streets to drive 130, or 1300 miles. How many SUVs get 12MPG on the highway? - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #30 May 17, 2004 QuoteMost people wouldn't take city streets to drive 130, or 1300 miles. How many SUVs get 12MPG on the highway? Mine. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #31 May 17, 2004 "Should we be griping about the nasty overconsuming overpolluting Europeans, I wonder?" Thats a whole other thread Jeffrey, but since you raised it.... Lets have a look at CO2 emmissions, as a general indicator of propensity to consume/polute. The US, with its 280 million population produces about 5,000 million tonnes of CO2 per year. The EU with its 446 million population produces around 3,500 million tonnes of CO2 per year. source http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3143798.stm#us Do the maths, and see on a per capita basis, you guys are making a bigger mess than we are. Furthermore, Europe signed up to the Kyoto accord which requires signatories to reduce CO2 emissions to 1990 levels. from the link above, "The US emits more, absolutely and per head, than any other country - although it also produces more wealth. When Kyoto was agreed, the US committed to reducing its emissions by 6%. But since then it has pulled out of the agreement and its carbon dioxide emissions have increased to 16% above 1990 levels." So you are making a bigger mess per capita, and things aren't getting any better. However its not all gas guzzling SUV's driving 1300 miles to visit granny, there is a lot of business considerations associated with producing greenhouse gases. So the picture becomes even more foggy (smoggy?) as we look at consumption per capita, not in isolation but in a context that also considers the net worth of the processes that contributed to the pollution. EG if you are making a lot of steel, you'll make a lot of CO2, but if your primary industry is say software writing, you'll contribute less CO2. Notwithstanding the above discussion, your Mr Bush will not sign up to the Kyoto accord because... A) It is based on 'bad science', there is no link between greenhouse gas emissions and global climate change. B) He has vowed not to tax fuel consumption as a means of reducing demand. Applying a tax to limit consumption at this stage of his career will cost him votes. C) Russia has not signed it, and its not fair to grant an exemption for developing countries, whilst expecting the US to reduce its pollution. D) The cost of reducing CO2 emissions to 1990 levels is prohibitive. There is therefore no economic incentive to change the way you do things. E) America does not pollute, its the rest of the world thats making a mess. F)Any or all of the above reasons. Some people here in Europe believe that one way to persuade the US to come into line with Kyoto will be to apply an import tax on the US. So watch out, this will not help your trade deficit, and could lead to further devaluation of the dollar, giving a virtual price rise of imported items, such as oil. But I digress, the reason our fuel will jump in price is because it is heavily taxed, as I stated way up the thread. Tax is levied as a percentage of the market price, for easy counting, lets assume a litre costs 1 pound, the tax levy is around 2 pounds. If the cost of the original petrol goes up by 10 pence, the tax will increase by 20 pence, giving a total rise of 30 pence. Thats why we are paying through the nose for the fluctuations in petroleum price. The fluctuations are undoubtedly linked to trouble in the middle East, but our tax structure is not.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #32 May 17, 2004 Don't confuse him with facts.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StevePhelps 0 #33 May 17, 2004 <> Heck ya you do! And I'm going to buy another SUV (that gives me 3) with six cars total for me and my wife -- I love making you suffer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,435 #34 May 17, 2004 >And I'm going to buy another SUV (that gives me 3) with six cars >total for me and my wife -- I love making you suffer. Seems akin to burning down your own house to piss off your neighbor. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,651 #35 May 17, 2004 Quote<> Heck ya you do! And I'm going to buy another SUV (that gives me 3) with six cars total for me and my wife -- I love making you suffer. At one time I had six cars too. But between me and the (ex) wife we could only burn gas in two of them at a time. I'm down to 2 cars and a plane now, but they're all small.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
