63 Miles Per Gallon?

[soberups]

Sober...stupid question...what does the exhaust smell like, if anything?

The biodiesel I usually run makes my exhaust smell like burnt cooking oil or the deep-fat fryer in a fast food restraunt. Different biodiesels will have different exhaust odors depending upon the source of the raw ingredients. Its not necessarily what I would call a "pleasant" smell but its way better than the eye-watering petroleum stench from regular exhaust. I really notice the difference during the winter when I am forced to run a blend instead of pure biodiesel due to the cold weather.

 

[soberups]

Well, in general the batteries appear to be good for at least 200k, that was actually one of the big things I was concerned about. I do like the diesel Jetta, a buddy of mine has one and he loves it for his long commute.

Hybrids are definately the better choice than diesels for someone who does most of their driving in town. Diesel engines take longer than gassers to warm up, and fuel economy (compared to a hybrid) suffers as a result. I am waiting for a plug-in hybrid to become available, it would be the ideal choice for my wife who only commutes a short distance and could easily make her 10 mile roundtrip without ever needing to use the gas engine at all.

 

[brett636]

Hybrids are definately the better choice than diesels for someone who does most of their driving in town. Diesel engines take longer than gassers to warm up, and fuel economy (compared to a hybrid) suffers as a result. I am waiting for a plug-in hybrid to become available, it would be the ideal choice for my wife who only commutes a short distance and could easily make her 10 mile roundtrip without ever needing to use the gas engine at all.

Why not get her a Nissan Leaf? 100% electric and would easily cover her 10 mile round trip.

 

[soberups]

Why not get her a Nissan Leaf? 100% electric and would easily cover her 10 mile round trip.

We are actually considering that, although she is a bit leery of a car that can only go about 100 miles before requiring a 3-8 hr recharge. The Chevy Volt would be better in that regard; it can only go about 35 miles on the battery alone, but for longer trips it has a gasoline powered generator that gives it 300+ mile range. But the Volt is at least $10,000 more than the Leaf and since we already have a diesel car that is ideal for road trips, the shorter range of the Leaf really wouldnt be an issue.

In any case, it will be at least another year or two before either of these cars is widely available so we will have plenty of time to weight the pros and cons of each.

 

[brett636]

We are actually considering that, although she is a bit leery of a car that can only go about 100 miles before requiring a 3-8 hr recharge. The Chevy Volt would be better in that regard; it can only go about 35 miles on the battery alone, but for longer trips it has a gasoline powered generator that gives it 300+ mile range. But the Volt is at least $10,000 more than the Leaf and since we already have a diesel car that is ideal for road trips, the shorter range of the Leaf really wouldnt be an issue.

In any case, it will be at least another year or two before either of these cars is widely available so we will have plenty of time to weight the pros and cons of each.

If range is your concern then a third option could be, albeit the most expensive, the Tesla Model S which will be available in 2012. 0-60 5.6 sec, 300 mile range using lithium ion batteries, can seat 5 adults and has two rear facing child seats in the back.

http://www.teslamotors.com

 

[wkmac]

This article on how photosynthesis could be the energy source of the future is rather thought provoking!

 

[brett636]

This article on how photosynthesis could be the energy source of the future is rather thought provoking!

I've read about that and it is very intriguing. There are some articles out there about jets getting fueled from the biofuel derived from this process. (http://www.wired.com/autopia/2010/06/airbus-parent-company-showcases-algae-powered-flights/) and it does sound promising. I would just like to see one of these upstart technologies to begin making headway into the general energy marketplace rather then being some experiment getting run in a lab. I don't particularly care what technology it is whether its algae derived biofuel, hydrogen fuel cells, or electric cars. Just give the general population something that gets us away from our dependence on middle eastern oil.

 

[soberups]

. Just give the general population something that gets us away from our dependence on middle eastern oil.

The tough part is that the general population is always going to want what is cheapest and easiest rather than what is best.

Right now, the cheapest and easiest way for the average person to drive is in a relatively inefficient car that burns petroleum-based fossil fuel.

The free market cannot provide a competitive alternative because the true cost of fossil fuels (enviormental, military presence in Middle East, oil company tax breaks/subsidies etc.) is being held artificially low at the pump, while realistic alternatives (electric cars, hyper-efficient 70MPG biofueled cars such as the VW Lupo) have huge cost disadvantages vs. gasoline powered cars or are simply denied to us via unfair emissions regulations, crash-test standards and other government interference.

The solution to energy independence is the free market. That means treating fossil fuels like what they really are....which is irreplaceable natural resources that only exist in finite quantities and cannot be replaced once consumed. It also means incorporating a "pay as we go" mentality at the pump, rather than simply borrowing the cost of our huge military presence in the Middle East and passing those costs on to our great-grandchildren in the form of debt.

A truly free market would allow each person to ask important questions such as "do I really want to purchase this product (oil) from a regime that supports terrorism and which treats half of its population (women) no better than cattle?" and then vote with their dollars rather than simply sticking a yellow ribbon on the antennae of their 10 MPG SUV and driving away in blissful ignorance of what had to happen and who had to die in order for them to be able to purchase that product for $3 a gallon.

 

[wkmac]

The tough part is that the general population is always going to want what is cheapest and easiest rather than what is best.

Right now, the cheapest and easiest way for the average person to drive is in a relatively inefficient car that burns petroleum-based fossil fuel.

The free market cannot provide a competitive alternative because the true cost of fossil fuels (enviormental, military presence in Middle East, oil company tax breaks/subsidies etc.) is being held artificially low at the pump, while realistic alternatives (electric cars, hyper-efficient 70MPG biofueled cars such as the VW Lupo) have huge cost disadvantages vs. gasoline powered cars or are simply denied to us via unfair emissions regulations, crash-test standards and other government interference.

The solution to energy independence is the free market. That means treating fossil fuels like what they really are....which is irreplaceable natural resources that only exist in finite quantities and cannot be replaced once consumed. It also means incorporating a "pay as we go" mentality at the pump, rather than simply borrowing the cost of our huge military presence in the Middle East and passing those costs on to our great-grandchildren in the form of debt.

A truly free market would allow each person to ask important questions such as "do I really want to purchase this product (oil) from a regime that supports terrorism and which treats half of its population (women) no better than cattle?" and then vote with their dollars rather than simply sticking a yellow ribbon on the antennae of their 10 MPG SUV and driving away in blissful ignorance of what had to happen and who had to die in order for them to be able to purchase that product for $3 a gallon.

DING! DING! DING! DING! We got us a winner! Have a cigar, you gonna go far!

Well said Sober across the board.

 

[moreluck]

Drill here. Drill now so we can have gas that's not from those monkeys.

 

[soberups]

Drill here. Drill now so we can have gas that's not from those monkeys.

If every passenger car in the USA got 40 MPG then we wouldnt need their oil in the first place.

The free market will produce such cars if there is a demand for them, and there will be a demand if we started paying a $3 per gallon "deficit reduction/military readiness tax" on all non-renewable motor fuels.

We may indeed need to drill here in the short term but in the long run we simply cannot drill our way out of our dependence on imported oil. Oil is the problem.....biofuels, electric cars, and sythentic fuels created from coal or biomass are the solution.

I'd like my great-grandchildren to inherit something other than a bankrupt nation sitting on top of a bunch of empty oil wells.

 

[wkmac]

If every passenger car in the USA got 40 MPG then we wouldnt need their oil in the first place.

The free market will produce such cars if there is a demand for them, and there will be a demand if we started paying a $3 per gallon "deficit reduction/military readiness tax" on all non-renewable motor fuels.

We may indeed need to drill here in the short term but in the long run we simply cannot drill our way out of our dependence on imported oil. Oil is the problem.....biofuels, electric cars, and sythentic fuels created from coal or biomass are the solution.

I'd like my great-grandchildren to inherit something other than a bankrupt nation sitting on top of a bunch of empty oil wells.

Interesting idea with the noble intent of trying to reflect the true cost of oil but oil already gets a ton of privilege and subsidization from many other areas of the budget such as from the military budget, Dept. of Energy, Dept. of Commerce and even Dept. of State and these costs are not seen or as easily seen as those paid at the pump. My question is, in implementing this $3 which we already pay anyway in truth, will you use a transparency model and show how all those costs are now shifted to being paid for away from general treasury revenue sources to now the new tax at the pump model?

If you do, at the very least it is a true(r) reflection of the actual cost of a gallon of gas and the effects of the tax burden are more clearly seen and then economic questions of comparing true costs of different energy forms would shift towards at least a bit more honest debate. However, if all things stay as they are and you just add on the $3 tax, the profit model for the oil companies doesn't change (not sure it does in the previous example either but it's an act of transparency) they still keep all manner of privilege and subsidization and in effect, the added $3 tax just puts more money into the hands of the Corp. State for them to exploit, we pay the tab, nothing changes and the taxpayer once again is just $3 a gallon poorer than he/she was.

I like your intent but the underlying specifics need to be ironed out so that the average folk aren't the one's getting hosed as typically does happen when talk of fair and honest taxation take place!


In a true free market when the gov't doesn't intervene at all, I don't believe oil can compete one on one with other energy options and I also don't believe in a true free market that there would be a one size fits all. Some areas might use electricity, other areas use some form of biodiesel, others may still use petro and others may use something else not even thought of yet. If you went to the grocery store and all they ever had was the same loaf of bread for sale and that was all you could ever buy, in time would you starve to death? Probably so think of the energy market in the same way as a grocery store stocked with all kinds of different foods and meats and then it comes down to you based on price or desire as to what you want to buy!

jmo