patrick.net

kiatoa says

True to a point, roughly 30% of the fuel from a gasoline engine actually makes you move, maybe as much as 45% with a diesel engine. The laws of thermodynamics won’t let you get a lot better than that using any known combustion technology. Fuel cells could theoretically get us to maybe 80% but not for cheap.

Right on... pesky thermodynamics!

kiatoa says

So, pretty much the only thing that will save us from self-annihilation is to actually run out of oil. BTW, the solution for those who haven’t read my rants before, simply tax the oil and thus take the unearned profits and return them to the people.

you sir, have a solid grasp of economics, if I may say so. . .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Severance_tax

jetbay says

Many places in Europe also tax the car based on the size on the engine, or have higher gas taxes or both. I bet the tax on a 5.0 V8 is huge.

On CR I was going on how great Norway is, as is my wont, and some guy popped up that he had a Norwegian coworker who fled here because he was unhappy with the tax regime on cars.

So I went to Oslo Toyota to confirm this, and I was shocked!

A fully loaded Prius is $63,000 -- a V8 Landcruiser is $270,000!

kiatoa says

I think we are at or very near to the point of diminishing returns on improvements with automotive technology.

nah, there's still tons of stuff to do. We have yet to really economize on the stuff outside the car.

Once we fully electrify things we'll be carrying less mass in motion, which is good. There's a desperate need to increase range and less battery mass. Not sure the world has enough copper to actually electrify roadways, but we might figure out something to get energy to cars better.

I'm pretty sure that by the turn of the century we'll be entraining cars on every trip -- there won't be a driver in cars any more.

Troy says

nah, there’s still tons of stuff to do. We have yet to really economize on the stuff outside the car.

It surely looks like that now...

but we did know how to do that in the past, and it looked GOOD.

I read somewhere that more than half of gasoline is wasted as heat. Only a relatively small portion is used to actually move the car.
So efficiency is a potential area for huge savings.

It's worse than half. The common ICE about 62% is straight out loss but not all heat, some of it is simple friction loss etc, energy expended to move fresh air in and exhaust out (sustain the cycle) and so on.

I was really reminded of the waste heat the other day when after a long drive I parked my car in a cold garage. When I came out to the garage to get something from trunk a bit later it was quite warm in there as all the heat still shedding from the block & manifold made it hot and stuffy.

Diesel engines are better, but here in America we hate diesels in cars for some reason.

triple-take headshake:

half-empty trucks guzzling like drunks, while warehouses crumble...
(the ones where the jobbers used to supply retail from)
- the ones that used to employ a lotta folks stuck in McJobs now.
Wasteful is the new North American industry.
Send in the clowns.

Whoever is still making a living by selling fuel is still smilin', I'm sure.
But the final kick in the pants is convincing the public that this is still,
um, necessary?
The whole concept of contraction brings on a tantrum of heroic proportions.
That gas bill has doubled in two years (and they're still blowing smoke
about a recovery.)

Bubble Bobble says

They will make sure they can sell us every last drop of oil before we move to another tech.

I'd agree with this.

Vicente says

Diesel engines are better, but here in America we hate diesels in cars for some reason.

Diesel fuel in the US is taxed higher than gas. In europe diesel is taxed lower than gas, a lot lower on the order of a dollar a gallon in many countries. There are extra costs to manufacturing a diesel engine, which needs stronger crank, rods, pistons, head, starter, battery as well as a very high pressure fuel injection system. You will never make up the difference in the extra cost of the car with higher mileage in the US. They are louder, slower, and most gas stations don't have a diesel pump so why would anyone buy one if it's not going to be any cheaper? People don't hate them, it just doesn't make any sense to buy one.

Bubble Bobble says

2.The solution for the next 30 years will involve the decentralization of the main engine to the wheels. Rotary engines are much more efficient and lighter. They will make sure they can sell us every last drop of oil before we move to another tech.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42460541/ns/technology_and_science-innovation/

I certainly hope the wave disk engine works out, but it's an awful long road from a proof of concept to a working production engine that will last 300,000 miles, meet emissions standards, and be produced at a price that is marketable. Many have tried to supplant the basic four stroke engine for the last 100 years and all have failed with the exception of the rotary, which is a very very thirsty little devil that has so far been limited to high performance applications that disregard fuel economy.

The wave disk engine looks to me like it will have massive problems with seals and need very expensive alloys similar to turbines to be viable.

Mark my words:

When the price of diesel hits $5 a gallon this 2011 summer, the trucking industry will grind down to a halt. Truckers that move everything from organic veggies to toilet paper to dog food will stop driving as was almost the case in late 2008 when a barrel of oil was around $150.

Now, what are you doing to do?

As for me, I am going to make ethanol as a clean, renewable fuel in a small scale and make food in greenhouses (veggies grown in CO2 enriched greenhouses, fishes, mushrooms, earthworms, etc.).

Check this out: www.LiquidEnergyOasis.com and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9qZPwBPAqks&feature=related

Everything is completely affordable (you should definitely buy that second home you want honey). Everyone also needs to go on a drive for their vacation (as far as possible, yeah baby). Everything is just wonderful today....

no2foreclosures,

You were saying about diesel? Thimble fledge could applecart...... must be distracted by something....

Well, put it in a perspective.

$400/Month for a household with two relatively new cars. Is it really much?

Two mid-size cars cost on average 45-$50K. They are usually replaced by a middle class family more often than after 5 years. This is about $4500 a year. On top of this there are $2000-$3000 (much more than that in California) spent on insurance, maintenance, interest on car loans, licenses, fees, parking, tickets, etc. It all adds up to more than $7000/year or about $600 a month. So gas prices are still less than 40% of car expenses. To become the majority of the transportation cost they must jump to $6-$7/gallon.

IMO, gas is still dirt cheep.

jetbay says

“justme” … USA uses 4x as per capita as the rest of the western world, not only because of our less efficient vehicles but mostly because of suburban sprawl with our 1+ acre housing lots and endless strip malls.
Most people in western countries live in apartments or townhouses in walkable areas without much suburban sprawl. Its either city or farm and countryside, not much in between.
Many places in Europe also tax the car based on the size on the engine, or have higher gas taxes or both. I bet the tax on a 5.0 V8 is huge.

While the whole concept of "endless strip malls" and "burbs" is a probably a topic for another time... :) Lemme throw in a contrarian view.

Yes, we have our 1 acre lots vs close in apartment buildings and townhouses. Why shouldn't we? This IS America, lest we forget. Living in the world's foremost economic power has its pros and cons, but let's not forget that there IS a difference between America and a third world country. It's fairly evident. Now, between Europe and America? That gets a bit more fuzzy...but I'll leave with you a parting thought.

While the average person in Europe (or certain parts of it) may feel "happier" overall, their lifestyle is not the same as the average American, who may be "unhappier", but has a different (for better or worse) lifestyle.

I'll pick a cheesy example.

Who in Europe or America wouldn't wanna drive nice V8 powered sports car? How much does it cost on both sides of the Atlantic? :) You have your answer.

While there is a lot of "brainwashing" in America, Europe's not a whole lot better either.

kapone says

let’s not forget that there IS a difference between America and a third world country.

The peasants here are deluded that the streets are paved with gold?

Vicente says

kapone says

let’s not forget that there IS a difference between America and a third world country.

The peasants here are deluded that the streets are paved with gold?
“Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt

I would say, unlikely, but I think they do believe that we won't get invaded/attacked anytime soon. Does that happen now and then? Yes. But compared to the rest of the world, America is relatively much much safer.

Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not expounding that everything is "right" with the US, but where I'm going is that there quite a few "rights" (vs wrongs) that exist in US, vs the rest of the world. There's a price to pay for that.

Now, that being said, I do think quite a few folks in DC need to be publicly shot/beheaded to hold them accountable. Greenspan comes to mind as the first candidate....

kapone says

I think they do believe that we won’t get invaded/attacked anytime soon.

According to quite a few people I know the invasion is already over with. Socialists and "brown people" run the show. Oh wait I forgot gays.

Vicente says

kapone says

I think they do believe that we won’t get invaded/attacked anytime soon.

According to quite a few people I know the invasion is already over with. Socialists and “brown people” run the show. Oh wait I forgot gays.
“Eagles are dandified vultures” - Teddy Roosevelt

That may be, but that doesn't mean that the average person on the street lives in fear of being killed. Go to parts of middle east, Asia, Africa, Europe, former Soviet Union and what not, and people live with "real" fear. Not imagined or economic or anything, but real fear that they may get killed anytime.

Maybe if Americans can ween themselves off of gas guzzling SUVs they wouldn't whine so much when gas prices fluctuate. Americans have always invented a need in their minds for bigger. No sympathy from me.

The average MPG for American automobiles is about 22 MPG, while it true some cars get much better gas mileage and other gets get much worse mileage, the overall average is 22 MPG. Not too bad huh, compare that to the overall average of 43 MPG in Europe, the United States is lagging far behind in conservation. So if 178 million gallons of gasoline is consumed every day, and we import 65% of that, switching over to more fuel efficient cars like Europe, we could cut our consumption by almost 50%!

I drive a diesel pickup that gets about 15 mpg. I just bought new tires for it ($835) and am driving more slowly, and not accelerating so quickly, to maximize my mpg and tire life.

I think fuel prices are still pretty cheap. I have been trying to cut out the waste in my lifestyle, which costs me a lot more than the recent increase in diesel.

For example, I don't like washing the dishes, and would buy new ones when the old ones got dirty. I have something like 28 teflon-coated frying pans because of that. Not to mention plates and bowls and utensils.

There is a lot of waste in our society, and many opportunities for us to cut out waste and inefficiencies.

Sean7593 says

For example, I don’t like washing the dishes, and would buy new ones when the old ones got dirty. I have something like 28 teflon-coated frying pans because of that. Not to mention plates and bowls and utensils.

There is a lot of waste in our society, and many opportunities for us to cut out waste and inefficiencies.

Kudos to you! BTW - you probably saved yourself some money by not wasting wash water on all of those dirty dishes anyhow. Here's another tip on how to save money on your water bill: try to stop pooping. Start by gradually eating less every day, until you are no longer consuming any food. Less waste all around = greater efficiency. Bonus: cheaper food bill!

>"So if 178 million gallons of gasoline is consumed every day, and we import 65% of that, switching over to more fuel efficient cars like Europe, we could cut our consumption by almost 50%!”

I think most Americans won't have it (switiching to better mileage cars). Many Americans are willing to change presidents because of the price of gasoline alone!

TechGromit says

the overall average of 43 MPG in Europe

I know they're working on efficiency and the stuff though, I can hardly believe they some how able to archieve almost twice the efficiency. 33MPG? I can take it, but 43... well... can that MPG possible even w/ hybrid? Or is that 43km/gal or something?

seaside says

TechGromit says

the overall average of 43 MPG in Europe

I know they’re working on efficiency and the stuff though, I can hardly believe they some how able to archieve almost twice the efficiency. 33MPG? I can take it, but 43… well… can that MPG possible even w/ hybrid? Or is that 43km/gal or something?

I think you are forgetting that their cars are much smaller physically and have much smaller engines. They were running smarts, minis, Benz a cars, Honda fit/jazz light years before it became available in the states. Many models sold in the us actually have larger seats than the same models in the restbof the world, larger seats people, please stop eating like pigs and go out and exercise!!

ih8alameda says

I think you are forgetting that their cars are much smaller physically and have much smaller engines. They were running smarts, minis, Benz a cars, Honda fit/jazz light years before it became available in the states.

Some of there pollution controls are more lax as well. The Smart car in Europe is rated at 60 MPG, but by the U..S. finished adding emissions control components to it, it barely got 45 MPG in the United States. While pollution prevention is important, if your losing 25% efficiency in the process (and burning 25% more gas) does it really help pollution in the long run? The New diesel smart car in Europe is reported to get 85 mpg!

ih8alameda says

Many models sold in the us actually have larger seats than the same models in the restbof the world, larger seats people, please stop eating like pigs and go out and exercise!!

So what if American market cars have larger seats? It's the larger vehicles and engine displacements which are reducing gas mileage.

For what it's worth, I'm both tall and fat. But I was quite comfortable in either my Geo Metro or Dodge Colt(Mitsubishi Mirage). I have been in a Chrysler 300 and I had to bend my neck to the side or ride gangsta' to keep my head off the headliner.

In alot of cases, there's an inverse relationship between vehicle price and space efficiency. It might be that Truckzilla epidemic soothes the egos of stature challenged drivers.

Once we fully electrify things we’ll be carrying less mass in motion, which is good.
I'm giving some thought to buying a Trek Transporter+ as a second vehicle. Check out this review where the guy was using it in the snow. The one thing holding me back is the lack of garage space (as in, I don't have one).

ih8alameda says

I think you are forgetting that their cars are much smaller physically and have much smaller engines. They were running smarts, minis, Benz a cars, Honda fit/jazz light years before it became available in the states.

The coolest car-related thing I saw in Lisbon was the enormous savings in parking space you get when most people drive something the size of a Smart Car or EuroCar - you just park head-on to the curb! Also no need to learn to parallel park :-)

Cook County resident says

So what if American market cars have larger seats? It’s the larger vehicles and engine displacements which are reducing gas mileage.

you're right, that was more my personal dig at fat people =) However, I think in general americans have a very entitled mentality that leads to over-indulgence. In the amount of food we eat, the amount of space we "need", the amount of comfort we "deserve" etc. All this leads to the bigger is better, and in the case of cars and their seats, the bigger, the less fuel efficient. More mass or more HP = more gas

ih8alameda2 says

you’re right, that was more my personal dig at fat people =) However, I think in general americans have a very entitled mentality that leads to over-indulgence. In the amount of food we eat, the amount of space we “need”, the amount of comfort we “deserve” etc. All this leads to the bigger is better, and in the case of cars and their seats, the bigger, the less fuel efficient.

Who knows? I like to make stuff up, too. I'll suggest our prosperity has allowed us to slide into a homebound lifestyle. TVs and electronic games are cheap and calories are cheaper. Used to be, before air conditioning, everybody would get out of the house just because it was too damn hot inside.

In our isolation, we seem to have grown more fearful. The outdoors seem less safe and there's no excuse for letting the kiddies walk to the school or the park -- no excuse at all, not when there's a paramilitary RoadMonster in the garage which will take them through Terra Incognito as a Conestoga through Injun Country.

But I like efficiency. I'd like to have the choice of the space and fuel efficient small cars that the rest of the world has. And I'd love to know what those foreigners are doing with the space saved by their smaller seats. Haul around an extra couple cubic feet of air, perhaps?

TechGromit says

Some of there pollution controls are more lax as well. The Smart car in Europe is rated at 60 MPG, but by the U..S. finished adding emissions control components to it, it barely got 45 MPG in the United States.

Are you sure about that, Gromit? I have a feeling that there may be other variables at play here.

1. US Gallon versus Imperial Gallon

2. Different driving cycle standard for mpg measurements.

From wikipedia:

In United States customary units there are the liquid (≈ 3.79 L) and the lesser used dry (≈ 4.4 L) gallons. There is also the imperial gallon (≈ 4.55 L) which is in unofficial use within the United Kingdom and Ireland and is in semi-official use within Canada.

I don't have time this moment to look into this, but maybe later.

Cook County resident says

In our isolation, we seem to have grown more fearful. The outdoors seem less safe and there’s no excuse for letting the kiddies walk to the school or the park — no excuse at all, not when there’s a paramilitary RoadMonster in the garage

Right on.

The difference in some of these cars mileage comes from what @justme said. The difference in a gallon. That is huge. EPA vs whatever is used in these other countries to measure MPG is huge as well. In europe they cut down on the acid rain producing emissions, while the US dioxide output. The cars are roughly the same, it's how things are measured.

We lost most diesel cars here because our sulphur laws in diesel were far less stringent than in Europe, and the diesel engines they made simply didn't work with the diesel here. I believe that has recently changed though with diesel #2 becoming more stringent.

Cars have lots of ways of becoming more efficient still. Three big ones:
#1) Weight of pieces used. Plastic vs Steel. Lighter glass. Smaller engine, lighter transmissions, chassis, etc.
#2) More areo dynamic. The cars start to look silly, but it makes a difference, especially over 55mph.
#3) Less rolling resistance, or in other words, smaller, thinner, more inflated tires.

Remove the battery from a prius and see what happens. Not much, other than a decent loss in startup power. It's has lighter glass, lighter body parts, it's far more areo dynamic, and the tires are small and thin. It gets it's great mileage mostly from car improvements, the hybrid aspect makes it more acceptable to drive with the additional power. As they add bigger batteries and electric only modes, it might start to make a bigger difference, but up until now, it's mostly been changes to the car.

I personally think that the biggest improvement in mileage will come when someone figures out how to socially punish/socially explain why they're driving like an idiot. The mpg display in the prius is pretty good, but something that has even more feed back will likely help people drive better. Basically figuring out what the best way to convince people to drive smarter is. Better driving can change a cars EPA rating from -20% to +40%, that's a huge amount.

justme says

TechGromit says

Some of there pollution controls are more lax as well. The Smart car in Europe is rated at 60 MPG, but by the U..S. finished adding emissions control components to it, it barely got 45 MPG in the United States.

Are you sure about that, Gromit? I have a feeling that there may be other variables at play here.

Yes pretty sure.

European Union (EU) testing rates the 999 cc Smart at 4.7 L/100 km (60 mpg-imp; 50 mpg-US)

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rates the vehicle at 36 mpg-US (6.5 L/100 km; 43 mpg-imp) combined.

So the European testing rates the Smart car at 60 MPG (Imperial) and the US EPA rates the vehicle as 43 mpg (Imperial) after the U.S. pollution controls are applied. That's a 28% difference between the European and US models, doesn't matter if you measure it in US Gallons or Imperial Gallons, still works out to 28% difference.

It's HOW you measure it. The rules are different here.

Wiki has some information on it, but not a lot on how the differences effect the numbers.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fuel_economy_in_automobiles#Fuel_economy_standards_and_testing_procedures

The EPA might have changed things around a bit, but they apparently used to test cars inside, which made it difficult for turbos to pass emissions. So an SUV and a Prius would have the same areo dynamics at high way speeds based on their testing.

The emissions controls on the US cars and European cars isn't that much different.

TechGromit says

That’s a 28% difference between the European and US models, doesn’t matter if you measure it in US Gallons or Imperial Gallons, still works out to 28% difference.

Gromit,

What pkennedy said: Don't forget the effect of how the EPA driving cycle is defined. Maybe the EPA cycle contain much brisker accelaration and harder stops and less coasting. Perhaps this is a reflection of how Americans drive, on the average.

My observation is that American drivers are prone to being acceleration freaks that race from one red light to the other, then sit and wait while I coast in just in time to catch the next green light, and often pass them in the process. You don't see many Europeans driving like that. I visited 6 countries in Europe last year and saw very little of this wasteful and misplaced macho type behavior, be it by females or males.

seaside says

I know they’re working on efficiency and the stuff though, I can hardly believe they some how able to archieve almost twice the efficiency. 33MPG? I can take it, but 43… well… can that MPG possible even w/ hybrid? Or is that 43km/gal or something?

The main difference is smaller cars and just as importantly, the fact that a large fraction (53% in 2007) of new cars have much more efficient DIESEL engines.

Also, the UK (and, I believe, Europe) tax CO2 emissions. Cars emitting less than 100g/km of CO2 don't have to pay a road tax. Also, starting this year, cars that are registered (new, I believe) will have to pay a higher initial fee (those below 130 g/km are exempted.)

Bubble Bobble says

The real problem is that we are transporting our goods with trucks instead of trains

Whaat? Yeah, trains are more efficient than trucks, but what makes you think trucks are burning most of our transportation oil. How about some data? Okay, I'll look it up for you:

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/pet_cons_psup_dc_nus_mbblpd_a.htm

Here one can see that diesel (trucking, marine AND trains) is less than 25% of the total. And gasoline is more than 55% of the total. So passenger cars are more to blame than trucks. Trucks are part of the problem, but they are not the most significant problem.

Or just apply common sense: Think kg(payload)*miles/gallon for trucks versus cars. And are you seeing swarms of truck clogging up our freeways as opposed to automobiles? Are they carrying only 80kg of payload per 1500kg of dead weight?

A general suggestion: If anyone wants to reduce the amount of energy wasted on trucking, stop drinking bottled water. Trucking all that bottled water around must be one of the most wasteful things imaginable. Only air travel wastes more energy relative to what is accomplished.

How about if all the automobile drivers were on trains? All the domestic airline passengers?