On the global warming-mad European continent…
… fuel efficiency is measured by carbon dioxide emissions rather than miles-per-gallon, and the European Commission has mandated 120 grams/kilometer (equivalent to a staggering 62 mpg) by 2012.
They aren’t going to make it.
This week in Belgium, officials acknowledged that an interim goal of 140 g/km (48 mpg) by next year is already beyond reach, as the average emissions of vehicles today is “only” 160 g/km (42 mpg). Even bureaucrats are now suggesting the 120 g/km goal be pushed off to 2015. Why are the Europeans missing their targets?
National Review writes stuff besides pathetic lies in support of war? Who knew?
I have a question. What nation does the “National” in “National Review” refer to? UK? Iran? Belize? Honestly, I’m stumped, as so few of their articles have anything to do with America I have to conclude it is not an American publication. So can anyone tell me: where are these guys physically located? Thanks.
Ummm…I think you mean km/g, not g/km. Otherwise the Earth’s temp would be .81 degrees higher, instead of .70…methinks.
That’s grams (g) of carbon per kilometer (km) Carbon dude.
Its easy to get 62mpg or even 100 mpg out of a vehicle. You put a five horse motor on a carbon fiber frame, use tires 1 inch wide and wrap the whole thing in an aerodynamic shell made of aluminum foil, cobwebs and sunbeams. No problem getting good mileage. Well, as long as the driver is under 180 pounds anyway. And he/she doesn’t want to go over 30 mph. And a stiff breeze helps.
No, getting astronomical mileage numbers is easy. Selling that kind of thing as a vehicle to the public, that’s the hard part.
You wanna ride a moped in the winter, go to ‘er buddy. I’m sticking with my 11 mpg truck.
When I was a kid ( and a whole lot lighter) I had a classic Honda 50 that approached 80MPG on a windless day..but the driver/passenger comfort was somewhat laking in the cold weather.
Maybe the Euros should think about throwing a leg over a Honda 50cc or 90cc…much of urban Asia travels this way….Europe is on its way to Asian authoritarian inflicted squalor anyway, may as well get used to the personal transport mode of that region and anthill lifestyle.
When I was a kid ( and a whole lot lighter) I had a classic Honda 50 that approached 80MPG on a windless day..but the driver/passenger comfort was somewhat laking in the cold weather.
Maybe the Euros should think about throwing a leg over a Honda 50cc or 90cc…much of urban Asia travels this way….Europe is on its way to Asian authoritarian inflicted squalor anyway, may as well get used to the personal transport mode of that region and anthill lifestyle.
When I was a kid ( and a whole lot lighter) I had a classic Honda 50 that approached 80MPG on a windless day..but the driver/passenger comfort was somewhat laking in the cold weather.
Maybe the Euros should think about throwing a leg over a Honda 50cc or 90cc…much of urban Asia travels this way….Europe is on its way to Asian authoritarian inflicted squalor anyway, may as well get used to the personal transport mode of that region and anthill lifestyle.
Andrew: National Review is an American publication in the same way that the National Post is a Canadian publication.Most of NR’s writers are Americans or live in the US, like Mark Steyn. Both print articles about other countries or continents as they relate to issues here, like the environment or vehicle mileage. When you read the article you will note that comparisons are made between the EU and US, about SUVs for example. Glad to be of help.
“Why are the Europeans missing their targets?”
Who profits from high oil prices and low gas mileage? Why, it’s the usual suspects– Jews and Arabs.
“Who profits from high oil prices and low gas mileage? Why, it’s the usual suspects– Jews and Arabs.”
So it’s OIL that brings these two antagonists together, not diplomacy, Jimmy Carter, or the UN, it’s good old oil!
Well, God bless us all!
Phantom dude…thanks for the clarification…I had not heard that measure before. Guess I tried to read too fast!
No problem. Bogus measurement anyway, probably why they are having trouble hitting their “target”. Grams of carbon per kilograms of load transported one kilometer would be a measure of engine efficiency. It might even tell them something useful.
But so would ml H2O/(kg*km). EU idiots.
When I was at Expo 1986 in Vancouver, Toyota had a prototype car on display that they said would get 90 mpg and would be on the market by 1990. Where is it?
“Where is it?”
…probably with the Roswell saucer…
The Phantom at 8:54 AM is pretty much right on the money. The SAE sponsors an annual contest in which various colleges compete to come up with an automobile designed for maximum mileage, last year several had achieved in excess of 1000, yes, one thousand, miles per gallon. Unfortunately they’re not marketable as top speed is only a few miles per hour, absolutely no creature comforts such as heat, a/c or even a radio. Even the body is made of materials that you would be more suited to R/C model airplanes.
The bottom line is that it can be done, but it’s just not practical.
A quick back of the envelop calculation:
Gasoline produces about 54 kJoules per gram-Carbon, while the average human does about 36 kJ/gC. Say the average fit human can do 25 miles a day. The same efficiency is therefore achieved for transport vehicles at 38 miles per gallon…approximately the US target.
I am anticipating demands to cull surplus energy-inefficient people. Start exercising…
Even the EU can’t just dream up new rules that ignore physics.
And what about driving in heavy city traffic in a wheeled equivalent of the “Gossamer Albatross?” Crash protection rating estimate, anyone?
Crash protection rating estimate, anyone?
Yeah, remember what it’s like to have gum on the bottom of your shoe? That’s what anyone that drives one would look like after an accident.
“That’s what anyone that drives one would look like after an accident.”
…I’m reminded of the 80’s ICBC ads of using a seatbelt where an egg inside a metal box and the guy puts tape on it, hits the box, egg is ok. Take the tape off, hits the box and the egg is scrambled.
Very graphic, made the point to me.
100 MPG Carburetor ?? Where did it go ??
And remember, that super ‘latte-crowd’ utopian device was supposed to turm an ordinary 1960s ‘tank’ into an eco-dream machine.
The existence of the ‘super carb’ was a fraud, and many knew it at the time, so how was the myth perpetuated ?? —- Think media 🙂
Same for Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) and Alien crop circles.
When it comes to fuel economy — vehicle size, shape ect are the biggies. Engine design (4 valve) and trany (converter lock-up) have made a huge difference.
We can all increase our existing vehicle’s fuel economy dramatically by simply driving slower. (The part we do not like is the ‘me’.)
Ontario to mandate 110 kph limit for trucks ?? All vehicles some day ?? (Fossil fuel use reduction.)
The technology is here. A vehicle’s brain would allow some exceptions, passing ect, hyways 110 kph, side streets 50 ect. (GPS device knows where the vehicle is)
Imagine the fossil fuel savings !!??
Imagine Corvettes and Ladas and Chevettes all going down the freeway at the same speed !!??
Imagine Buzz Hargrove !!??
Let me draw your attention to a few words near the bottom of the NRO article Kate links to…
** Though European cars currently average a phenomenal 42 per gallon and sport such whiz-bang technology as clean diesel, direct-injection systems,**
That*s CDI for short and it can save you a fortune in fuel money until you can get a Plug-in Hybrid,* EV or compressed-air vehicle.
This link will change your new car choices.
http://www.tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/atvpgm/tech.htm
VW is the most obvious choice for CDI these days. Driving is a lot more fun when the miles cost you next to nothing in fuel costs.
VolksWagon Lupo TDI = [ 74 to 94 MPG ]
tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/atvpgm/vehdesc/volkswag/00_lup3L.pdf
Ford Ranger EV
tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/atvpgm/vehdesc/ford/98_rngev.pdf
Nissan HyperMini
tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/atvpgm/vehdesc/nissan/01_hmini.pdf
Saab, Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Renault etc. will build new plants in Shanghai and sell to increasingly affluent and robust markets in the far east if their products are no longer welcome at home.
Like what happened with France’s great right turn this year, the EU will be forced by deteriorating economic circumstances to abandon unattainable socialist goals like carbon regulation. Otherwise their automotive golden geese will permanently migrate from Europa’s shores a taking their precious technology and manufacturing jobs elsewhere.
But, but, but, they made a law! How can they not meet the targets? It’s a law, people! You can’t break laws, especially socially-engineered laws that will help our planet survive! A law!
Here*s a broken law for you…
Nice big Voyageur SUV at [ 35 / 43 MPG ]
[Not for sale in Canada.. offensive to Chevron, Exxon-Mobile, PetroCan and Alberta.]
tc.gc.ca/programs/environment/atvpgm/vehdesc/chrysler/05_voygr_E.pdf
= TG
SUV = Sport Utility Vehicle.
Voyageur = Van.
Plenty of utility, zero sport.
Use www. in front of the link or you could get a *bad request* message. Allow time for the 9= Megs PDF to load.
Adobe and their overstuffed PDF game gives me a pain. = TG
Detroit automakers criticized, defended in Congress
Detroit Free Press July 12, 2007
— A debate over the survival of Detroit’s automakers broke out Thursday during a Congressional hearing on the future of plug-in hybrid vehicles, as advocates pressed for more action. While General Motors Corp., Ford Motor Co. and DaimlerChrysler are building prototype plug-in hybrid vehicles, none was invited to the hearing of the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming.
http://tinyurl.com/3cot7f
========================= www6.lexisnexis.com
= TG
I’m no engineer, but has anyone ever calculated the total energy in a gallon of gasoline, the energy requirements to move four adults over a given distance (100km say assuming hills etc), friction, the weight of a vehicle able to meet crash test specifications, taken this as an ideal and calculated a “get real” fudge factor? Take this as the asymptote which simply can’t be realistically met and beyond which there’s no point flogging the dead horse. One would hope that this would keep Greens from pulling numbers out of the air, but I won’t hold my carbon-laden breath.
DrD, You and I may not be engineers so we have to ask an *expert*,. . .
While gasoline holds great energy potential, it only burns at 22% efficiency unless you mix it with hydrogen, then it goes to 98%.
The problem then, should you decide to solve it, is to reduce the Million dollar hydrogen car price tag by about 80% and reduce engineer hydrogen fill-up jockey wages to $15 per hour.
Good luck. = TG
West Coast vulnerable to volatile gas prices;
Taxes and tight supply contribute to high costs in the lower mainland, inspiring hybrid sales and alternative research
The Toronto Star July 12, 2007
–When Glen Haley needs to fill up his 1994 Honda Accord, he knows where to go. Living in the Vancouver suburb of Tsawwassen, the software sales manager ducks across the border to nearby Point Roberts, Wash., to fill up for his hour-long commute to downtown Vancouver.
*They’re usually 10 to 15 to 20 cents lower on any given day, depending on the cycle,* Haley said.
http://tinyurl.com/27zhb3
=========================== www6.lexisnexis.com
=TG
Well DrD I just did that.
Taking the weight of a VW Jetta at 1500 kg (didn’t add for passengers) and a coefficient of rolling friction of 0.015 (ideal flat smooth surface) and an ideal energy content of gas at 32 MJ/l….
I determined the theoretical maximum (assuming 100% efficiency) to be 146.7 km/l. 100 mpg = 43 km/l.
Based on the research I’ve done, the most efficient combustion engine ever built is a 90,000 HP marine diesel at 52%. Cars are much lower (~32%).
The problem isn’t the supression of carburetors as so many whackos claim. The theoretical ideal air/fuel mixture ratio for gas is 14.7:1. This is already achieved. Typical carburetors and injectors have a mixture range between 10:1 and 18:1. The problem is materials. Typical engine construction is steel (although some use aluminum) and the working temperature of steel is around 925 K (temperatures greater than this significantly reduce strength properties). The adiabatic temperature of gasoline is 2300 K. You’d melt the engine block long before you got to a high enough temperature to reach maximum energy output of gas (steel melts around 1640 K and aluminum is even worse at 930 K).
Sorry TG. But hydrogen is worse for the environment than fossil fuels. The problem is that hydrogen doesn’t occur naturally so you have to make it. It takes far more energy to make and transport hydrogen than you get back.
Also, you’re not getting that high of a percent of efficiency on the adiabitic maximum. The adiabatic temperature of hydrogen is even higher than gasoline and you can’t possibly “burn” it at it’s ideal temperature.
So until you build a $hitload of nuclear power plants you’re going to have to burn fossil fuels to make the hydrogen.
You should read this report on a hydrogen economy.
http://www.idatech.com/solutions/multi_fuel_solutions/Hydrogen%20Economy%20Report%202003.pdf
Reid,
I agree with you and disagree with our premier Gordon Campbell, [hydrogen highway from Vancouver to the Whistler Olympics].
Dream on Gordie. Better get quick compressor stations ready for Air-Compression vehicles.
Or, quick charge stations for EV battery packs and certainly a chain of Bio-fuel depots in place at least. = TG
The greatest burning of fuel takes place when the vehicle begins acceleration from zero. Having driven sometimes for hours in Europe without having to stop because of roundabouts it amazes me that we do not fully embrace them here. It is great to see in today’s Toronto Sun that cities like Waterloo are starting to implement them and the States is also. Nothing is so frustrating as, particularly late at night, lurching from stoplight to stoplight stopping for no traffic. They are far safer than stoplights as you must slow down and pay attention to navigate them. Widespread use of roundabouts in NA would save millions of litres of fuel and millions of dollars also.
The whole affair is doomed for failure unless these new technologies can accomplish the following:
1. pass a lumber truck on a secondary highway in less than 8 seconds
2. haul a demolished bathroom to the landfill site
3. keep a family safe if involved in a collision
4. able to fuel up in every hick town in Canada
5. run reliably at – 35 C
if all 5 knuckledragging criteria cannot be met, get that garbage out of my way
Thanks for the information. It’s tough for a layman to know the real issues involved in fuel efficiency.
I like the roundabout-instead-of-four-way-stops idea. I drove roundabouts regularly in Aussie and quite liked them once I was used to them.
TG, regarding your comment at 2:59 PM. FYI take a peek the tech briefs in the July ’07 issue of AEI, particularly page 33 (page 8 of the .PDF) found here.
http://www.sae.org/automag/techbriefs/07-2007/1-115-7-26.pdf
There are some pictures of the Wartsila-Sulzer RTA96-C turbocharged two-stroke diesel engine, which achieves over 50% thermal efficiency, and it’s only 89 feet long and 44 feet high:
people.bath.ac.uk/ccsshb/12cyl
the carburator that will allow a 1957 Edsel with 2 blown pistons, 3 missing plugs , a slipping transmission, siezed emergency brakes, going up the side of a cliff in -56 degrees F was thrown in the north sea in 1946
what actually amazes me is that the real waste of energy in a car’s life cycle is all most completely ignored, this is when it is being manufactured. If cars were built to reasonable have a usefull life time of 20 years with maintenance and update considerations addressed at design and manufacture, the energy efficiency of a vehicle would be grately increased!!!
R30C,
Thanks, that was lip-smacking delicious.= TG
TG. Please don’t be offended by this… but based on alot of your posts I’ve read…. do you wear a tin foil hat?
I am currently researching this “compressed air” engine. So far I’m thinking it’s snake oil. The websites I’ve looked at have alot of “perpetual motion” type claims.
Again, it takes energy to compress the air. The air provides energy to the car by expanding in the cylinders thus driving the crank shaft. Just like the expanding gas in a combustion engine. You can’t recapture enough energy to recompress the air since this would require (under perfect conditions) the same amount of energy it just released in driving the car.
So once more you need to burn fossil fuels to either directly run the air compressor or generate electricity to run the air compressor. And due to losses every time you convert one form of energy to another… it’s just more efficient to burn the fossil fuel directly in the car.
The absolute best most efficient vehicles we can get would be European style diesel engines.
The diesel combustion cycle is the most efficient and with clean diesel fuels and good particulate filters on the vehicles pollution is greatly reduced.
For example the Volkswagen Jetta TDI could go around 1000 – 1200 km on a 50 l tank of diesel. This is a fuel economy of between 50 and 60 mpg. The current EPA estimates for the Toyota Pious is 55 mpg (which Pious owners find is a pipe dream and actually achieve economies less than that). But VW pulled this model from North America because North American refiners are in the process of releasing a cleaner diesel fuel. Once this fuel is released (closer in composition to European diesel fuel) you’re going to see all the major car companies (American included) release high efficiency diesel versions of their lines that make the Toyota Pious extinct like the dinosaur.
Reid,
OK, I see your opinion, yet reading carefully through that opinion I seem to keep missing your expert links. = TG
Do you think Forbs is *tin hat?*
forbes.com/2007/06/21/tata-motors-issuance-
markets-equity-cx_rd_markets51.html?partner=autos_newsletter
=========================
http://tinyurl.com/3775lv
=========================
India*s Tata Motors has interests in cars that run on condensed air as well as battery.
Transportation for 3K; now that is more like it. = TG
Since most people who comment on this site do not believe in human caused global warming, nor (I imagine) peak oil, the entire concept of gas mileage must seem quite absurd, apart from the economic perspective that is (e.g. a cool car you want gets 10 mpg, and another cool car you want gets 15 mpg, so to save money you buy the 15 mpg car).
But for those that do believe in human caused global warming and peak oil, trying to mock the Europeans for failing to meet their goals is rather… asshattish of you.
I mean, what, there cars currently get about 3-4 times the mileage ours do? Hell, I was in London the other week and if a car wasn’t an Audi, VW, or BMW, it just wasn’t on the road. Nice, nice cars. I wish my Winnipeg streets were filled with those kind of cars.
Instead we got most people driving 2001 neons, or Cavaliers, getting shit mileage compared to the Euro’s in shittier cars with shittier speeds, performance, hell, you name it.
It’s a shame they never met their goals, but at least they tried. Look at us, we signed up to Kyoto and all we did was make some golf-balls with J.C. on them.
But like I said. The whole topic is entirely moot for 90% of posters here.
Oh and hat tip to David Hand… nice point.
The EUROWEENIE UNION is getting for rediclous their former leaders are spinning in the graves
European cars currently get about 3 to 4 times the mileage ours do? I think not, Ted. Oh, by the way, here are the top 8 automobiles ever: tinyurl.com/gze6l
Thanks Vit. The “what” above was meant to indicate that I was guessing. Your post made me check my facts. The EU is only about 2x as good as us.
Wow. You sure nailed me.
Oh, and your top 8, with the moon car and all. I missed the point. How does that relate to my earlier comment? Namely, that for those who believe in Human Caused global warming and peal oil, to criticize the EU for not meeting their goals is…. well, I was going for absurd. But then you posted a picture of a moon car. So,now I want to say patently stupid.
drd, go to popular mechanics and see if they archive the grest alternate fuel rally. they compare different vehicles and fuels for a trip from ny to cal. it had a good chart which i printed but did not save on disc .
great alternate fuel rally