WATCH TALK FORUMS banner
1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
100 Posts
Holy cow!

35 mpg by 2020. I hope we have the ingenuity to get there. We wouldn't want to fall short and disappoint out fellow Americans.

What? Has it been 100 years since the invention of the internal combustion engine?

Seriously? Can we make our standards any less minimal than they are? How did we ever get to the moon?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,800 Posts
Holy cow!

35 mpg by 2020. I hope we have the ingenuity to get there. We wouldn't want to fall short and disappoint out fellow Americans.

What? Has it been 100 years since the invention of the internal combustion engine?

Seriously? Can we make our standards any less minimal than they are? How did we ever get to the moon?

I kept an Audi 200 Turbo from 91 that has made the rounds in the family from my wife and I to the kids and other family and now is back. 5 cyinder and a turbo.. 35mpg on the highway, 28 in the city. Big and comfy. Almost the same size as my Audi S8 which gets 16 at best.


We can do it but there are no incentives to do it. Hybrids are not the answer and neither is ethanol. Make the engines more efficient.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,800 Posts
Koi: Why do you feel hybrids are not the answer?


You should have watched Boston Legal last evening. The batteries used are formed from a nickel mine in Canada, which is also the most polluted site in the world. Fom there the lead is shipped to China for processing, eastern europe for some other refinement and back to the US. Add to that the total cost for the hybrid over it's lifetime and it is not that green. A lot of people will drive more because they get better milage, that by itself can offset the better milage benefit.

I parsed part of an article below. The link is below it.


What might be a “green” decision for some that drive many, many miles might not necessarily be a “green” decision by others who drive little enough that the creation of the hybrid components and the ethanol would do more harm than good in the long run.

CNW Marketing Research, Inc., of Bandon, Ore., a firm with a well-established reputation for industry forecasting, made claims last year that that hybrid vehicles used more energy in their lifetime, from creation to disposal, than many SUVs. The tagline of one of CNW's releases was, "Hybrids Consumer More Energy in Lifetime Than Chevrolet's Tahoe SUV."



With the full study released in December, called "Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles from Concept to Disposal," CNW claims to assess all stages of vehicle production, including research and development, raw material production and sourcing, production and assembly, sales, operation and maintenance, and disposal of the vehicle at the end of its life.



http://www.thecarconnection.com/Aut...MMER_Exploding_the_Myth.S196.A12220.html?pg=2
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top