Ask the Car People.SM


How The 35 mpg Law By 2020 Will Affect The Cars We Will Drive - READ ONLY

543 messages,  Last post on Feb 05, 2012 at 12:28 PM

You are in the Automotive News & Views-Archives Forum.

What is this discussion about? Future Vehicle

Messages Page 53 of 55

#514 of 543 Re: did you hear? [1stpik] by huntzinger

Jul 08, 2008 (10:08 am)

Replying to: 1stpik (Jul 02, 2008 4:22 am)
It is precisely because the US Automakers have turned to DC for bailouts (such as the E85 charade) and keeping competitors out of the US market (such as diesel pollution standars), instead of being themselves a key innovative leader that is better alligned with world realities (the handwriting has been on the wall for expensive oil for years) and what all of the consumer market segments want, for why they've been losing market share everywhere except in big honking SUVs.
 
And insofar as the fuel economy angst, Blu-Tek technology exists in diesels -- all GM has to do is licence it from Mercedes: technical risk: ZERO!
 
If they want to beg for regulatory relief, then let them relax the diesel pollution standards to harmonize them with EU ... GM can then licence the VW / Audi TDI, as well as the plain Mercedes CDI. Again, technical risk is zero.
 
-hh

#515 of 543 Re: did you hear? [huntzinger] by cooterbfd

Jul 08, 2008 (3:18 pm)

Replying to: huntzinger (Jul 08, 2008 10:08 am)
Why would GM have to "license" anything from anybody, when they have those products for sale in the EU already??? Tech risk: zero. Cost: ZERO

#516 of 543 Re: did you hear? [cooterbfd] by lemmer

Jul 09, 2008 (6:28 am)

Replying to: cooterbfd (Jul 08, 2008 3:18 pm)
Don't you know? According to GM, we don't want that European stuff here. They understand that Americans only want big pickups and Suburbans.

#517 of 543 didja' hear? by nippononly

Jul 09, 2008 (12:38 pm)

The Prez commited yesterday to a 50% reduction in GHG emissions by 2050. Needless to say, that's not nearly a big enough reduction, and other countries called him out on that score. But even if we just settle for the 50% figure, the automakers won't have any time to rest in 2020 - they will have to get cracking on improving fuel economy even further, just as quickly....

#518 of 543 didja' hear? (nippononly) by hpmctorque

Jul 09, 2008 (1:55 pm)

"Needless to say, that's not nearly a big enough reduction..."
 
How much is enough, and why?

#519 of 543 Burning hydrocarbons by wtd44

Jul 10, 2008 (9:21 am)

MPG being the question is a situation that won't last long, if we turn to the more important question of just what alternative (to gasoline) fuel shall we use to replace gasoline. We have a tremendous supply of natural gas in America. We could "quickly" begin this substitution process while we work on a future fuel of whatever sort for the long haul.

#520 of 543 Re: didja' hear? (nippononly) [hpmctorque] by nippononly

Jul 10, 2008 (7:13 pm)

Replying to: hpmctorque (Jul 09, 2008 1:55 pm)
Well 80% by 2050 is enough to negate the worst effects of global warming by the year 2100, according to the report by the IPCC. That is for all developed nations, but especially for what is by far the biggest energy consumer and polluter in the world, the United States.
 
If we switch to natural gas, we will still be consuming a non-renewable energy source that produces greenhouse gas emissions.
 
If we can manage to produce massive quantities of cellulosic ethanol, then I like E85's chances. But that's a long way off, if ever. We need to diversify our automotive energy sources as much as possible, as soon as possible.
 
Oh yeah, and my original remark was slightly tongue in cheek, as there were no specific obligations agreed to by the G8 leaders on Tuesday, and no-one expects them ever to have the courage or the foresight to actually oblige themselves in any specific way, so automakers don't really need to worry...

#521 of 543 Re: [nippononly] by wtd44

Jul 11, 2008 (6:26 am)

Replying to: nippononly (Jul 10, 2008 7:13 pm)
Let's get graphically fundamental: The natural gas for IC engines is aimed at fueling our transportation to get us to work each morning, after which we will do our jobs developing the future fuel. Eventually we start using the new future fuel and quit using the natural gas, which had itself already replaced gasoline in significant proportion. None of this will occur instantaneously. Yes, we will use gasoline and natural gas for a while. And on another vein, we should consider the conversion of our vast coal resources to other fuels. Key word: consider. We really must also consider that to get from A to Z, we may need to linger briefly at F, K, O, and V. Patience and pure science are mandatory. Double punt the emotionality! (he said, with some notable emotion...)

#522 of 543 Re: Burning hydrocarbons [wtd44] by kernick

Jul 14, 2008 (8:04 am)

Replying to: wtd44 (Jul 10, 2008 9:21 am)
We have a tremendous supply of natural gas in America.
 
You are right about the tremendous supply - but it is in the ground or under the oceans.
 
The problem is how do you deliver it economically? I live in NH and the vast majority of the state does not gas-lines. The areas that do have natural gas, usually run short on supply near the end of the winter. So there is no extra supply for more people to run there houses, never mind running their vehicles on them too.
 
LNG also comes into the area on tankers, and the LNG is stored in tanks. There are a lot of safety and terrorist concerns even at present levels of use.
 
We use many fuels right now to heat our homes, and power our cars ... You can't eliminate any unless you have a viable - economic and quick way to do so. It's just theory and dreaming to state otherwise.

#523 of 543 Re: Burning hydrocarbons [kernick] by dtownfb

Jul 16, 2008 (10:39 am)

Replying to: kernick (Jul 14, 2008 8:04 am)
We use many fuels right now to heat our homes, and power our cars ... You can't eliminate any unless you have a viable - economic and quick way to do so. It's just theory and dreaming to state otherwise.
 
Which is why any energy plan must include drilling oil and more refineries to address short term issues (next 20 years). The alternative solutions will take time to get integrated into our society.

Messages Page 53 of 55

Advertisement

Browse by Category

Browse by Vehicle
   View All Vehicles

Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
View All Topics

Edmunds Community

Advertisement