Sign In Join 



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

538 messages,  Last post on Jul 31, 2008 at 6:28 AM

You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires

What is this discussion about? Future Vehicle


Messages Page 53 of 54
1
...
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion

#519 of 538
Burning hydrocarbons by wtd44
Jul 10, 2008 (8:21 am)
Reply
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 538
Re: didja' hear? (nippononly) [hpmctorque] by nippononly
Jul 10, 2008 (6:13 pm)
Reply

Replying to: hpmctorque (Jul 09, 2008 12:55 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 538
Re: [nippononly] by wtd44
Jul 11, 2008 (5:26 am)
Reply

Replying to: nippononly (Jul 10, 2008 6:13 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 538
Re: Burning hydrocarbons [wtd44] by kernick
Jul 14, 2008 (7:04 am)
Reply

Replying to: wtd44 (Jul 10, 2008 8:21 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 538
Re: Burning hydrocarbons [kernick] by dtownfb
Jul 16, 2008 (9:39 am)
Reply

Replying to: kernick (Jul 14, 2008 7:04 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.
#524 of 538
Re: Burning hydrocarbons [dtownfb] by nippononly
Jul 16, 2008 (11:42 am)
Reply

Replying to: dtownfb (Jul 16, 2008 9:39 am)

Except that the negative impact of allowing more drilling and more refineries is that then we say "See? That is what we are spending our money on for the time being, and that is what we are doing to solve the energy crisis" and then we do NOTHING. ELSE. AT ALL.
 
When the oil supply jolts of the 70s came along, we did nothing at all to plan for our energy future or protect ourselves from the whims of OPEC etc. Do you really want that to be our only reaction AGAIN this time?
 
It is time to diversify, not intensify our production of one fuel, ESPECIALLY not the one that has got us in so much trouble here.
#525 of 538
Re: Burning hydrocarbons [nippononly] by nortsr1
Jul 16, 2008 (12:06 pm)
Reply

Replying to: nippononly (Jul 16, 2008 11:42 am)

Well, what you say is true, howver; if we would have started drilling back in the 70's
(off shore, Artic, etc.) we sure as he-- wouldn't have to be as dependent on all those foreign countries that LOVE us, as much as we are dependent on them now. Let's at least start drilling...even though I read that it wouldn't change the course of are dependency on the LOVE countries for at least ten or more years. We will ALWAYS need oil...why not get and use our own!!!! Let's get the ball rolling. We already missed the boat a long time ago and still haven't learned our lesson!!!!!
#526 of 538
the news by nippononly
Jul 16, 2008 (12:14 pm)
Reply
keeps trumpeting the fact that oil companies already have unused leases on 60 million acres of land. I guess some are saying the oil companies should drill those lands before they are allowed to drill in other places. How come the oil companies aren't doing that already?
#527 of 538
Re: the news [nippononly] by lemmer
Jul 16, 2008 (1:12 pm)
Reply

Replying to: nippononly (Jul 16, 2008 12:14 pm)

I would guess that if the oil companies have oil that they aren't extracting, it is because at current prices they can buy it more cheaply elsewhere. We have plenty of oil; it is cheap oil we lack.
#528 of 538
Re: the news [lemmer] by steve_ HOST
Jul 16, 2008 (2:04 pm)
Reply

Replying to: lemmer (Jul 16, 2008 1:12 pm)

Plus there aren't enough rigs around and there haven't been for years. Now there's a shortage of drilling ships.
 
Tap existing land leases before drilling offshore (Island Packet)
 
Back in the 70's we started the Strategic Petroleum Reserve. That's just crude - there's not much gas or diesel or heating oil stored in the US.

Messages Page 53 of 54
1
...
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
Prev
Next
Last
Go To Msg #
Search This Discussion
To POST a message, please Sign In.

New? Join Now!

Forum Tools

Please sign in.
Email Address:

Password:

Forgot Password?

Search Forums

Enter Keyword(s)

Advanced Search

Browse by Vehicle



View All Vehicles
Advertisement
Ask the Community
See What People Are Asking

Browse by Board

Browse by Topic


View All Topics
Advertisement