Global Warming The debbil made me do it

On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 11:45:58 GMT, Jay Maynard
wrote:

On 2008-03-14, Roger wrote:
If we all just practiced conservation there would be no need for new
power plants and we could eliminate the need for importing crude to
use in auto fuel. That part is simple math. Raising the fleet
average to 30 MPG would be far more than sufficient to make us
independent of foreign oil for fuel.

That's not conservation, that's deprivation.

Not true.

Raising the fleet average to 30 MPG would require replacing a large portion
of the fleet with European-style econoboxes. Simple physics will tell you

Most mid size cars could be quite capable of getting 30 plus with fuel
efficient engines. There is no need to remove the large trucks. We
are talking "fleet average," not the mileage of every truck.

You use common sense. Those that can do so, could use the hybrids.
Those that really need the larger vans and SUVs could still use them
and the trucks could still remain. IOW we use what we need , not what
we think we'd like. Sure, I'd like a Hummer (I'm referring to the
4-wheel kind), or a new SUV for hauling all the stuff around I usually
have with me, but for the vast majority of trips I don't need anything
larger than my wife's Hybrid. Nor does every family with kids in
sports need a super long van. It's time these people learn about car
pooling.

that that's going to dramatically lower fleet safety, especially in light of

Why. They have found that the small car against the large may not
fare well, but the large SUVs against another large SUV fares even
worse. Today's cars, even the small ones are far safer than those of
say 30 or 40 years ago when I was driving a 5600# Pontiac Bonneville
convertible. Back then cars were BIG.

A few years back I took a full size GMC SUV broadside at cruise speed.
Yes it totaled my Transam. BUT other than being punchier than two
6-packs on an empty stomach I didn't even get bruised. The driver of
the SUV ended up in the hospital. With education and attitude there
is no need for the hybrids to be unsafe.

the massive numbers of large commercial trucks that would still be needed to

You don't have to get rid of the commercial trucks. The fleet average
can nicely be taken care of by the cars.

transport goods. (Getting rid of those would *really* wreck the economy in
short order.) There's also the minor matter of the mission profiles of many
folks, who a European econobox simply won't fit.

You don't need to go to the little econoboxes.


With 120 million family homes switching the incandescent lights to CFLs
would eliminate the need for roughly some where between 4 and 6 electric
generation plants. That would free up part of the electric grid so it
could be used to power electric cars which at current rates for most of
the country (excluding California) make the cost of operating one a
fraction of a gas powered car.

It would also generate a booming market in hazmat remediation, as common

Pure BS.
There is so little mercury in a CFL you sweep 'em up, put in a plastic
bag and properly dispose. Air out the room if paranoid.

household accidents that would result in lamp breakage turn into major
environmental disasters...not to mention simply disposing of them when they
finally do burn out.

As for the electric car, let me once again use those two magic words:
"mission profile". I'll consider one when I can get one that will go 400

No one said use the electric car for long trips hauling heavy loads.
The average trip made by cars is short and typically round trip to
work, or in to see the kids play what ever sport. Car pooling could
take care of a lot this.

OTOH we have both a Hybrid that I mentioned gets 46-47 MPG
average.(winter/summer) and an SUV that gets 18 MPG. Normally the
Hybrid gets used and it'll haul 4 adults comfortably unless you try to
put two really tall ones in the back seat. 2, 6 footers with normal
leg length would fit comfortably. At any rate, we still have the SUV
but our mileage happens to be well above 30 MPG for any given period.

However for those that need the extra room and load capacity they
could still have it. I reiterate, FLEET AVERAGE does not mean every
car and tuck has to get that mileage. It's expected that all of them
averaged together would get that. Big difference.

miles on a charge, while hauling four people and a substantial amount of
stuff, and recharge in 10 minutes so I can go 400 more. My current vehicle
will do that quite easily, and I bought it because I need that capability.

This is the typical "all or nothing" argument against better mileage
or conservation. When it comes to the cars on the road, most of us
don't need a big pickup truck, monster SUV or 5,000# luxury car.
Getting rid of all but the ones needed would not ruin the economy.
Yes,I have an SUV but I only drive it when needed. Going to smaller
cars for the ones who can would not have any great impact on safety
and changing to CFLs to be followed by LEDs would not create a great
boom in hazmat teams. Of course the LEDs are far preferable over
CFLs, but they are currently very expensive. Give 'em a couple years
and they just might be on par with today's CFL, but far more efficient
and almost indefinite life with very little heat given off and no
starter required.

The greatest impact on safety would be getting the public to quit
accepting a yearly highway death toll of between 40 and 50,000 as
acceptable. Maybe the biggest at present would be to build a jamming
device to prevent cell phones being used while the car is in motion
and education. Although when it comes to education it's more one of
changing attitudes. We have big problems with people making up their
own rules of the road. Speaking of which, do they still teach those
in driver's ed?.

Today there seems to be an element in society that fights any change
to improve things. They argue endlessly against global warming and
mankind's contribution, yet mainstream science has all but accepted it
even in face of our government's efforts to deny its existence.

When it comes to conservation there are endless excuses as to why we
can't or shouldn't do it, but we can save money and safely have a
cleaner more healthy environment. The catch is we have to be willing
to take responsibility and work to achieve these ends.

Nothing comes without some kind of cost including "business as usual"
which probably has the highest long term cost of any option.
Roger Halstead (K8RI & ARRL life member)
(N833R, S# CD-2 Worlds oldest Debonair)
www.rogerhalstead.com