Stupid Al Gore

[Eleanor]

The next-generation Corvette — scheduled to bow in 2012 — could be lighter and less powerful than the current model, thanks to stricter CAFE regulations. The current Corvette lineup includes the 430 horsepower base car and the 505 horsepower Z06. Chevrolet also took the wraps off of its 620 horsepower 2009 Corvette ZR1 at the Detroit Auto Show last week.

The new CAFE regulations have Chevrolet engineers thinking more about an environmentally friendly Corvette than a 700 horsepower one. "What's going to be more important is fuel economy, carbon footprint and green," Tom Wallace, vehicle line executive for the Corvette, told Automotive News. "We have already paid a lot of attention to those areas. Where we can pay more attention is pounds per horsepower."

Wallace added: "I don't think we're going to design a 700 horsepower Corvette."

Instead, Wallace says the next Corvette will have a heavy emphasis on pounds per horsepower. Although no figures are set, Wallace said that if the C7 Corvette were to shed 300 or 400 pounds, it could use a 4.7L V8 with 150 less horsepower than found in the 2008 models and still maintain the same performance. Lighter weight would also translate into better handling.

http://www.leftlanenews.com/corvette-to-downsize-due-to-new-cafe-regulations.html


In the face of newly passed CAFE regulations, it looks as though Chrysler will once again have to cease production of its legendary Hemi engine. Chrysler hopes to sway the definition of what performance and power means to those who didn't grow up with the Hemi engine by offering smaller, more fuel efficient powerplants with similar performance.

"The Hemi is not the powertrain of the future," Jim Press, Chrysler co-president, told Automotive News. "It's the powertrain of today."

One powertrain of the future could lie underneath the hood of the recently unveiled Dodge Zeo — a 268 horsepower electric motor capable of propelling the concept from 0-60 in less than 6 seconds. Dodge says the lithium-ions battery pack that powers the car can go 250 miles between charges.

Although the Dodge Zeo offers Hemi-like performance without the fuel consumption or emissions, its technology still puts it several years out. However, Chrysler's new line of fuel efficient Phoenix V6 engines will arrive in about a year. The new Phoenix range of engines will feature double-overhead-cams, an aluminum block, variable valve timing and cylinder deactivation. The new V6s should offer greater performance while reducing emissions and fuel consumption.

But Chrysler hasn't completely given up on the Hemi yet. The latest iteration will bow in the all-new 2009 Dodge Ram, which will feature the same displacement — 5.7L — but will see a 10% increase in horsepower — up to 380 — while reducing overall fuel consumption by 4%. The improvement were achieved through variable valve timing and cylinder deactivation.

Chrysler didn't shed any more light on the Hemi's future, but with the new CAFE standards taking effect in 2011, the Hemi's revival could be short lived.

http://www.leftlanenews.com/chrysler-says-hemi-is-not-the-powertrain-of-the-future.html

[SpoonEK9@STRD]

Nice to see its getting stuff done. +1 for CAFE regulations. -1 for Eleanor, gores my boy.

[b_t]

This is good to hear, green is good. Every time I drive into Calgary at night and see that big ugly brown and yellow band across the city, I want more hybrid cars on the road.

[gpomp]

if my car was more fuel efficient, i would drive more...

[Mr_ET]

perhaps this will push the americans into producing less horribly inefficient engines.

7.0L to get 505hp is not that great...

[Hash_man]

This is a good thing... and by the sounds of it, will possibly make the corvette even better by making it lighter weight and use less fuel, yet still same performance... how is that bad in any way?

Good to see something finally impact auto manufacturers big time, and make them move away from inefficient gas guzzling motors and such.

[Destinova403]

its good to see the american "big 3" finally putting some emphasis on fuel efficiency. they finally got the clue after 10 years of crap. especially chrysler.
I have a hunch that the old systems (hemi etc) will still be available for some time to come.

as for Al Gore, South Park pretty much mimics my oppinion of him in the "imagination land" episodes.

[Xtrema]

Well it had to be done. I think we'll see more turbo charged and/or diesel vehicles from here on in.

Corvette in itself is very fuel efficient for what it is. But they have to leave room in CAFE for the bread and butter guzzler trucks. So these low volume car end up suffering.

[blownz]

Lots of people seem in favour of the new cafe regulations but I think lots of people are forgetting how much these new lightweight vehicles are going to cost. Performance vehicles may get more light weight and efficient but the cost to play might eliminate a ton of enthusiasts.

And it isn't just the American companies this is going to effect. The Japanese companies are going to have trouble with this too.




Originally posted by gpomp
if my car was more fuel efficient, i would drive more...

And this is the funny part about the government using regulation to force the auto companies to build more fuel efficient vehicles to 'reduce America's dependance on foreign oil'. Many people will just drive more or buy the larger or more powerful vehicle since it now gets the same mileage as their old smaller less powerful car and in the end use the same amount of fuel anyway so there will be little to no benefit.

The only real way to reduce their dependency would be to double the price of gas imo. (not that I would be in favour of that)

[Eleanor]

Originally posted by Mr_ET
7.0L to get 505hp is not that great...

yeah a 7 liter v8 with 505hp and 475 lb-ft of tq that still gets 26 mpg on the highway. Plus you get way more torque out of it.

and lets bash the 8.4 liter viper v-10 that meets LEV 2 standards.

but wait an s2000 with its 2.0L 240hp f20c only gets 24 mpg highway and only meets LEV standards? But wait V-TAK yo!

[riceeater]

Originally posted by Destinova403
its good to see the american "big 3" finally putting some emphasis on fuel efficiency. they finally got the clue after 10 years of crap. especially chrysler.
I have a hunch that the old systems (hemi etc) will still be available for some time to come.

as for Al Gore, South Park pretty much mimics my oppinion of him in the "imagination land" episodes.

chrysler isnt that horrible, they can be quite fuel efficient if you drive them right...

In my 2005 neon, i get about 9-10L/100km consumption...

In my 2004 srt4 with almost 400 horse, if i turn the boost down and drive like a normal person, i get 10L/100km... that's not bad is it, considering hte power :dunno: what does a civic get, 7-8L/100km?

[riceeater]

Originally posted by b_t
This is good to hear, green is good. Every time I drive into Calgary at night and see that big ugly brown and yellow band across the city, I want more hybrid cars on the road.

what are you talking about ????? :banghead: :banghead: smog in calgary?? Have you traveled anywhere else urban in the world?

The brown is the setting sun for fuck's sake :banghead: :angel:

[rmk]

Originally posted by riceeater
The brown is the setting sun for fuck's sake :banghead: :angel:

wrong.

[Seanith]

Good.

[b_t]

Originally posted by riceeater


what are you talking about ????? :banghead: :banghead: smog in calgary?? Have you traveled anywhere else urban in the world?

The brown is the setting sun for fuck's sake :banghead: :angel:

You fucking moron, the CF fumes must be getting to your head. I like your name - riceeater - but you are the biggest producer of nice CF patterned rice in the whole fucking city.

How long have you lived in Calgary? Just in the four years I've been making my drive to SAIT, I have noticed that there is now this hideous brown stain of smog over the city in the past while that was never there four years ago. Its a city of over one million people with an insane amount of cars per capita, a shitty public transportation system, and industrial work going on within the city limits. How in the fuck could it NOT have smog?

Sure the setting sun might highlight it (you know I am driving east though, away from the setting sun?), but it is still there, and you can see it on any day that is warmer than normal when the weather pushes it down to ground level. Sure it is not as bad as say, LA, but it is still atrocious and is still way way worse than it was when I was growing up here.

Every time I see it I wish I had a hybrid or a diesel that gets 60mpg.

[vietdood]

the city does have smog. most of the time it's not noticeable because of the winds from the the mountains in the west push our pollution over to the east to saskatchewan.

[gpomp]

calgary has smog? since when?

[benyl]

Originally posted by blownz

The only real way to reduce their dependency would be to double the price of gas imo. (not that I would be in favour of that)

This is the only way. You have change the consumption habits of the consumer, not the production habits of the producers.

Car manufacturers will build what people buy. Why do you think 50% of vehicles sold are light duty trucks. It isn't because GM, Ford and Chrysler decided to produce more of them and offer them for cheap, cheap prices. No, it is because consumers demanded them and thus they are a cash cow for the Big 3.

They are such a big cash cow that even the Japanese are playing ball (new full size Tundra).

Double or Triple the price of gas, like what happened in the late 70s and early 80s and I can guarantee that the new CAFE regulations will be met.

[benyl]

Originally posted by gpomp
calgary has smog? since when?

Wait for an inverted day in the summer and you will see the Brown air. It has been over Calgary for a good ten years.

[treg50]

Cool Al Gore.

Lighter cars, less heavy, more fuel efficient, better handling, longer brake life, longer tire life, with the same HP? I can live with that, it's a Gran Turismo-style upgrade that would be welcomed for any car and car buyer Plus less emphysema and other respiratory ailments.

[tirebob]

The only real way to reduce their dependency would be to double the price of gas imo. (not that I would be in favour of that) [/B]

I don't know about that... I would like to agree, but I have seen the price of gas more than double in the last 10 years and while evryone was freaking out and complaining, I don't see any less driving. We are addicted to our cars and we always find a way to pay the bill... Now if gas was $10.00 a liter maybe shit would change, but $2.00 vs $1.00? Naw... It would just drive inflation and we would keep driving...

I think it would help more to have big rebates (and I mean big... something truely substantial) and tax right offs for fuel efficient vehicles and have large penalities for gas guzzlers (and I mean LARGE). It could be at time of purchase and a yearly charge during the licensing fee payment etc. Of course there could be exemptions and reduced "extra taxes" for certain industries etc such as transport companies, farmers, etc, but when you see the guy driving his huge International CXT to starbucks for a coffee, I don't have a ton of sympathy...

[Eleanor]

Originally posted by b_t
Every time I see it I wish I had a hybrid or a diesel that gets 60mpg.

And yet you don't, so don't bitch about it if you aren't going to be proactive in reducing the problem.

BTW, yay diesel gets 60mpg, but have you seen emissions from diesels? there's so much particulate in them. they're way worse then gas engines. You're complaining about smog and you want a diesel? give me a fucking break.

and yeah no i want a hybrid, everyone should drive a hybrid so we can have lithium batteries piling up in landfills and leeching into our ground waterin a few years! have you looked into the manufacturing processes for lithium batteries? it's horrible for the environment but no one here gives a shit about it cause they don't see the effects cause they're all made overseas.

sorry, diesels and hybrids are not the fuels of the future car. i also don't believe that gm and chrysler should be cutting these engines, people will still want them. people don't buy a corvette cause they're concerned about the environment or emissions. If you're concerned about the environment, don't drive!

/rant

[b_t]

I don't drive a hybrid or a diesel because there is no vehicle that meets my needs and has a hybrid or diesel powerplant. Fuck off. Not driving is not a reasonable option in this province. I'd like to quit driving, but I'm not willing to bring my life and career to a stop to do it. I can ride a bike to work, easily, but not 12 months a year, and I definitely can't ride a bike all the way to SAIT from Cochrane for classes.

What do you propose then? You bitch about more economic vehicles in the first post, then you bitch about the more economic options that do exist. Then you suggest that people just drive the cars that do kill the environment, suggesting that you think cars should just stay the same as they are now, even though the proposed changes will not harm the performance of the car - it will just have less horsepower on paper.

Fuck! What is your train of thought here? Are you just an idiot, or do you have a point to make? Will you complain when performance cars run on ethanol, economy cars and trucks run on biodiesel, and Smart cars run on electric power?

[ricoRA]

There's, a problem there. How can we justify being e-friendly when we live in one town and work in another, will driving a diesel help or just cut down on the cost of fuel, why not consider moving close enough to be able to bike/walk/Transit in?

I quit a job a few years back because it was on the wrong side of town. (although 3/4 of us carpooled to work) I'd do the same if my current company decided to move the shop.
Not because of the cost in gas consumption but also the cost of time consumption.

I think some of the things we could be doing right now is trying not to drive across town on a daily basis and do more car pooling. I'm love cars too but I would not drive a 400 hp machine daily, unless it did get awesome mileage.

[arian_ma]

Originally posted by b_t
I don't drive a hybrid or a diesel because there is no vehicle that meets my needs and has a hybrid or diesel powerplant.

I'm going to assume what "meets your needs" is a truck since you drive an 07 Tacoma. You're going to tell me no trucks come with diesel?

[GTS Jeff]

You guys make it sound like Al Gore was the one who polluted the air...

[Xtrema]

Originally posted by blownz
The only real way to reduce their dependency would be to double the price of gas imo. (not that I would be in favour of that)

That won't do anything but cost inflation to go out of control.

CAFE standard is good. We would never have VTEC if it were for the Japanese over 2L displacemnt tax (or something in the effect).

The new CAFE standard is less severe than European or Japanese's standard and I'm sure this will bring even more exciting technologies.

[banned3x]

this is why the gnx was invented:drool:
yes i have a hemi and it really does suck on gas im putting at least $20 a day driving to work and small errands, im looking for 6.1liter so i can get to work faster and waste less gas so its a win/win for everyone

[Eleanor]

Originally posted by b_t
I don't drive a hybrid or a diesel because there is no vehicle that meets my needs and has a hybrid or diesel powerplant. Fuck off. Not driving is not a reasonable option in this province. I'd like to quit driving, but I'm not willing to bring my life and career to a stop to do it. I can ride a bike to work, easily, but not 12 months a year, and I definitely can't ride a bike all the way to SAIT from Cochrane for classes.

What do you propose then? You bitch about more economic vehicles in the first post, then you bitch about the more economic options that do exist. Then you suggest that people just drive the cars that do kill the environment, suggesting that you think cars should just stay the same as they are now, even though the proposed changes will not harm the performance of the car - it will just have less horsepower on paper.

Fuck! What is your train of thought here? Are you just an idiot, or do you have a point to make? Will you complain when performance cars run on ethanol, economy cars and trucks run on biodiesel, and Smart cars run on electric power?

What I'm trying to say is that due to this stupid CAFE regulations, all the U.S. Government is doing is actually being more harmful to the environment, if they wanted to actually do something to help the environment, they'd make emissions regulations, not fuel economy. fuel economy standards are not going to reduce emissions.

Example: Dodge can't make Hemis anymore, so they put a V6 into their 1/4 ton. But people buy the truck to tow stuff, now with a v6 the truck's engine has to work a lot harder, thus not allowing the engine to be at it's most efficient rpm. Look at the honda ridgeline as an example. Really good mileage for a truck, now try weighing it down with payload or a trailer. You have to rev the piss out of it to get it going and to keep it going, watch your fuel gauge dive.

now i know you're going to say, what about a diesel 1/4 ton? as i already mentioned, diesels are fucking dirty, lots of particulate. I know they're not as bad as they used to be, but they're still dirty. The other problem with diesels are they're heavy too, hurting their fuel economy.

as for my earlier comment, you were complaining about the smog over calgary and yet you drive a truck in from cochrane every day? if you're driving a truck everywhere, don't complain about smog. just like people who own suv's or performance cars and bitch about gas prices, wtf are you thinking?

and yes i will complain when cars run on ethanol, biodiesel and electricity. electricity requires batteries which i already mentioned are really harmful to the environment, ethanol and biodiesel are grain based, driving grain prices through the roof and starving in particular third world countries. Plus they both still put out CO2 and H2O which are the two biggest contributors to global warming.

I am concerned about the environment, but there are other better things we can do then make sure that the CAFE standard is 30mpg or w/e. Hybrids and diesels are not the answer.

[b_t]

Logic dictates that cars that get better mileage not only burn less fuel, reducing total emissions, but also reduces fuel needs, and in turn processing needs, and then extraction needs, and then that in turn reduces the pollution generated by all the associated work... of course it will never actually reduce the total pollution output created by the refining process, but it will slow its increase.

I don't see how making cars more fuel efficient harms the environment more...

So Dodge will put a V6 in the quarter ton. People, in fact, do not constantly tow trailers. That argument has no bearing on the fact the truck will have better average mileage over the course of its lifetime. Turbocharger technology has come a long way and would benefit from the increased effective octane rating of ethanol gas, so that could even make up any power deficit while still getting better mileage on the average. People who do tow constantly will buy the bigger super duty trucks and (should) pay a heavy tax to the tune of 10% of the truck's purchase price or more that (should) be used to develop alternative fuel resources further...

My truck is basically the most economic pickup you can buy fuckhead. I need to haul a hell of a lot more than a hatchback can carry, so I got the Tacoma that will it in one trip and average better mileage than a V6 car from the 90s. And since I can fit it all in one trip, I burn less gas on the whole... Its not like I got a Dodge 3500 to carry around a whole band's gigging gear. I drive to school - because I fucking need to. If they come out with a turbodiesel Tacoma, guess who is going to be first in line? My next truck, when my lease expires, is going to be the new hybrid GMC 1500, but since that option didn't even fucking exist when I bought it, I took the absolute best option available at the time. There were other factors too, I know you'll say I am not hauling stuff all the time, but I need the ground clearance to get to some work sites, need the utility when at some work sites, etc.

New batteries have an relatively long life time and aren't as toxic as old batteries have been. Ethanol will not affect the world food supply, especially in areas that do not depend on grain for most of their food - like most third world countries - and in fact could help boost their industry and reduce increases in pollution as they turn to agriculture instead of heavy industry to take advantage of any potential market for ethanol fuel. Biodiesel recycles the output of fast food chains and once again, won't have much of an impact on the world food market.

What are other better things we can do, other than attempting to reduce the increase in fuel consumption? Hit me with some good ideas there. So far, you haven't scored a point.

[DonJuan]

Originally posted by Eleanor

What I'm trying to say is that due to this stupid CAFE regulations, all the U.S. Government is doing is actually being more harmful to the environment, if they wanted to actually do something to help the environment, they'd make emissions regulations, not fuel economy. fuel economy standards are not going to reduce emissions.

Example: Dodge can't make Hemis anymore, so they put a V6 into their 1/4 ton. But people buy the truck to tow stuff, now with a v6 the truck's engine has to work a lot harder, thus not allowing the engine to be at it's most efficient rpm. Look at the honda ridgeline as an example. Really good mileage for a truck, now try weighing it down with payload or a trailer. You have to rev the piss out of it to get it going and to keep it going, watch your fuel gauge dive.

now i know you're going to say, what about a diesel 1/4 ton? as i already mentioned, diesels are fucking dirty, lots of particulate. I know they're not as bad as they used to be, but they're still dirty. The other problem with diesels are they're heavy too, hurting their fuel economy.

as for my earlier comment, you were complaining about the smog over calgary and yet you drive a truck in from cochrane every day? if you're driving a truck everywhere, don't complain about smog. just like people who own suv's or performance cars and bitch about gas prices, wtf are you thinking?

and yes i will complain when cars run on ethanol, biodiesel and electricity. electricity requires batteries which i already mentioned are really harmful to the environment, ethanol and biodiesel are grain based, driving grain prices through the roof and starving in particular third world countries. Plus they both still put out CO2 and H2O which are the two biggest contributors to global warming.

I am concerned about the environment, but there are other better things we can do then make sure that the CAFE standard is 30mpg or w/e. Hybrids and diesels are not the answer.

preaching to the choir my man.

Until the automotive industry decide to mass produce hydrogen fuel cell technology, I'm gonna continue filling up 80L of premium and getting 400km.

Hybrids are not the answer, growing biofuel isn't either. How can someone argue that an amount of corn that would feed a person for a month is put to better use as a tank of biofuel in an SUV. Talk about a waste of freakin time!

If your truly worried about the environment don't go out and buy a hybrid to increase your MPG; instead reduce your environmental footprint, use less, spend less (it's hippie talk but it does have a point). I'm not gonna rant on about how the parts of a hybrid car have crossed the globe 2 times in total. If you actually want to save the environment by buying a hybrid, you have to drive that hybrid for 40 years before the inital cost to the environment of the making and delivery of the hybrid make it more of a globe killer than an Escalade used over the normal 15-20 year life. Before that Prius has even left the factory it has caused more global environmental pollution than an SUV that was made in Detroit with local materials, and sold in North America will make over it's entire life time.

Gawd, I said I wouldn't rant on... :rolleyes:

Great, now someone is gonna start typing in CAPS and demanding references, I'm done.:guns:

[riceeater]

Originally posted by b_t


You fucking moron, the CF fumes must be getting to your head. I like your name - riceeater - but you are the biggest producer of nice CF patterned rice in the whole fucking city.

coming from the guy that told me that mixing gasoline with toluene will blow me up because mixing gas is an exothermic reaction and the heat caused is enough to make an explosion, i can only laugh :rofl: :rofl: you were just as mouthy back then, you're still just as mouthy now... you'd think 2-3 years would have made an effect on you...

i think every city has a little bit of polution, it's to be expected, but calgary has no heavy industry. Most of our gas just comes from cars, and having been in a lot of other cities all over the world that were stinky as hell, i like calgary just fine... imo we have a LONG way to go before it becomes a noticeable problem... if we have smog, what does toronto have? or a polluted city in eastern europe?

and that's just my 2 cents... you dont need to get your panties in a knot over it

[riceeater]

have you guys seen that new DIESOTTO engine from mercedes? It's a gasoline engine that runs like a diesel, and has diesel like performance... could be interesting a few years from now



http://jalopnik.com/cars/teutonic-efficiency/mercedes-reveals-diesotto-engine-it-runs-on-gas-282231.php

[b_t]

Originally posted by DonJuan


preaching to the choir my man.

Until the automotive industry decide to mass produce hydrogen fuel cell technology, I'm gonna continue filling up 80L of premium and getting 400km.

Hybrids are not the answer, growing biofuel isn't either. How can someone argue that an amount of corn that would feed a person for a month is put to better use as a tank of biofuel in an SUV. Talk about a waste of freakin time!

If your truly worried about the environment don't go out and buy a hybrid to increase your MPG; instead reduce your environmental footprint, use less, spend less (it's hippie talk but it does have a point). I'm not gonna rant on about how the parts of a hybrid car have crossed the globe 2 times in total. If you actually want to save the environment by buying a hybrid, you have to drive that hybrid for 40 years before the inital cost to the environment of the making and delivery of the hybrid make it more of a globe killer than an Escalade used over the normal 15-20 year life. Before that Prius has even left the factory it has caused more global environmental pollution than an SUV that was made in Detroit with local materials, and sold in North America will make over it's entire life time.

Gawd, I said I wouldn't rant on... :rolleyes:

Great, now someone is gonna start typing in CAPS and demanding references, I'm done.:guns:

I like the hypocrisy here... you tell me to change my lifestyle to reduce my footprint, but then say you are going to continue driving your pig of a car because the options that do exist to drastically reduce your footprint are, for some reason, not good enough for you.

Hydrogren fuel cells? This technology is not perfect either and still requires gasses to be burnt to produce them. It seems to me you are rejecting all these other options because they are not perfect, but hydrogren is not perfect either.

I'm not typing in caps but I am going to ask for some references. If you aren't going to back up your fucking argument, don't bother posting in the first place.

[b_t]

Originally posted by riceeater


coming from the guy that told me that mixing gasoline with toluene will blow me up because mixing gas is an exothermic reaction and the heat caused is enough to make an explosion, i can only laugh :rofl: :rofl: you were just as mouthy back then, you're still just as mouthy now... you'd think 2-3 years would have made an effect on you...

i think every city has a little bit of polution, it's to be expected, but calgary has no heavy industry. Most of our gas just comes from cars, and having been in a lot of other cities all over the world that were stinky as hell, i like calgary just fine... imo we have a LONG way to go before it becomes a noticeable problem... if we have smog, what does toronto have? or a polluted city in eastern europe?

and that's just my 2 cents... you dont need to get your panties in a knot over it

It is a noticeable fucking problem. There is now smog clearly visible where there was none 5-10 years before. There is a huge fucking brown cloud above this city on a pretty regular basis. This is a symptom of the fucking problem. The problem is the city is too big, too spread out, has a shitty public transportation system that no one uses, too many people drive, not enough people carpool, we have too many cars per family, too many trucks on the whole....

You are right though, we should just wait until the air actually does smell bad and becomes a health concern before do anything about it though. That's the best way to do things. Your 2 cents is about as worthless as your CF laminations.

As far as the toulene thing, yeah that was great, but it also wasn't 2-3 years ago and you were about as persuasive then as you are now.. if the engineer never posted, you never would have been vindicated.

[riceeater]

Originally posted by b_t


It is a noticeable fucking problem. There is now smog clearly visible where there was none 5-10 years before. There is a huge fucking brown cloud above this city on a pretty regular basis. This is a symptom of the fucking problem. The problem is the city is too big, too spread out, has a shitty public transportation system that no one uses, too many people drive, not enough people carpool, we have too many cars per family, too many trucks on the whole....

hmmm... shitty deal for you then, i guess working from home in the suburbs I get to miss out on all the best the city has to offer :rofl: Haven't ran into any pollution yet, walking down the stairs :rofl:


Originally posted by b_t

Your 2 cents is about as worthless as your CF laminations.

hahahahhaahaah, you broke my heart with that one


Originally posted by b_t
As far as the toulene thing, yeah that was great, but it also wasn't 2-3 years ago and you were about as persuasive then as you are now.. if the engineer never posted, you never would have been vindicated.


ahahahhahahahahahahhahahah... hahahahahahahahahhahahahahaha.... so by your logic, i was only vindicated when someone educated came on and mouth fed you the info in baby steps so even you'd understand and realize you're an idiot, and that's good? So stupidity and ignorance according to you should always win out just because you shout louder and cuss out more, and people who know what they're talking about are all idiots, unless an expert happens to wonder by?? hahahahahahaha mixing gas releases large amounts of heat hahahahahhahahaha... it still kills me hahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahaha

Dont ever leave this forum dude, we all need a good laugh, and you're hard to beat.

[b_t]

Nice stuff man, I love that shit. You ducked out of that one pretty neatly, I guess actually thinking about stuff is not your forte. I'll spoon feed you this next bit. I'm not making anything up here, but just step back and read these and see if this makes any sense.

P - Their is pollution visible over Calgary frequently in the day
P - I do not have to leave my house for work
C - Pollution in Calgary is not an issue until I can smell it in my house.

That might be too late.

Next one...
P - Calgary has a pollution problem
P - I live in Calgary but don't leave my house for work
C - Pollution is not my problem

Okayyy...

So the big difference between you and me is I admit I was wrong in that thread, but now you are just typing "haha" a lot. The bad part of that is its going to draw a lot of attention to your post and how totally lacking in everything it is. You certainly are speaking for your character on this one :thumbsup:
You don't seem to understand mine though so I'll spell it out. I don't trust anyone who does not back up what they are saying. I don't care how old the guy looks, how long he claims to have been doing something for, or how he says it. If he doesn't give me a good explanation for something, it is worthless to me. "Because" is never an explanation. You didn't back up anything you said in the thread, so I ignored everything you said. Then when a guy who knew his shit explained it, bam, the very next post was me admitting I was wrong.
You don't seem like the kind of guy who is competent enough to run a successful business. Good luck anyway.

[riceeater]

you just automatically assume i dont care about the environment... we planted 80 pines at my mom's bf's acreage last year, and 9 in our yard... not asking for any cookies, just saying i do care... i just dont think it's as bad as other places, not by a long long shot, and i dont see how you can disagree on that...

i think expanding the c-train transit lines will help cut down on polution from cars the most, since that's our biggest real problem here... that, and more interchanges so traffic flows smoothly into downtown to cut down on idling...

imo, instead of bullshit carbon credits and other scams, we should all just be planting trees... that whole 15 bux per ton of CO2 they've imposed, that should all go into planting trees...

[AG_Styles]

expanding a public system will not cut down on pollution as service will still suck. as long as the service is horrendous, people will still and always drive their SUV's and cars whereever and whenever they want.

as long as the city insists their transportation system is world class, this will be the case.

[hjr]

running registrations like they do in the UK could help with changing demand. Instead of a flat fee for everyone at around 70 buck (iirc) we could classify all vehicles by how much they pollute. The yearly registration then relates to how your vehicle runs. this of course benefits new vehicles far above old ones, and would probably require 'smog' testing, but neither of which is that big a deal.

so if you run a truck with a v10, reg = 250
you run a nissan altima, reg = 100
you run a toyota yaris, reg = 50


long run? people actually see the costs of their choices, and can choose to pay it, or not. long run though, more efficient vehicle will be on the road

[DonJuan]

Originally posted by b_t

I like the hypocrisy here... you tell me to change my lifestyle to reduce my footprint, but then say you are going to continue driving your pig of a car because the options that do exist to drastically reduce your footprint are, for some reason, not good enough for you.

Hydrogren fuel cells? This technology is not perfect either and still requires gasses to be burnt to produce them. It seems to me you are rejecting all these other options because they are not perfect, but hydrogren is not perfect either.

I'm not typing in caps but I am going to ask for some references. If you aren't going to back up your fucking argument, don't bother posting in the first place.

LOL, OK, I'm gonna dump my used car in a scrap yard, have it take up room in a landfill, and buy a nice shiny new hybrid that didn't need to be made, didn't need to produced from the earth's resources, the parts of which didn't need to be shipped around the world twice before it was made, if I just kept driving my pig of a used car. If you are still gonna dump your car and go buy a hybrid, then by all means please do. All I'm saying is just dont try and fool me into thinking that you are saving the environment, you are only fooling yourself.

Yes, Hydrogen fuel not a perfect fuel yet. The operative word here is YET. Rather than waste time and money behind a technology that is inefficient to produce and has a much more harmful net value than an SUV over it's lifetime. Perhaps this money may be better put to use on a technology that isn't still reliant on fossil fuels.

I remember seeing a nice video on you tube that encompased many of these ideas, just have to find it. Gimme a day or and I'll post the link. It has a nice context and format that was very entertaining; much more so than articles by economists. but if thats you thing here is an article in Maclean's that nicely highlights the high inital costs of a hybrid, and the over stated fuel economy:
http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20051205_116965_116965

Please don't call me a hypocrite, I never said that I was trying to save the environment, I merely showing the flaw in how buying and throwing away is more wasteful than keeping what you have. I'm not going to throwaway my car until I am satisfied that the new technology that it is being replaced by is sound and good enough for me. Why can I do this you ask? Cuz I'm the consumer and it's up to me to make myself an informed consumer instead of a lemming.

[GT4rally]

Originally posted by b_t
This is good to hear, green is good. Every time I drive into Calgary at night and see that big ugly brown and yellow band across the city, I want more hybrid cars on the road.

What most people don't understand is that 80% of the pollution produced by any vehicle is from the manufacturing of that vehicle... and hybrids are among the most environmentally un-friendly to manufacture.

Hybrids are also much more difficult to dispose of at the end of their life, since they have numerous lead/acid filled batteries (38 of them in the Prius) which last, at most, 10 years. The amount of fuel saved by driving a hybrid can't come close to making up for the manufacturing and disposal pollution.

Besides, there are many small diesels in Europe (like the VW Polo) that get better fuel economy that hybrids.

So, basically, you are kidding yourself if you think hybrid cars are the answer. In 2006 the most environmentally friendly car to drive in North America was the Jeep TJ! Yup, that's right. Why? While the Jeep's fuel economy is not great, it is the simplest to manufacture --no power windows, locks, nav systems, just simple transportation --thus, drastically cutting manufacturing pollution. And since it is a simple vehicle, disposal has less impact on the environment.

Go buy a Jeep TJ if you want to help the environment... or take the bus, 'cause a hybrid isn't the answer like the politicians have brain-washed you into believing.

[DonJuan]

^ I see someone else can see the big picture. :thumbsup:

[b_t]

I can find absolutely nothing on the internet to back up your claim the Jeep TJ is the most environmentally friendly vehicle out there. I also can find absolutely nothing to back up your other claim that manufacturing hybrid cars is worse for the environment.

Its not like they are just dumping these batteries when they are done... you can recycle them. Any car has parts shipped around the world twice - that is par for the course for anything in this global economy - but once again, I couldn't find anything to back this up either.

You can sit back and wait as long as you want to do your part to fix the problem. That kind of attitude is not going to help anything. We need to do something now to solve the pollution problem and right now that means making the most of what we have and driving the diesels, hybrids, whatever that ARE available instead of waiting years and years driving your pig of a car for something that suddenly is good enough.

You are accusing me of buying into propaganda here but it seems the majority of environmentalists seem to share my viewpoint, whereas only big car companies that depend on SUV and truck sales share yours. It's a fucking joke.

Ideally, yeah, I would ride the bus, but there is no bus service between Cochrane and Calgary. If they ever did build that high speed train, I would certainly use it. You are assuming I am advocating only changing the cars we drive bla bla bla I would hope it is obvious I am thinking more of the big picture. The city needs to do its part to curb pollution, but it isn't, and you guys are all complicit with it. You need to something about it fucking now.

[Redlyne_mr2]

Originally posted by b_t
I can find absolutely nothing on the internet to back up your claim the Jeep TJ is the most environmentally friendly vehicle out there. I also can find absolutely nothing to back up your other claim that manufacturing hybrid cars is worse for the environment.

Its not like they are just dumping these batteries when they are done... you can recycle them. Any car has parts shipped around the world twice - that is par for the course for anything in this global economy - but once again, I couldn't find anything to back this up either.

You can sit back and wait as long as you want to do your part to fix the problem. That kind of attitude is not going to help anything. We need to do something now to solve the pollution problem and right now that means making the most of what we have and driving the diesels, hybrids, whatever that ARE available instead of waiting years and years driving your pig of a car for something that suddenly is good enough.

You are accusing me of buying into propaganda here but it seems the majority of environmentalists seem to share my viewpoint, whereas only big car companies that depend on SUV and truck sales share yours. It's a fucking joke.

Ideally, yeah, I would ride the bus, but there is no bus service between Cochrane and Calgary. If they ever did build that high speed train, I would certainly use it. You are assuming I am advocating only changing the cars we drive bla bla bla I would hope it is obvious I am thinking more of the big picture. The city needs to do its part to curb pollution, but it isn't, and you guys are all complicit with it. You need to something about it fucking now.
:werd:
Toyota has some of the best production methods in the world. Part of their corporate culture is to be environmentally friendly. All these batteries are recyclable, its not like they crack them open and let them leak into some river in china. All the materials used to build a toyota is fully recyclable so that when the vehicle is ready to go to the junk yards it's parts can be used again. They use a plastic called tsop in order to achieve high recyclability.
Now I know we were talking about hybrids and not Toyota but Toyota holds most of the hybrid market share so thats why I brought them up.

Ive been in both the toyota factories and the chrysler/jeep factories. In the toyota factories you see 3 different types of recycling bins all over the place. In a chrysler plant everything not used gets thrown away.

[DonJuan]

Originally posted by b_t

You can sit back and wait as long as you want to do your part to fix the problem. That kind of attitude is not going to help anything. We need to do something now to solve the pollution problem and right now that means making the most of what we have and driving the diesels, hybrids, whatever that ARE available instead of waiting years and years driving your pig of a car for something that suddenly is good enough.

Funny you should mention diesels. That explains much about how you are more concerned with MPG rather than actually helping the environment. You obviously have no idea about particulate carbon matter as well as sulfur emissions; which IS the haze that you are trying to stop. (educate yourself)
http://news-service.stanford.edu/pr/02/jacobsonJGR1023.html

If you cant see my point of driving an older car for 20 years rather than buying a new car every 5 years, being better for the environment then you need to read your post about production costs and materials crossing the globe twice. I am sure the manufacturers love the idea of consumers buying a used vehicle every 20 years; yep I can see how they are profiting from that... I sure can... it sure is a lucrative business!

BMW plans to release a few hydrogen powered 7 series this year (in Europe) and California figures to have a hydrogen filling station highway by 2010. So if you are very generous with the trickle down effect, by 2020 there will be much more hydrogen cars available, and infrastructure support. Its not really that far away. But I'm only looking at it as 1 more used vehicle away. I can see how it may be hard too see into your future if you are looking 4 or 5 cars away.

Until then how about try and get China to stop meeting most of their electricity demands from coal (un-filtered and un-recycled, were talking industrial revolution shit). Or burning old batteries for heating (and I wish I was kidding)

("Alberta uses a lot of coal power too, we should write a letter to our Alderman, on recycled paper of course!")
I couldn't resist! :rofl:

[b_t]

Your article is six fucking years old. Do you have any idea how much EVERYTHING has advanced since then?

[GT4rally]

Originally posted by b_t
I can find absolutely nothing on the internet to back up your claim the Jeep TJ is the most environmentally friendly vehicle out there. I also can find absolutely nothing to back up your other claim that manufacturing hybrid cars is worse for the environment.

Its not like they are just dumping these batteries when they are done... you can recycle them. Any car has parts shipped around the world twice - that is par for the course for anything in this global economy - but once again, I couldn't find anything to back this up either.

You can sit back and wait as long as you want to do your part to fix the problem. That kind of attitude is not going to help anything. We need to do something now to solve the pollution problem and right now that means making the most of what we have and driving the diesels, hybrids, whatever that ARE available instead of waiting years and years driving your pig of a car for something that suddenly is good enough.

You are accusing me of buying into propaganda here but it seems the majority of environmentalists seem to share my viewpoint, whereas only big car companies that depend on SUV and truck sales share yours. It's a fucking joke.

Ideally, yeah, I would ride the bus, but there is no bus service between Cochrane and Calgary. If they ever did build that high speed train, I would certainly use it. You are assuming I am advocating only changing the cars we drive bla bla bla I would hope it is obvious I am thinking more of the big picture. The city needs to do its part to curb pollution, but it isn't, and you guys are all complicit with it. You need to something about it fucking now.

Well, you didn't look very hard. If you search for "Jeep Wrangler" (which is what the TJ is called in the U.S.) you will find it. The study was done by CNW Marketing Research.

Even if you don't believe their claims, you cannot deny that small diesel cars get significantly better fuel consumption ratings than current hybrid cars.

The VW Lupo diesel gets 75mpg, while the Prius only does 47mpg (real world)... and the small gas engine cars, like the Yaris are not that far behind (36mpg).

Also, these guys posting here are not your sworn enemies, so you need to tone down the attitude... since all 21 of your imature years are showing!

[DonJuan]

Originally posted by b_t
Your article is six fucking years old. Do you have any idea how much EVERYTHING has advanced since then?

Yep, and I'm sure you can imagine how much of those those modern Durmax/Powerstoke/Cummins guys have those bully dog (etc) systems, which effectively remove much of the "advanced" diesel systems that you are alluding too. (I only mention trucks as it is the most common form of diesel engines in North America). I only posted that link as it seemed like a decent summary, if you go on google and type in diesel particulate matter or sulphur emissions, you'll get a huge amount of controversial articles, on both sides of the clean diesel argument.

Sulphur emissions are at their highest from a diesel when it is cold. The brown haze over the city seems to be most prominent when it is cold. (just my opinion) I'm not jumping to conclusions, but you can see where I might be going with this.

GT4rally:
I completely agree with you. Despite it's short comings I believe diesel vehicles are much better than anything else currently available (hybrid or otherwise). Cheaper and easier on the environment to produce and maintain. With a little more technological development and some increased support for diesel fuel with even lower sulphur content, this is what should have been the next step instead of hybrid cars. Now if only there was a better option for cheap diesel cars here other than the jetta.

Review of the article you are talking about:
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/motoring/features/jeep-wrangler-is-this-the-greenest-car-on-sale-423233.html
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/biztech/articles/060331/31hybrids.htm

"But for car buyers concerned about the overall environmental implications of the car they choose to drive, the CNW study should cause some rethinking. There's not a single hybrid among the 10 most energy-efficient cars, for instance. But the Scion xB, at the top of the list, requires just 48 cents of energy per mile—about one seventh as costly as a Prius–and the Ford Escort, at No. 2, just 57 cents. At the other end of the list, there are few surprises. The $380,000 Maybach ultraluxe chariot is the least energy-efficient vehicle, requiring $11.58 worth of energy per mile.
From usnews.com

Maybe I should trade in my Maybach?!?!