View Full Version : 36 mpg by 2025 for cars sold in Colorado
https://kdvr.com/2018/11/16/colorado-adopts-california-emissions-standards/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
So I guess alot of car dealerships around here are going to close up shop. Not sure how anything that isn't a commuter car gets sold atound here.
I'm sure dealers in Wyoming will love this.
hurley842002
11-17-2018, 06:01
Brother mentioned this yesterday, fu$& Colorado!
I don't recall voting for that commission or saying I'd go along with their stupid rules.
I don't recall voting for that commission or saying I'd go along with their stupid rules.
Look Comrade, you don't have a choice.
So I guess alot of car dealerships around here are going to close up shop. Not sure how anything that isn't a commuter car gets sold atound here.
I'm sure dealers in Wyoming will love this.
The dealerships will do just fine and will probably make more money than ever. The 36 mpg is an average for all vehicles sold. It just means the prices of pickup trucks and SUVs will go up substantially. They?ll also do record sales volumes since this is about emissions more than fuel economy. I?m not sure how many vehicles on the road here are equipped to meet CA emissions standards but bringing a vehicle up to those standards is likely going to be cost prohibitive to the point where most people will likely just opt to buy a new vehicle.
Unless the vehicles sold in Wyoming meet Colorado?s new emissions standards then I doubt people will be running north to buy their new vehicles.
Remember, this has nothing to do with the environment or saving the planet or any of that bullshit. It?s always about money. Raping people on the cost of a new vehicle even more just increases tax revenue.
GeorgeandSugar
11-17-2018, 07:08
Climate change is getting old. Only a sucker would believe these politicians pushing this narrative.
Just another way to foist more control and add to the cost of living.
I'll be buying a vehicle outside CO, if still here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
SideShow Bob
11-17-2018, 08:38
Just do like a couple of neighbors of mine. One has lived here as long as I have and another had been here about seven years, both are still running Wyoming plates.
I wonder if I rent a P.O. Box across state lines will it suffice to register there ?
Great-Kazoo
11-17-2018, 08:55
I don't recall voting for that commission or saying I'd go along with their stupid rules.
It was 40 years ago today. Jim Jones forced his people to stay
Climate change is getting old.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Climate Change is real. It use to be called, The weather
I wonder if I rent a P.O. Box across state lines will it suffice to register there ?
Snow Birds can have vehicles plated outside their state. Just get a ups or post office box.
There is nothing at all wrong with trying to improve emissions. However, I think we've already discussed all the stupid that is involved with the CARB commission or whatever it is called. I tend to shutter at adoption of things that California does. As Ray said, this is about money more than anything. Boo
They're just punishing those that do real work for a living and/or live outside the metro. Shame on you for not falling in with the party line.
California rules with elevation...yeah, that works. [hahhah-no]
They're just punishing those that do real work for a living
And they?ll be the first ones to whine like little bitches when the big companies pass their increased costs on to them in the higher costs of their products and services.
I suppose once we go full California I can sell my modest home for $1.5M and pay cash for something nice in another state.
And they?ll be the first ones to whine like little bitches when the big companies pass their increased costs on to them in the higher costs of their products and services.
I suppose once we go full California I can sell my modest home for $1.5M and pay cash for something nice in another state.
It seems others are already bringing out of state money to Texas and Oklahoma. Likely other states too. I've been following TX for a while and it's getting crazy.
Does that mean no high performance vehicles?
[Rant1]
And what if the big 3 fail to deliver?
Zundfolge
11-17-2018, 15:44
Keep in mind this only apples to NEW cars ... I've never owned a new car and don't expect I ever will.
And what if the big 3 fail to deliver?
They already are in CA. Most car manufacturers make all their cars to meet CA standards, so not much will change there. Just means that there will be less available new cars for sale in CO and that they'll be more expensive.
I'm doing my part to save the planet.
Green Car Journal has selected the Ram 1500 as its 2019 Green Truck of the Year (https://5thgenrams.com/2019-ram-1500-named-2019-green-truck-of-the-year-by-green-car-journal/)
Yeah, it's a Hemi. [Coffee]
fairrpe86
11-18-2018, 00:47
Just do like a couple of neighbors of mine. One has lived here as long as I have and another had been here about seven years, both are still running Wyoming plates.
I wonder if I rent a P.O. Box across state lines will it suffice to register there ?
Negative on PO box for vehicle registration in WY. You must have a physical address to register up here.
A UPS store will give you a physical address, but if anyone looked into it, it'd be easy to figure out that it is the UPS store.
Great-Kazoo
11-18-2018, 08:19
Does that mean no high performance vehicles?
[Rant1]
It's not a h-ipo unit but my 08 versa has no issue doing 120. Ask the CSP between CO/Wyo about that one.
It is stupid. There are ways around it, but I won't ever be buying a new car in CO as an individual again.
Aloha_Shooter
11-18-2018, 08:22
All the more reason to buy classic cars or do resto-mods for your "new" vehicle ....
ChickNorris
11-18-2018, 08:59
Yes
Does that mean no high performance vehicles?
[Rant1]
Just because a vehicle is more efficient and pollutes less doesn't mean it must be slower and lame.
The plan is another wealth redistribution scheme, of, by and for the democrats. It is taxation without representation designed to take from the producers (blue collar and other people who use trucks, vans, etc.) and gives to the less productive (white collar elites, stay at home soccer moms).
Jeffrey Lebowski
11-18-2018, 11:30
2025 is pretty early, but I’m all for pushing limits on electric. I wanted my next car to be that Bollinger anyway. I don’t think they are there, may not be by 2025, but it is a good nudge. As you all say, without all states on board, it is dumb. So, I stick with my 14mpg wonder.
This is good old communist command economy BS.
The communists are telling the consumers what they can buy in the Colorado market and they're telling the manufacturers what they can produce for the Colorado market.
The plan is another wealth redistribution scheme, of, by and for the democrats. It is taxation without representation designed to take from the producers (blue collar and other people who use trucks, vans, etc.) and gives to the less productive (white collar elites, stay at home soccer moms).
While I'm not in disagreement with your over-arching point the phrase "Taxation without representation" gets applied WAY too liberally these days. The roads, schools, et al are the "representation" of our taxation. The phrase stems from a time when we paid a tax to the King of England and got literally nothing in exchange for it. This is the driving force to forming out nation. To apply it to something you simply don't agree with does a tremendous disservice to our founding fathers.
It reminds of people who invoke "Bait and switch" because they're upset with how a vendor is treating them when what they claim happened is actually not Bait and Switch at all which is a legal term that comes with specific set of guidelines to be considered such. It's not just a term you throw out even if the circumstances don't meet the definition because jimmies are ruffled.
The plan is hatched by a committee working under edict of the king, err, Governor by way of executive order. The tax scheme was not debated or passed in the legislature.
Goes to show how redistricting would look under a "committee". The word also suitably describes a group of vultures.
My car is down to 36mpg after tuning.
Zundfolge
11-18-2018, 17:17
Negative on PO box for vehicle registration in WY. You must have a physical address to register up here.
If you want to register a car out of state you do it in Montana. All you need to do is set up a Montana LLC and then the LLC buys and owns the car and you title and tag it there.
Apparently lots of people with supercars and other 6-7 figure cars do this to avoid paying exorbitant taxes in states like CA.
https://www.49dollarmontanaregisteredagent.com/montana-registration/exotic-car
All the more reason to buy classic cars or do resto-mods for your "new" vehicle ....
Just make sure you do all the resto mods after the emission test and classic plates in hand.
GilpinGuy
11-18-2018, 19:41
Man, I haven't ever owned a car, truck or Jeep that wasn't 10+ years old.
Edit: Bought a TJ that was 6 years old. That was the only vehicle I ever had a loan on. Learned my lesson.
OtterbatHellcat
11-18-2018, 23:19
This is good old communist command economy BS.
The communists are telling the consumers what they can buy in the Colorado market and they're telling the manufacturers what they can produce for the Colorado market.
Is everyone seeing this?
Yeah liberals suck but I don't get the hand-wringing. 13 other states already use the CARB standard. CA, CT, DC, DE, ME, MD, MA, NJ, NM, NY, OR, PA, RI, VT, WA. Together their 2010 census populations are 111 million. Total 2010 US population was 309 million. I'm not aware of any (common, mass-market) cars produced currently that are not CARB-compliant; it doesn't make any sense to field a model that cannot be sold to over 1/3 of the US population.
Aloha_Shooter
11-19-2018, 11:40
@Rumline, aside from CA, NY, and PA, the states you listed are hardly huge population centers. CA uses its population mass to push a lot of its state agenda into a national agenda since manufacturers (whether they are producing cars or textbooks) would rather design once and produce massively than have to deal with 50 different sets of standards. Differing standards are why gasoline mixes are such a nightmare for the petroleum industry.
The hand-wringing here comes from CO now adding itself to the list of states that do whatever CA does because we've all seen that CA standards are rarely based on reason or facts anymore and the fact that some of us can see that this mandate isn't really about making ICE cars more efficient so much as it is to push people away from ICE because the enviros think electric is better. In many ways it is, in other ways it isn't -- just as fluorescent lightbulbs don't always make sense over standard incandescents (but the enviros got incandescents more-or-less outlawed anyway) and low-flush toilets don't always make more sense over full-flush.
To reverse your last point, it makes no sense to mandate automobile standards that don't serve 2/3 of the population -- but they do anyway.
wctriumph
11-19-2018, 11:55
Well, if that average is met, it will mean that fuel prices will go up as well. If vehicles get more efficient and use less fuel, the price of fuel will need to go up to cover the lost revenue of less fuel being sold and the .gov will want their share of the higher pricing as well with a new tax for our own good.
Well, if that average is met, it will mean that fuel prices will go up as well. If vehicles get more efficient and use less fuel, the price of fuel will need to go up to cover the lost revenue of less fuel being sold and the .gov will want their share of the higher pricing as well with a new tax for our own good.
Yep, CDOT is currently testing tax by mile solutions some of which are intrusive devices in your car.
SamuraiCO
11-19-2018, 13:19
What is disingenuous about this argument of improved MPG and emissions is there is no calculation into the production and destruction of the raw ingredients and manufacturing process and transportation of the batteries that go into these electric and hybrid vehicles. Same for solar panels and the magnets that are put into wind production generators.
I whole hearted agree with this is again nothing more than a wealth transfer. Too bad the blue collar workers that voted for Dems have voted for increased taxes on their business in the near future.
Can't wait to see what fun the Dems have instore for the oil and gas industry. Will see if Polis keeps to his words about the "will of the people" with the defeat of prop 112 and the effort to completely remove TABOR.
manufacturers (whether they are producing cars or textbooks) would rather design once and produce massively than have to deal with 50 different sets of standards. Differing standards are why gasoline mixes are such a nightmare for the petroleum industry.
Right, that was my point. I should have been more specific with the hand-wringing comment. If folks want to buy cars outside of CO that's cool, but it's not going to be any different of a car nor any cheaper (retail/wholesale price). Registering one out of state to avoid the taxes is a different story, but the buyer still isn't avoiding the issue that this thread is about.
To reverse your last point, it makes no sense to mandate automobile standards that don't serve 2/3 of the population -- but they do anyway.
That's not really accurate. It's not like cars that meet the CARB standards won't run or are unsuitable for use in other states; it's a stricter standard that costs more to implement. Saying that a 4% price increase on a new car means that the car "doesn't serve" a huge population is kind of in Chicken Little territory.
What is disingenuous about this argument of improved MPG and emissions is there is no calculation into the production and destruction of the raw ingredients and manufacturing process and transportation of the batteries that go into these electric and hybrid vehicles. Same for solar panels and the magnets that are put into wind production generators.
Actually, there is. But it gets buried.
Windmills are a net loss no matter how you do the math. At $2-3M per unit installed, it is true that they do NOT require more energy to make than they produce. On average, they produce about 30 times what it takes to make them. But what gets lost is the fact that almost all of them are also paying a per unit lease to the landowner, have maintenance costs, and you just hope you don't get a fire. It is not even a ponzi scheme. We are at the tail end of the build-up, a lage part of which had benefit of taxpayers paying a portion of the costs.
You can extract the information for batteries, magnets and solar panels if you are so inclined, but it takes some work since again, it gets buried. NREL's library is a good resource if you actually want to do so: https://www.nrel.gov/research/library.html
Having gone to Mines and worked on some NREL projects and having friends and my Father working at NREL, there are some good sources, but politically, the US craps on the best ones and fawns over those that are economically wasteful. That puts engineers like myself who have worked in the energy sector in a hard spot in that the professional code of conduct includes an obligation to society.
CO is pursuing some good technologies at the state level, but these new emissions standards are going to do a lot of damage.
Yeah liberals suck but I don't get the hand-wringing. 13 other states already use the CARB standard. CA, CT, DC, DE, ME, MD, MA, NJ, NM, NY, OR, PA, RI, VT, WA. Together their 2010 census populations are 111 million. Total 2010 US population was 309 million. I'm not aware of any (common, mass-market) cars produced currently that are not CARB-compliant; it doesn't make any sense to field a model that cannot be sold to over 1/3 of the US population.
Exactly. Cali standards are already the de facto measurement for automakers. California has the biggest car culture and car economy, so it makes sense.
Emmision standards are one thing. How much junk comes out the engine suppressor is another thing.
Average fleet mpg is another story.
A car company with perfect emissions but only gets a fleet average of 28 mpg would be barred from selling cars, while car company with marginal emissions, but get a fleet mpg of 35 would be allowed. This is diesel vs gas. Diesel is dirty but better mpg.
Cleaner emissions could be sacrificed for mpg.
If there are any issues with the cars or emissions we could just ask the friendly people at Volkswagen what they think would be a good solution.
I don't know about you guys, but I liked VW more after that whole scandal. I'm not sure if that's the right response, but it's the one I had.
OtterbatHellcat
11-19-2018, 22:15
Mass produced electric cars are a joke. You're still plugging it in, dumbass. All the awesome progress super clean coal plants made got hosed by obama in favor of more expensive natural gas production....and then nobody wants oil companies drilling "in my back yard". Fuck yourself, btw.
And good luck when your electric car battery has been cycled too many times too, you'd better be ready to write the $6,000 check for your new car battery and the poor fag that has to replace the 1,200 LB part. They don't replace that for free either, write another big check...hugger, cause you ain't doin it.
In fact, if you're part of this camp, you oughtta just start suckin a bag of dicks. If you own a Prius, go fuck yourself, asshole.
I guess that's all I have to say about that.
Mass produced electric cars are a joke. You're still plugging it in, dumbass. All the awesome progress super clean coal plants made got hosed by obama in favor of more expensive natural gas production....and then nobody wants oil companies drilling "in my back yard". Fuck yourself, btw.
And good luck when your electric car battery has been cycled too many times too, you'd better be ready to write the $6,000 check for your new car battery and the poor fag that has to replace the 1,200 LB part. They don't replace that for free either, write another big check...hugger, cause you ain't doin it.
In fact, if you're part of this camp, you oughtta just start suckin a bag of dicks. If you own a Prius, go fuck yourself, asshole.
I guess that's all I have to say about that.
What is your fascination with homosexuality?
OtterbatHellcat
11-19-2018, 22:31
I came back to clean that up a bit, but since you CP'd……..it's too late.
I'm frustrated with "green People". I could have said it better, and that's all I can say now, Jer.
I came back to clean that up a bit, but since you CP'd……..it's too late.
I'm frustrated with "green People". I could have said it better, and that's all I can say now, Jer.
Don't hold back. Stress can kill ya.
OtterbatHellcat
11-19-2018, 22:41
Don't hold back. Stress can kill ya.
G, the community deserves better from someone that's been here for a while. I'm wise enough to say exactly the same thing with eloquent wording, but didn't take the time to do so.
G, the community deserves better from someone that's been here for a while. I'm wise enough to say exactly the same thing with eloquent wording, but didn't take the time to do so.
The true measure of a man's character is how they act under pressure. Everyone can remain poised when everything is going to plan.
Jeffrey Lebowski
11-20-2018, 07:06
I don't know about you guys, but I liked VW more after that whole scandal. I'm not sure if that's the right response, but it's the one I had.
I must confess similar. As wrong as it was, there was a part of me that admired the ingenuity (and cahones) to cheat with software.
SamuraiCO
11-20-2018, 10:24
Thanks for the info Mark. I was also going for the calculation of all the environmental emissions and not the raw cost of the projects. Forgot to put that in but maybe I am wrong and there is other information? I have thought the environmental impact of these clean energy devices in production, transportation and eventual destruction is far more harmful than our current energy production and internal combustion engines or am I wrong?
I am all for any and all energy production as long as it keeps us energy independent, gives us the lowest cost or provides options to pay higher rates for incentives for investments in diverse energy production if we so choose. To force it is wrong.
The first CAFE standards had everything to do with moving us away from relying on foreign energy sources that impacted our national security. Now it is being bastardized for the whole global climate change shake down scheme.
Aloha_Shooter
11-20-2018, 21:27
I don't know about you guys, but I liked VW more after that whole scandal. I'm not sure if that's the right response, but it's the one I had.
If there are any issues with the cars or emissions we could just ask the friendly people at Volkswagen what they think would be a good solution.
I must confess similar. As wrong as it was, there was a part of me that admired the ingenuity (and cahones) to cheat with software.
I don't know about admiring but I didn't see anything wrong with gaming the system to take advantage of how idiotic testing for dumbass regulations in order to met consumer demand. What they did was no worse than ACLU and Democrat Party lawyers meeting the caravan of illegal immigrants at the border (or before!) to advise them on what to say to create the most stress on the US immigration system, especially when they KNOW it's false.
Mass produced electric cars are a joke. You're still plugging it in, dumbass.
Just a slight disagreement here. Industrial electricity produced by modern power plants is a minimum of 4 times more efficient than the best internal combustion engines for individual automobiles. Green pomposity is still BS directed by lack of facts or reason but there IS a legitimate anti-pollution argument to be made.
I am all for any and all energy production as long as it keeps us energy independent, gives us the lowest cost or provides options to pay higher rates for incentives for investments in diverse energy production if we so choose. To force it is wrong.
Completely agree. If all goes well in the next few months, what I am working on will again challenge the Oil industry in 3 or 4 years. My attorney is worried about my personal safety, and we will see if the any of the Greenies really are or it is just a easy platform to attack from. The technology works, but it was suppressed and forced out by the sector of the industry whose economic viability was threatened. The worldwide economic impact literally keeps me up at night.
CobaltSkink
11-21-2018, 10:01
Ha!
And everybody said I was crazy for saying Big Oil was keeping the 100mpg carburetor down!!!
Soon, I can drive to Denver in my Suburban and back for only a one and a half gallons!
76644
Ha!
And everybody said I was crazy for saying Big Oil was keeping the 100mpg carburetor down!!!
Soon, I can drive to Denver in my Suburban and back for only a one and a half gallons!
76644
36 mpg is WAY far away from 100 mpg. :)
I thought it was interesting that the base engine for the 2019 Silverado is a 2.7L 4 cylinder. It has more hp and torque than my old 2003 5.3L V8 but only gets about 5 mpg better than the V8, and 1 mpg better than the V6 it is replacing. Energy conversion is always going to be an issue with IC engines. Sans a 1 person micro car, it is just plain not possible to get 100 mpg in anything compact and larger. Diesel electric hybrids and turbines can improve the actual output and reduce losses, but conversion is what it is. But diesel vs. mpg is a politically created problem the current regs won't be able to handle.
I thought it was interesting that the base engine for the 2019 Silverado is a 2.7L 4 cylinder. It has more hp and torque than my old 2003 5.3L V8 but only gets about 5 mpg better than the V8, and 1 mpg better than the V6 it is replacing.
This is a really good example of something I've noticed ever since "energy efficiency" became a hot buzz phrase. Increased efficiency in a vehicle engine can be used to get better mileage, or, it can be used to increase power/acceleration/towing capacity.
The result, in many cases, and quite counterintuitively, is that greater efficiencies result in more energy used because those more efficient engines are leveraged for greater power gains.
You can see similar things with electronic devices as well. More power-efficient computer processors are built to be more powerful. Efficient LED lights are utilized with light fixtures that take more bulbs, or are put on strands of hundreds/thousands of LEDs, more efficient power use in screens and monitors results in monitors and TVs that are larger, etc. etc. etc.
In the mid 90s a motorcycle magazine did a story on efficiency that that stuck with me. It compared a single or twin with an similar weight super bike. On the highway doing 55 the superbike did slightly better even with the extra cylinders and HP. Bottom line is it takes a fixed amount of HP, BTU, calories, watts to do work. I don't think gas has enough energy to do what they want given current drags and weights. In the 90's mileage was a real goal. Honda had a 55 mpg civic and we all know about the Metro. Most IC engines are 40 percent efficient. Might be some industrial motors in the 60 percent range. The VW XL1 (260mpg) is cool, but not practical for most, and sure as heck not something I'd want to crash. And not for sale.
They should just put turbines in everything if emissions is their big concern. We have turbines that make 7,000 horsepower that produce less emissions than anything Toyota or Honda sells with an internal combustion engine.
Of course the fuel consumption would probably make it impractical.
In the mid 90s a motorcycle magazine did a story on efficiency that that stuck with me. It compared a single or twin with an similar weight super bike. On the highway doing 55 the superbike did slightly better even with the extra cylinders and HP. Bottom line is it takes a fixed amount of HP, BTU, calories, watts to do work. I don't think gas has enough energy to do what they want given current drags and weights. In the 90's mileage was a real goal. Honda had a 55 mpg civic and we all know about the Metro. Most IC engines are 40 percent efficient. Might be some industrial motors in the 60 percent range. The VW XL1 (260mpg) is cool, but not practical for most, and sure as heck not something I'd want to crash. And not for sale.
Yes, 40% is about right for gasoline engines. There are a few specimens that approach 45%, but those in the 45-50% are not production capable. Diesel is in the range of 50 to 55%.
Diesel/Electric hybrids with a constant speed DI diesel power plant on board purely to keep the batteries charged, regenerative braking (like Locomotives), cold start bags, etc. can reduce pollutant output by 60% over today's cleanest vehicles and get efficiency numbers up in to the range of 70%. Go to a turbine engine and now we are talking efficiency in the range of 85 to 90%. While the Volt claims a conversion efficiency of 99%, that is not taking into account the conversion of the raw power source into electricity nor the line losses. If you consider that, oops, only about 60% efficient. They claim 80% while also claiming gasoline is 15% efficient. I have dug into their calculations and they got some math folks to slant all the calculations to their benefit. Imagine that.
I said it in the 90s and I will say it again, constant speed DI diesel engines producing onboard generation with a completely electric drivetrain is the path that has, for at least the last 30 years, been the most economically, environmentally friendly that will be scalable and mass production capable. There are vehicles in Europe that follow this model, but why one may ask, do we not have that system in the US? "Consumer Acceptance". I was told that by Chrysler in the 90s, and it still holds true today. The engineering, materials, and infrastructure will support a significant percentage (about 50% of sales) of all consumer vehicles on this model. If you take the same concept, but use gas turbine, you can collect another 30% of sales. But these were leap-frogged over by the politicians and the auto-makers have in large part succumbed to the consumer acceptance and government influence, to straight EVs. BTW, pure EV can only be about 5% of the total sales with our power distribution network, and in some locales, impossible.
So to the Silverado, I went back and looked at some of the consulting work I did in the late 90s. The group I was working in specified a 1.3 DI engine coupled to a generator for a light duty truck. The battery bank supplied power to a single BLDC motor with a fixed drive ratio output shaft into a standard differential. The weight savings in the motor was used up some with insulation as we ran it hotter, in the 300F range and minimized heat waste. The weight of the electrical components was countered by the elimination of a transmission. All told, the powerplant and driveline was 50 pounds lighter in 2WD and 200 pounds lighter in 4WD. Don't ask me about the specifics of the electrical side because I did not work on that, but in late 1990s dollars, a Dodge 1/2 ton could have been sold for the exact same price as their V8 model with an effective mileage of 32 mpg, more than doubling with power, tow and range capacites the same. I expect now that we can get that over the 36 number, but the supply side needs 5 years just to switch over. The executives were downright scared of it. One told me it was too much too soon. We heard rumors of active government suppression of these projects, and there were several that did not like some other nitpicky aspect. I lost touch with most of the people I worked with when I switched over to the Forensics field, but it was pretty cool stuff at the time. BTW, I paid out several $100 bets with friends in 2015. I had bet that by 2015, half of the cars sold in the US would be DI Diesel with electric drivetrain hybrids. They are still hard to find. The few out there have the best conversion rates in their class, but still sell well behind gas.
A footnote...Diesel costs about 15% more than gasoline. You also get about 40% less diesel per gallon of crude than gasoline. So that makes a difference of about 50% that must be overcome, which is one reason it does not look as rosy as I painted it. But if you really dig into it without bias, one can see that some changes in perceptions, refinery processes and technology will be a benefit for all in the stream of commerce except the primary players...the Oil Companies.
BushMasterBoy
11-21-2018, 14:00
Long chain fossil fuel hydrocarbons are a short term solution. We are going to run out eventually. Maybe a bio-diesel from algae would work. Feed the algae sewage from the cities. This would work in the desert southwestern US. It would not work in the cold climate of the northeast. Just my opinion.
Long chain fossil fuel hydrocarbons are a short term solution. We are going to run out eventually. Maybe a bio-diesel from algae would work. Feed the algae sewage from the cities. This would work in the desert southwestern US. It would not work in the cold climate of the northeast. Just my opinion.
We will run out of water before crude oil. But I agree in part. That is why Diesel makes sense...it can be a renewable fuel. Hard to get gasoline from organic matter and alcohol is incompatible with the majority of the infrastructure.
I believe in a multi fuel system. Biomass conversion, use of trash for fuels at power plants, some solar and wind, nuclear, sea-turbines (maybe, intriguing, but scary). If I was Secretary of Energy, I'd probably get shot by Oil and Greenies in an all out coordinated assault. Too little of the public really grasps the whole undercurrent of the energy sectors, even the engineers, until they actually work in it for a while. But still, forest view is that until we as a country can grasp the true multi-fuel agenda by wresting the Oil focus from big Oil, we, at least as a country won't progress (regardless of the political climate). 36 mpg is certainly achievable, but the goals and implementation are wrong. My Libertarian leaning social viewpoints also see no path to that end without .gov meddling. So that is a catch 22. Big Oil won't release their grip on the oil reserves until they see a real threat to their bottom line.
For those interested...https://www.colorado.gov/pacific/energyoffice/waste-energy
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.