First thing you need to do is to learn when someone is LYING to you. These same scare tactics were deployed when lead was taken out of the gas, when seat belts and collapsible steering posts were mandated (so as to not send a bolt of steel through your chest during a crash), and when air bags were required.
The result of these things is fewer Americans dying on the road every year, and a marked drop in the lead detected in the blood of our nation's children.
Another the thing, let's be polite and call them skeptics, forget to mention. The $700 billion dollar defense budget -- never mind the Bush wars which are estimated to cost us in excess of $3 TRILLION in taxes.
There is one reason we are in the middle east. And that is to protect the world market price of oil. So, add that cost to your $11,000 car.
Physics is Physics no matter what some people think or government attempts to mandate. You have that right. More engineers should be in government and fewer lawyers. Things might become more logical/rational in the real world.
Let's make one thing clear. I am not anti-defense. But when the US defense budget is greater than the rest of the world combined, there is order of magnitude budget cuts available in that area.
Is the bloated defense budget entirely responsible for the budget deficit? No. President Bush pretty much guaranteed that we would be on the road for permanent budget deficits when he made massive cuts in taxes.
But even that is not the whole story. The baby-boomers are retiring. It is therefore NECESSARY that total of taxes to go up.
Of course, the size and causes of the deficit don't matter in this context. What does matter is that SO LONG AS THE STABILIZATON OF WORLD OIL PRICES IS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE US DEFENSE DEPARTMENT, THEN EVERY SINGLE TAX PAYER HAS A RATIONAL INTEREST IN ENERGY EFFICIENCY STANDARDS.
Oh, and I forgot. EVs don't get rid of pollution; they only move the pollution elsewhere! If anything they create more pollution with making batteries, power plants, etc. Again, insanity. Let the market decide. Vote with our dollars.
@Isleguard I could not agree with you (and some of the other posters) more. Lawmakers posing as engineers! A better solution might be engineers being law makers. At least engineers have a grasp on physics. I disagree with the "tradeoff" concept. Each gallon of gas has a fixed quantity of energy and each passenger has a fixed quantity of mass. Further air resistance at a given velocity is fixed. If a car is made with zero mass one can calculate the MPG and this cannot be improved any more than trying to mandate gravitational acceleration. Of course a lawyer solution would be to change the volume of a gallon of gas to fix the problem! All insanity.
The problem could be realistically fixed by simply removing government help in all areas. Get them out of oil production, manufacturing, and money printing. Everything! Let them work on getting the mail delivered, just as the Constitution authorizes. That alone will keep them out of our hair for eternity!
""The Prius has half the fatal accident rate..." Ever known anyone under the age of 35 buy a Prius?"
Yes because I participate in PriusChat and other user forums. We do find younger than 35 buyers including one that is already on his second Prius after rolling his first. Prius owners come in all shapes, sizes and ages. We have two others at work, youngsters to me.
"Do you think anyone who uses a car as a personal status symbol could drive a Prius? "
The false claim of "personal status" comes from hybrid skeptics such as CNW Marketing whose "Dust-to-Dust" report has been throughly debunked. GM's Bob Lutz also tried to make these claims until he came out with the Volt. The only status I care about is the smugness of having money in my wallet when I drive away from the gas pump.
BTW, we bought the 2003 Prius, used, with 49,300 miles. It has just reached 150,000 miles on its second set of tires and original brake pads. Our 2010 Prius has over 33,000 miles and counting. Both cars are fully paid for and the most expensive, the new 2010 was $24,000 and came with a lot of standard parts that are expensive options on other cars.
"That explains it. It's the type of driver, not the type of car thats influencing the statistic."
Then go to the FARS database and test this hypothesis. The ages of those involved are available but right now, it has as much standing as the CNW Marketing nonsense ... no merit at all.
Engineers at Fuel Cell Energy have found a way to take advantage of a side reaction, unique to their carbonate fuel cell that has nothing to do with energy production, as a potential, cost-effective solution to capturing carbon from fossil fuel power plants.
To get to a trillion sensors in the IoT that we all look forward to, there are many challenges to commercialization that still remain, including interoperability, the lack of standards, and the issue of security, to name a few.
This is part one of an article discussing the University of Washington’s nationally ranked FSAE electric car (eCar) and combustible car (cCar). Stay tuned for part two, tomorrow, which will discuss the four unique PCBs used in both the eCar and cCars.
Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.