>> The automatic is listed as getting 29 city and 40 highway.
Real-World MPG average for Prius is 48. The new model next year will push that even higher. There's no contest when it comes to emission rating either.
It sure looks like this long awaited debut will end up being summed up with the word: disappointment
..."Real-World MPG average for Prius is 48. The new model next year will push that even higher. There's no contest when it comes to emission rating either.
It sure looks like this long awaited debut will end up being summed up with the word: disappointment"...
I have no trouble at all or make much effort to get 49/50 mpg.
Just a cursory comparison with the European markets, would show your conclusion for a host of reasons to be myopic at best. Put it in the context of world wide, Toyota &/or Honda, and at best Prius, Civic Hybrid is at the very best, a niche market. Toyota Landcruiser's probably sell more world wide.
Both Toyota & Honda have for years experienced challenges in selling in the European markets.
US regulators at all levels have been fantastically successful in keeping European fuel sipping diesels (gassers also for that matter) OUT of the USA market. 48 mpg is a "gas guzzler" in comparison.
I for one would have no issues getting a Prius/Civic Hybrid if the cost was on par with Corolla/Civic gassers.
The new so-called cleaner diesel is less efficient, widing the MPG gap between it and the gas hybrids.
Also, diesel has been around for decades. Hybrids are only now approaching their first life-cycle end. So, how come European marketshare for diesel isn't higher and hybrids are gaining ground?
Diesel is more efficient at speed. Hybrid is more efficient in city driving. Diesel engines are robust and last for 100's of thousands of miles. Hybrids are in the early days of development (although electric motors are not).
Why is it a competition? Isn't the competition with passenger vehicles that get less than 30 mpg?
The new so-called cleaner diesel is less efficient, widing the MPG gap between it and the gas hybrids FYI- this comment is ridiculous. 1. There are no 'so-called' cleaner diesels available for you to pass judgment on. To be 'so-called clean' ,the vehicle has to pass CARB- that will make it as-clean or cleaner than all the vehicles currently available. 2. 'Less efficient'- than what??Unclean diesel? Clean vs unclean diesel- there is no mileage loss. What makes it 'clean' happens in the tail-pipe. 3. What is the 'widening gap' between diesel and hybrid. Your numbers compare 'actual experience' with the hybrid to EPA for the diesel. Why don't you choose to use Ruking's 'actual experience' to compare the 2, then it looks like a wash.
Since you are doing the lumping, diesel and electric (hybrid) have been around for at least 100 years. 34 years ago I had tow vehicles that ran off plug in electric. (No Thomas Edison did NOT come by to check it out ) So again, you are in denial that the European diesel market share is growing also. Right now it is aover 50% and growing. You need to tell me what hybrid growth is in Europe, as it is probably infinitesimally small in comparison
I have read registered hybrids in the USA are @ 350,000. Put that in the passenger vehicle fleet of 251.4 M and it is at .0013922% So pick a start date, but for comparison purposes say 2003 for Prius/5 years and we are talking of a HUGE .0002784 yearly growth rate. This is with FULL regulatory blessing, etc, etc.
Even you know that new car diesels sales since the 2004 has been BANNED. It has also been no secret of the regulatory bias against diesel, since they can not constitutionally BAN it all together. Not surprisingly, diesel populations are at 2%.
Let's see Prius/Civic hybrids use RUG which has 30 ppm vs ULSD which as 15 ppm. Which has more? Which is dirtier? Obviously to you you want to convince folks 2x more is really 2x less!!?? Biodiesel approaches ZERO ppm. A Harvard study showed bio diesel (diesel) products having better emissions characteristics than gasser/hybrids and actually are BETTER than plug in electric. So it is patently obvious what is happening here.
I am ok with your bias, However you should really acknowledge BOTH sides as your continual slanting of the data does nothing for credibility. The other is while YOU and the regulatory agency's see this process as adversarial, I and others do not!!
For sure however the regulators have made America safe for gas guzzlers!!! This is a prime market for European super cars that get like 12 mpg. It is really no accident that new TDI's sales getting easily 50 mpg were banned from 2005-2009 model years in 5 states.
Don't waste your breath. This guy obviously has an agenda and sound reasoning will not change his mind. I just wish he would be honest and tell us what his real problem is with diesel. Maybe he is invested heavily in hybrid technology.
For sure there are in roads to diesel hybrids. This to me would be the more logical hybrid as diesels structurally get 20-40% better than gassers. (consumer point of view)
So in comparison, a Prius gasser hybrid that gets 20-40% better than 48 mpg (this would include the 20% hybrid advantage) (real world for the sake of discussion), puts that at 57.6 mpg- 67.2 mpg. Indeed given my 38-42 mpg in the Civic vs a Prius/Civic hybrid 48 mpg it is simple to see the hybrid 20% advantage. When you factor in that the advantage costs from $13,436 to $7,436 more at the time..... well I leave that to you to calculate the B/E. For me a huge advantage, sans the premiums.
I would leave that to consumers whether the up-front costs make any sense. As good as this would be, there are European diesels, LONG since on the market that get that type of mileage.
As much as I like diesel, I think that the very large bias toward diesel in the EU is going to stymie our getting many diesel cars. We are getting massive amounts of RUG from the excess in Europe. That is keeping the price relatively low. While our high use of diesel for trucks, trains, planes and heating will keep that price high.
Yes, that is definitely the good/bad news. You and I and others have said some time ago, on various threads, that one of the longer term consequences of going to a larger % of diesel will be higher prices. Indeed in the US market the % of diesel dropped app 33% from less than 3% to 2% and the prices have literally skyrocketed!!!!??? Looking at Europe, they have long had a much higher % of diesel and their fuel prices have been app 2x higher.
Again China to the rescue!!! It is projected that China will be the new market for the foreseeable future for 400 M vehicles.
Indeed given the variables, there are limited things folks can do to keep the cost per mile driven down. One major one is to keep a vehicle long past the payment period (typically 24 mo to 60 mo) and more specifically many miles past.
Things are just warming up, as it is being announced, signaled in almost every way , the price per mile driven is lock stepped going to go much higher.
So yes, I have been appreciative of my 5 year lead time of 20-40% cheaper per mile driven fuel prices. So for example one day before Hurricane Katrina cost per mile driven .$ 057. (2.85/50=) Today's corner store 4.85/50=$ .097= 41.24% more. Even at today's RUG prices of 3.95/39= .101282= 4.23% cheaper. But as the European comparisons reveals; since they keep out the real fuel sippers @ 60-65 mpg, this price differential is artificially LOW. In other words, the cost per mile driven is KEPT artificially HIGH.
Right now barring the car getting totaled, the advantage right now is abnormally great resale value and the spectre of going 500,000 miles PLUS. :shades:
I am just glad I made the decision years ago to keep my commute to under 50 ft. I understand most folks would have a very hard time doing that.
Yup, it's the whole European/excess gasoline factor that has me looking at a gasser for my next car over a diesel, even though I'd prefer a diesel all else being equal.
I'm beginning to think that until we finally get around to sustainable fuel production from the likes of micro algae (or something with an even higher yield, and so far at least, nothing even comes close), there's going to be no significant benefit to buying a diesel automobile.
If some manufacturer brings a diesel SUV I like to our market I would be tempted in spite of the fuel price difference. Going from 15 MPG in the Sequoia to 30 MPG with a diesel SUV would be an incentive. So far nothing in the USA turns me on. As much as I wanted to like the GL320 CDI their transmission left me wanting. The old 5 speed in my 2006 Mercedes Sprinter was much better. I would love to have that 5 cylinder diesel and transmission in an SUV like my Sequoia. It had more than enough power in the hills to pull that 8000+lb RV so a little old 5500 lb SUV should be a light load. UPS and FedEx love them with their 25 MPG. Nothing built comes even close. The new ones with the V6 diesel are an unknown for me. Have not seen one or talked to any owners.
sustainable fuel production from the likes of micro algae
I'm with you on that. I hope they don't push for more soybean biodiesel. They should be seeing the folly of the corn for ethanol boondoggle and cap their legislative pens. Nothing I have seen done by our government as an alternative to fossil fuel is more than corporate welfare for those they are beholden to. It is in the billions of dollars down the corporate drain.
I would agree! Most US consumers who could CARE about diesel have rebutted the (Prius) hybrid's premiums. Many more folks vol and % would buy diesels, but the various issues from cost of compliance with regulatory agency's to outright banning of diesel cars have left diesel inventories at ZERO. Hard to buy them when they AIN' T there to be bought.
Honda is taking a good stab at it with the (upcoming) Fit/hybrid, but still the premium is at $1900. The TDI vs 1.8T controversy was triggered over 246 dollars!!!
Agreed, the larger the vehicle, the greater the benefit a diesel engine would provide, errr, unless you're talking about something like a 1.2 liter diesel in the likes of a Jetta; something that ain't too likely to ever happen here in the States. So yes, if I was in the market for a larger vehicle, then a diesel would definitely be at the top of my list.
After driving the GL320 CDI and owning a Sequoia I do not see much difference in acceleration. Both are way more than adequate. I can live with 0-60 MPH in 10 seconds no problem. I rarely accelerate hard anyway. The diesel engine in my Sprinter was a 2.7L that had gobs of torque. It was great on steep winding mountain roads both up and down hill. The Tiptronic transmission was just tap tap and you were in a lower gear with no need to use your brakes going down hill. If a person can get 27.9 MPG with the GL320 CDI driving the Interstates at 75 MPH, the slightly smaller engine should easily top 30 MPG. With that I would be most happy. All that said, we live in a country where 0-60 trumps MPG for most buyers. So we may never see a larger SUV with an adequate diesel engine. Quite frankly my biggest complaint with taking the Sequoia on a trip is the small gas tank. My Suburban had a 42 gallon tank and I went several times over 650 miles between gas stops. That gives a lot more choices of places to refuel. The GL320 CDI has nearly twice the range of the Sequoia.
The talk of algae for fuel has been debunked repeatedly and has now taken on messianic qualities. While the issue of corporate welfare is real, what should not be forgotten is that if the true social and infrastructure costs of driving cars was passed on to consumers, most people would be walking. As gas prices rise to european levels and beyond, the myth of the endless highway will crumble, and with it the black hole of the private automobile. Many of the posts here are still living in a world that ceased to exist years ago and fail to understand that they are on life support.
Actually it costs 28% more to run a new "good mileage vehicle" (39 mpg) than an owned SUV (15 mpg) given a yearly mileage that is between the yearly average of 12,000 to 15,000 miles.
Your assumption is clearly negated by the taxes per mile driven generated by use of passenger vehicle fleets and the trucking industry. What you say will be signaled by a return to (wind) sailing ships to get world wide products to your local stores. So when do you think that will happen?
"The talk of algae for fuel has been debunked repeatedly and has now taken on messianic qualities."
Do tell. While I'm no expert in this arena, I am however a resonably rational engineer and can typically see a farce when presented with one. For my part I have yet to see any show-stoppers with regard to biofuel from algae. Would you care to enlighten me/us?
Actually for those that have diesels now, the news can be even better. Using the above gasser example of 15 mpg vs 39 mpg and the 15 mpg SUV being cheaper to run; going forward using the 2.6 x factor, means the market will need to come up with a car that gets 130 mpg (50 *2.6=) since we have shown an extreme reluctance to use alternative fuels. Going forward will indeed be interesting if not entertaining.
In a world where it took a physicist to explain the engineering failures of the Challenger space craft to the engineers, I am not comforted. Any credible search of cost benefit, reliability of supply, time horizons and far more will net you the needed information that will, on this site, no doubt be denied or "discredited" while the clock continues to tick.
"In a world where it took a physicist to explain the engineering failures of the Challenger space craft to the engineers, I am not comforted. Any credible search of cost benefit, reliability of supply, time horizons and far more will net you the needed information that will, on this site, no doubt be denied or "discredited" while the clock continues to tick."
Sorry, I have to call "cop out".
I've done as you've suggested, and have been doing so for some time now when the mood takes me, and I've yet to see anything that would suggest that algae based biofuel is anything but completely achievable.
I think that was the basic response to the evidence supporting cigarettes as the primary cause of cancer, asbestos exposure as the cause of asbestosis, and of course far more. What is always surprising, and entertaining, is the number of hair trigger responses from most of the remaining posters here clinging to a dying world view.
"I've yet to see anything that would suggest that algae based biofuel is anything but completely achievable." ===========================================================
You might check some of the earlier posts and links on this site regarding fuel from algae, in addition to those on the net.
Statements about fuel taxes mitigating against actual costs are frequently trotted out by corporate welfare types. Fuel taxes in no way approach covering the costs of private vehicle dependency. There are an overwhelming number of un-refuted studies in the accounting, city planning, civil engineering, and related fields supporting this. That people who know better continue to deny the reality is how corporate subsidies, like those of ethanol, and the larger problem of private vehicle dependency, continue unabated.
Every search I do regarding biofuel from algae provides information that shows just how possible a source of fuel this methodology is, and while there are certainly some technical and infrastructure challenges to overcome before the yield is high enough to literally eliminate all use of crude oil for vehicle fuel, nothing, and I repeat, NOTHING even remotely sounds like a show stopper.
Your own words:"The talk of algae for fuel has been debunked repeatedly..."
My response: :"I call shenanigans."
Why? Because if what you've written was even remotely true, then I should have no problem finding scientific dissertations that describe why algae isn't a good source for biofuel. The truth is, I have yet to find even a single source that presents an argument that even remotely supports your words.
So, if you want to maintain even a shred of credibility, I'm thinking now would be a good time for you to "walk the walk" and provide us with some references to science that debunks the talk about algae for fuel.
This guy shoots from the hip and rarely comes close to the target. I cannot recall a link he has posted to back up any of his wild claims. It is all doom and gloom in his World. I suppose if I was stuck in the armpit of CA. I would have a horrible outlook for the future as well. Riding a stinking bus in San Bernardino comes real close to being stuck in a 3rd World country with out any chance to escape.
It looks to me like there are those that believe algae is a viable source of energy.
PetroSun has announced it will begin operation of its commercial algae-to-biofuels facility on April 1st, 2008. The facility, located in Rio Hondo Texas, will produce an estimated 4.4 million gallons of algal oil and 110 million lbs. of biomass per year off a series of saltwater ponds spanning 1,100 acres. Twenty of those acres will be reserved for the experimental production of a renewable JP8 jet-fuel
I came across a like a while back that was referencing Chevron's investments in micro algae R&D as well. Hmmm, apparently the Collective over at Chevron didn't contract hypnosis44 for his guidance. :P
It seems his view of society is each person having 100 sq ft of space in a high rise. All forced to ride public transit. We would give all our income to the government and they would give us each a portion of rice each day if we did not speak out against common rule by the politburo. I have never seen him post a positive idea for alternative energy or how to solve a problem that did not include getting rid of all personal forms of powered transportation. Sad outlook on life :sick:
And then one from wikipedia that says, "The corporations Chevron, Honeywell, and Boeing are starting algae businesses. According to Boeing's technology leader for energy and emissions, Dave Daggett, 'In the past two years, we have changed from algae skeptics to proponents'."
The diesel enthusiasts are having a hard time with the facts. The numbers are just not good enough to make the Jetta the more economical vehicle. Toyota hit a million car home run with the Prius. The new Jetta diesel is going to be more of a single. The diesel enthusiasts are going to buy a few initially, but the mainstream buyer will avoid it like the plague.
I have enjoyed a lot of the posts, especially the ones about the diesel conspiracy theory. Paranoia runs deep. DEs would like to see diesel tax breaks like Europe and they don't like having to meet the new emission standards. It is all so terribly unfair.
Actually it is the other way around. The facts are very easy to deal with. It has been a full court press to keep diesels out of the American market. Is it a conspiracy? No! It is being done in plain sight.!! The regulators truly fear the 20-40% advantage over like model gassers. During the ban of new diesel CAR sales, the population of diesels has slipped from less than 3% to 2%. This appproaches a 33% DECLINE!!! So are DE's paranoid? Heck no!! The other side has shown REAL progress!!! As a matter of fact if they had 33% reduction in the over all use of RUG to PUG it would be seen as the ACTION of the century!!!. NOT HAPPENING!! The whole logistic system is telling you a number of things:
1. you will continue to burn more, (up to 40% more) when less will do.
2. the growth in the INCREASE of RUG to PUG use might see fits and starts, So instead of 103% (3% over last years growth for example, it might be ONLY 102%)
3. It is going to cost you more per mile driven to do so.
4.. Congress is doing the propaganda job as to who is the boogie man who makes all these windfall profits ($.10 on the dollar, As soon as they are satisfied the Pavlovian response is set...
5.Congress will raise the already $ .50 per gal taxation to who knows what points beyond.
The numbers are just not good enough to make the Jetta the more economical vehicle. Toyota hit a million car home run with the Prius
I think the Jetta TDI has probably sold a million copies World wide in the same time that the Prius has sold a million. As close as I can tell the Prius is only popular in Japan and the USA. That is because both countries have shunned diesel cars. Toyota cannot sell the Prius in China after building a factory for them. The Prius is not selling worth a hoot in the EU. The reason is there are so many options that are superior.
Why would you say that each time the VW TDI emissions are improved for the Euro emissions, CARB ups the anti to keep them out of CA? If CA really wants low CO2 diesel is the obvious choice of fuel. With biodiesel being the best choice when it becomes available in greater quantities. What other alternative fuel is on the horizon with any chance of meeting the demand of American drivers?
"So, if you want to maintain even a shred of credibility,..." ============================================================ I think you know how to do a word search here for yourself. The terms "Credibility" and "Diesel" blog are antithetical for most of the Diesel religionists here. Sites on several issues I have raised have been posted here in the past - with the usual response of "can't see them, can't hear them, can't discuss them, so they don't exist". The sites and counter arguments to algae fuel have been posted here by others, some of them now stating an opposite position from their original because, well..., because for them it does seem to be more about entertainment than information. Virtually all of the well informed posters wisely give up on this site due to the "religious" nature of the backlash. I on the other hand quickly realized the entertainment value of the posts, and the predictable hair trigger reactions that anything pointing out the failures of facts, logic, and "Off World" algebra, produce.
I am pleased to see that those who on one day bemoan the likes of big oil and global corporate conspiracies have now on another day embraced their brothers like good comrades and quote subsidized corporate references to algae fuel. The next thing we know, they will be saying that they no longer believe that government subsidies are a bad thing after all! Ah, the madness of it - no one can be trusted! :P
like good comrades and quote subsidized corporate references to algae fuel.
I have followed Edmund's since they first came on line. I do not recall you posting any link in the short time you have visited here, that had anything at all to do with diesel, biodiesel or algae production for fuel. Did I miss something or are you banned from all the other sites so you like to troll here? Most everyone I read here on these diesel threads are looking for a way to use less fuel while not giving up essential needs in a vehicle. What are you looking for? You should read what is on the horizon. It may give you a better outlook on the future of automotive transportation. The car and the ICE are not going away in our lifetime, I am willing to bet on that. I believe ruking posted this once before. It looks like the real deal at 100,000 gallons per acre per year.
The Holy Grail in the renewable energy sector has been to create a clean, green process which uses only light, water and air to create fuel. Valcent's HDVB algae-to-biofuel technology mass produces algae, vegetable oil which is suitable for refining into a cost-effective, non-polluting biodiesel. The algae derived fuel will be an energy efficient replacement for fossil fuels and can be used in any diesel powered vehicle or machinery. In addition, 90% by weight of the algae is captured carbon dioxide, which is "sequestered" by this process and so contributes significantly to the reduction of greenhouse gases. Valcent has commissioned the world's first commercial-scale bioreactor pilot project at its test facility in El Paso, Texas.
Comments
Real-World MPG average for Prius is 48. The new model next year will push that even higher. There's no contest when it comes to emission rating either.
It sure looks like this long awaited debut will end up being summed up with the word: disappointment
It sure looks like this long awaited debut will end up being summed up with the word: disappointment"...
I have no trouble at all or make much effort to get 49/50 mpg.
Just a cursory comparison with the European markets, would show your conclusion for a host of reasons to be myopic at best. Put it in the context of world wide, Toyota &/or Honda, and at best Prius, Civic Hybrid is at the very best, a niche market. Toyota Landcruiser's probably sell more world wide.
Both Toyota & Honda have for years experienced challenges in selling in the European markets.
US regulators at all levels have been fantastically successful in keeping European fuel sipping diesels (gassers also for that matter) OUT of the USA market. 48 mpg is a "gas guzzler" in comparison.
I for one would have no issues getting a Prius/Civic Hybrid if the cost was on par with Corolla/Civic gassers.
The new so-called cleaner diesel is less efficient, widing the MPG gap between it and the gas hybrids.
Also, diesel has been around for decades. Hybrids are only now approaching their first life-cycle end. So, how come European marketshare for diesel isn't higher and hybrids are gaining ground?
OLD- 45/51 combined-47
NEW-37/45 combined-40
This is for the 2004, 5-speed manual civic hybrid.
Also remember that the mpg never actually changed, just the way it was calculated. Your supposed 48mpg is about 20% better that the new EPA number.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Diesel is more efficient at speed. Hybrid is more efficient in city driving.
Diesel engines are robust and last for 100's of thousands of miles. Hybrids are in the early days of development (although electric motors are not).
Why is it a competition? Isn't the competition with passenger vehicles that get less than 30 mpg?
The new so-called cleaner diesel is less efficient, widing the MPG gap between it and the gas hybrids
FYI- this comment is ridiculous.
1. There are no 'so-called' cleaner diesels available for you to pass judgment on. To be 'so-called clean' ,the vehicle has to pass CARB- that will make it as-clean or cleaner than all the vehicles currently available.
2. 'Less efficient'- than what??Unclean diesel? Clean vs unclean diesel- there is no mileage loss. What makes it 'clean' happens in the tail-pipe.
3. What is the 'widening gap' between diesel and hybrid. Your numbers compare 'actual experience' with the hybrid to EPA for the diesel. Why don't you choose to use Ruking's 'actual experience' to compare the 2, then it looks like a wash.
Since you are doing the lumping, diesel and electric (hybrid) have been around for at least 100 years. 34 years ago I had tow vehicles that ran off plug in electric. (No Thomas Edison did NOT come by to check it out
I have read registered hybrids in the USA are @ 350,000. Put that in the passenger vehicle fleet of 251.4 M and it is at .0013922% So pick a start date, but for comparison purposes say 2003 for Prius/5 years and we are talking of a HUGE .0002784 yearly growth rate. This is with FULL regulatory blessing, etc, etc.
Even you know that new car diesels sales since the 2004 has been BANNED. It has also been no secret of the regulatory bias against diesel, since they can not constitutionally BAN it all together. Not surprisingly, diesel populations are at 2%.
Let's see Prius/Civic hybrids use RUG which has 30 ppm vs ULSD which as 15 ppm. Which has more? Which is dirtier? Obviously to you you want to convince folks 2x more is really 2x less!!?? Biodiesel approaches ZERO ppm. A Harvard study showed bio diesel (diesel) products having better emissions characteristics than gasser/hybrids and actually are BETTER than plug in electric. So it is patently obvious what is happening here.
I am ok with your bias, However you should really acknowledge BOTH sides as your continual slanting of the data does nothing for credibility. The other is while YOU and the regulatory agency's see this process as adversarial, I and others do not!!
For sure however the regulators have made America safe for gas guzzlers!!! This is a prime market for European super cars that get like 12 mpg. It is really no accident that new TDI's sales getting easily 50 mpg were banned from 2005-2009 model years in 5 states.
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Watch it dudes..................before you get "host-smacked."
I'd hate to see this forum set to READ ONLY !!!!!!!!!!!!!
So in comparison, a Prius gasser hybrid that gets 20-40% better than 48 mpg (this would include the 20% hybrid advantage) (real world for the sake of discussion), puts that at 57.6 mpg- 67.2 mpg. Indeed given my 38-42 mpg in the Civic vs a Prius/Civic hybrid 48 mpg it is simple to see the hybrid 20% advantage. When you factor in that the advantage costs from $13,436 to $7,436 more at the time..... well I leave that to you to calculate the B/E. For me a huge advantage, sans the premiums.
I would leave that to consumers whether the up-front costs make any sense. As good as this would be, there are European diesels, LONG since on the market that get that type of mileage.
Again China to the rescue!!! It is projected that China will be the new market for the foreseeable future for 400 M vehicles.
Indeed given the variables, there are limited things folks can do to keep the cost per mile driven down. One major one is to keep a vehicle long past the payment period (typically 24 mo to 60 mo) and more specifically many miles past.
Things are just warming up, as it is being announced, signaled in almost every way , the price per mile driven is lock stepped going to go much higher.
So yes, I have been appreciative of my 5 year lead time of 20-40% cheaper per mile driven fuel prices. So for example one day before Hurricane Katrina cost per mile driven .$ 057. (2.85/50=) Today's corner store 4.85/50=$ .097= 41.24% more.
Even at today's RUG prices of 3.95/39= .101282= 4.23% cheaper. But as the European comparisons reveals; since they keep out the real fuel sippers @ 60-65 mpg, this price differential is artificially LOW. In other words, the cost per mile driven is KEPT artificially HIGH.
Right now barring the car getting totaled, the advantage right now is abnormally great resale value and the spectre of going 500,000 miles PLUS. :shades:
I am just glad I made the decision years ago to keep my commute to under 50 ft. I understand most folks would have a very hard time doing that.
I'm beginning to think that until we finally get around to sustainable fuel production from the likes of micro algae (or something with an even higher yield, and so far at least, nothing even comes close), there's going to be no significant benefit to buying a diesel automobile.
Best Regards,
Shipo
I'm with you on that. I hope they don't push for more soybean biodiesel. They should be seeing the folly of the corn for ethanol boondoggle and cap their legislative pens. Nothing I have seen done by our government as an alternative to fossil fuel is more than corporate welfare for those they are beholden to. It is in the billions of dollars down the corporate drain.
That is loooong overdue.
NON-HYBRID diesel is just silly.
Like said before, denial.
NON-HYBRID diesel is just silly.
Like said before, denial
You could simply participate elsewhere.
Or answer any of the rebuttals... :surprise:
Honda is taking a good stab at it with the (upcoming) Fit/hybrid, but still the premium is at $1900. The TDI vs 1.8T controversy was triggered over 246 dollars!!!
Best Regards,
Shipo
Oh geez, even I have to agree with larsb on this one (and that's saying something). Dude, comments like that are not even remotely helpful.
For my part I want nothing to do with a hybrid of any kind, however, I'd love a nice diesel.
$ 2.35 per gal.
link title
How's that any different from what we've been reading before those new EPA estimates?
Helpful has been absent for awhile now.
Well, you described Non-Hybrid diesel as 'silly'.
We're not sure what you have to suport 'silly', that makes it unhelpful.
This isn't really that hard for you to grasp is it?
Do tell. While I'm no expert in this arena, I am however a resonably rational engineer and can typically see a farce when presented with one. For my part I have yet to see any show-stoppers with regard to biofuel from algae. Would you care to enlighten me/us?
Best Regards,
Shipo
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
Sorry, I have to call "cop out".
I've done as you've suggested, and have been doing so for some time now when the mood takes me, and I've yet to see anything that would suggest that algae based biofuel is anything but completely achievable.
Best Regards,
Shipo
I think that was the basic response to the evidence supporting cigarettes as the primary cause of cancer, asbestos exposure as the cause of asbestosis, and of course far more. What is always surprising, and entertaining, is the number of hair trigger responses from most of the remaining posters here clinging to a dying world view.
===========================================================
You might check some of the earlier posts and links on this site regarding fuel from algae, in addition to those on the net.
This site is at least entertaining.
Could you provide a link? There are over 5000 posts in this forum.
You can't blame others for doubting the accuracy of your statements when you don't/can't provide any evidence.
Every search I do regarding biofuel from algae provides information that shows just how possible a source of fuel this methodology is, and while there are certainly some technical and infrastructure challenges to overcome before the yield is high enough to literally eliminate all use of crude oil for vehicle fuel, nothing, and I repeat, NOTHING even remotely sounds like a show stopper.
Your own words:"The talk of algae for fuel has been debunked repeatedly..."
My response: :"I call shenanigans."
Why? Because if what you've written was even remotely true, then I should have no problem finding scientific dissertations that describe why algae isn't a good source for biofuel. The truth is, I have yet to find even a single source that presents an argument that even remotely supports your words.
So, if you want to maintain even a shred of credibility, I'm thinking now would be a good time for you to "walk the walk" and provide us with some references to science that debunks the talk about algae for fuel.
Best Regards,
Shipo
It looks to me like there are those that believe algae is a viable source of energy.
PetroSun has announced it will begin operation of its commercial algae-to-biofuels facility on April 1st, 2008.
The facility, located in Rio Hondo Texas, will produce an estimated 4.4 million gallons of algal oil and 110 million lbs. of biomass per year off a series of saltwater ponds spanning 1,100 acres. Twenty of those acres will be reserved for the experimental production of a renewable JP8 jet-fuel
http://gas2.org/2008/03/29/first-algae-biodiesel-plant-goes-online-april-1-2008/-
I came across a like a while back that was referencing Chevron's investments in micro algae R&D as well. Hmmm, apparently the Collective over at Chevron didn't contract hypnosis44 for his guidance. :P
Best Regards,
Shipo
http://www.biodieselnow.com/blogs/algae_as_a_feedstock/archive/2006/12/13/widesc- - ale-biodiesel-production-from-algae.aspx
And then one from wikipedia that says, "The corporations Chevron, Honeywell, and Boeing are starting algae businesses. According to Boeing's technology leader for energy and emissions, Dave Daggett, 'In the past two years, we have changed from algae skeptics to proponents'."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Algae_culture
Hmmm, I like that bit about Boeing (which I assume is the division that deals with turbines for power generation).
Best Regards,
Shipo
I have enjoyed a lot of the posts, especially the ones about the diesel conspiracy theory. Paranoia runs deep. DEs would like to see diesel tax breaks like Europe and they don't like having to meet the new emission standards. It is all so terribly unfair.
1. you will continue to burn more, (up to 40% more) when less will do.
2. the growth in the INCREASE of RUG to PUG use might see fits and starts, So instead of 103% (3% over last years growth for example, it might be ONLY 102%)
3. It is going to cost you more per mile driven to do so.
4.. Congress is doing the propaganda job as to who is the boogie man who makes all these windfall profits ($.10 on the dollar, As soon as they are satisfied the Pavlovian response is set...
5.Congress will raise the already $ .50 per gal taxation to who knows what points beyond.
So no, no trouble with the facts at all.
I think the Jetta TDI has probably sold a million copies World wide in the same time that the Prius has sold a million. As close as I can tell the Prius is only popular in Japan and the USA. That is because both countries have shunned diesel cars. Toyota cannot sell the Prius in China after building a factory for them. The Prius is not selling worth a hoot in the EU. The reason is there are so many options that are superior.
Why would you say that each time the VW TDI emissions are improved for the Euro emissions, CARB ups the anti to keep them out of CA? If CA really wants low CO2 diesel is the obvious choice of fuel. With biodiesel being the best choice when it becomes available in greater quantities. What other alternative fuel is on the horizon with any chance of meeting the demand of American drivers?
============================================================
I think you know how to do a word search here for yourself. The terms "Credibility" and "Diesel" blog are antithetical for most of the Diesel religionists here. Sites on several issues I have raised have been posted here in the past - with the usual response of "can't see them, can't hear them, can't discuss them, so they don't exist". The sites and counter arguments to algae fuel have been posted here by others, some of them now stating an opposite position from their original because, well..., because for them it does seem to be more about entertainment than information. Virtually all of the well informed posters wisely give up on this site due to the "religious" nature of the backlash. I on the other hand quickly realized the entertainment value of the posts, and the predictable hair trigger reactions that anything pointing out the failures of facts, logic, and "Off World" algebra, produce.
============================================================
Oh no - not "The Sadness". And I have always had such nice things to say about you.
Actually, I am in good company as so many similar false claims have been made about so many other people who no longer check in here.
However, because we have been through so much together, you get 110 sq ft in a low rise - with extra diesel for the stove
Please keep posting.
Phil :shades:
For the last time, post a few links to some good science that supports your point of view or take a hike.
I have followed Edmund's since they first came on line. I do not recall you posting any link in the short time you have visited here, that had anything at all to do with diesel, biodiesel or algae production for fuel. Did I miss something or are you banned from all the other sites so you like to troll here? Most everyone I read here on these diesel threads are looking for a way to use less fuel while not giving up essential needs in a vehicle. What are you looking for? You should read what is on the horizon. It may give you a better outlook on the future of automotive transportation. The car and the ICE are not going away in our lifetime, I am willing to bet on that. I believe ruking posted this once before. It looks like the real deal at 100,000 gallons per acre per year.
The Holy Grail in the renewable energy sector has been to create a clean, green process which uses only light, water and air to create fuel. Valcent's HDVB algae-to-biofuel technology mass produces algae, vegetable oil which is suitable for refining into a cost-effective, non-polluting biodiesel. The algae derived fuel will be an energy efficient replacement for fossil fuels and can be used in any diesel powered vehicle or machinery. In addition, 90% by weight of the algae is captured carbon dioxide, which is "sequestered" by this process and so contributes significantly to the reduction of greenhouse gases. Valcent has commissioned the world's first commercial-scale bioreactor pilot project at its test facility in El Paso, Texas.
http://www.valcent.net/s/Ecotech.asp?ReportID=182039