By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
Gasoline dropped down to $3.05 here. Good thing since I get lousy mileage creeping up to Bogus in a 15 mile long line of idiots ... ah, but I digress. :shades:
Something many people do not realize is Canada is drilling for oil right on our border. Which is ANWR. Same eco system, same caribou herds, same pool of oil. They can produce it and sell our oil to us. Makes perfect sense to me...
You embrace this future, gagrice?! ;-)
PS I kind of liked the idea put forward to tax just the imported portion of the oil we consume. But I suspect such an idea would go nowhere unless the compromise was to drill places like ANWR and the California coast to increase domestic production, and in that case it's not worth the price.
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
Naah. Whoever controls the orbital solar collectors will survive, unless we decide to mine Jupiter for hydrogen instead.
I think CA has a 4 cents tax on each gallon of gas produced with foreign oil.
we should only do what we want?
somewhere in between is the answer.
we have to hand this planet down to our grandchildren some day.
$4 gas is coming. I don't think it will stay if it comes in the next few years.
maybe 2011 it could stay.
the next president is not going to solve the oil crunch.
Now averaging 23 mpg for a group of cars, trucks and vans and I gave up figuring out how to improve on it. The one that gets the lowest is a 16 mpg big [non-permissible content removed] truck that will be 10 years old in 2011 and it will use less than a gallon to drive to work.
The one I use the most is a 29 mpg car. when $4 gas hits, it will cost $4 a day to commute to a 14 mile away job. In the truck it will be $7 a day.
back when I bought my first home I got a 13.5% fixed rate loan and gas was $1.35 a gallon. now gas is $3.04 and interest rate is 6.0%. Overall, I'm better off now.
That's how the average house went from $170,000 to $230,000 in five years -- interest rates dropped from 7% to 4%. Now interest rates are back at 6%, and prices are coming down. No mystery there.
The same thing is happening with the gasoline market. Prices have doubled in the past five years, so efficient cars are selling better, and new methods of efficiency (hybrids) and alternative fuel vehicles (hydrogen) are being produced.
Nothing escapes market forces. People just complain because the transitional periods take longer than everyone wants.
If you're tired of complaining about ever-higher gas prices, buy a hybrid. I did. Now, I couldn't care less if gas goes to $4/gal. It won't affect me. In fact, a price of $5 won't hurt either ..... but it'd certainly make my Civic Hybrid worth a lot of money, maybe even more than I paid for it.
Basically, a hybrid car immunizes you from OPEC's price scams. Try it, you'll like it.
.
But. back then my monthly mortgage interest was 47% of my monthly gross income.
Today, the 6% interest on twice as big a house is 11% of my monthly gross income.
Back then gas to a 16 mile away job was 51 a month or 4.5% of my monthly gross income.
Today gas to a 15 mile away job is 1.3% of my monthly gross income in my gas guzzler truck.
It would take over $9 a gallon gas to be as bad as back then.
The point is I once paid 47.1% of my gross income for mortgage interest and $4 gas would now swallow 1.8% of my income and $5 gas would take 2.2% of my gross monthly income.
The hybrid would not change much. As a family with 6 vehicles, I could save more money by taking two off the road (ins and regis) than by driving a hybrid given to me free. What would the hybrid replace? the low mileage one that I drive 4k mi a year or the 29 mpg one I drive 14k a year? In either case, the 185 gallons a year savings will take 2.76 years to pay back the 7% sales tax on the hybrid.
Once again, toyota and the gov trying to get me to think my best move is to send them my money to stop terrorism.
Even with a hybrid when gas goes from $3/gallon to $4/gallon your fuel prices still increase by 1/3rd.
And don't be so smug about that hybrid. For what you paid for that hybrid I paid for my small fuel efficient car and enough gas to drive nearly 90K miles. FWIW for us to get to the same cost of car plus gas (presuming $4/gallon gas) would take us driving over 150K miles.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
How long ago was "back then", though? Hopefully, your income has also risen substantially, since you have years of experience in the workforce, probably gotten some raises and promotions under your belt, etc.
If you want to see an example of how things have changed, and not for the better, check this out. In 1994, I was 24 years old. I bought a condo, a starter home, for $84K. I had only been out of college for about a year, had only been full time with my company for about 10 months, and was still pulling down a part time job. It was a reasonable match...a starter home for someone just starting out in the working world. Between the two jobs, I was probably making about $26K
Ten years later, I sold that condo for $185K. The guy who bought it was 30 years old, a manager at some financial institution, and made about $50K per year. When I bought that condo in 1994, that was about the cheapest neighborhood around. It still was, in 2004. However, $185K is not starter home money, I don't care what people say. And $50K per year, unless you're very fortunate, is not the kind of salary most people fresh out of college pull down. So while I was able to afford that condo back in 1994 (and it was a stretch at that time, trust me), I'd imagine that typical recent college grad just starting off in the workforce, 10 years later, wouldn't be able to get into something like that.
Even worse, my old condo was re-sold in early 2007, for $245K. Still the cheapest neighborhood in that town. And still a starter home in the sense that it's the cheapest community around. But still WAY out of reach for your typical recent college graduate.
I have no idea what people just starting out in the workforce do for housing nowadays. Stay at home a few more years? Get a couple friends together and rent an apartment or small house?
As for gasoline, I remember when I got my license back in 1987, gasoline cost around 85-95 cents per gallon. It was rare for it to go over a buck. I made $3.75 per hour back then, and minimum wage was $3.35. So in working an hour, not counting taxes, FICA, etc, a minimum wage earner back then could buy about 3.5 gallons of gas. I could buy about 4.
Nowadays, at $3.00 per gallon, to follow the same ratio, minimum wage would have to be around $10.50 per hour. And my $3.75 job would be more like $12.00 per hour.
Yes and New Hampshire where I live has a registration-property tax each year based on the MSRP. So if you have a $25K Prius, you're going to pay more than if you have a new (or even better) 2 year old Cobalt or Focus or similar.
If you want to by a more loaded $25K new car I'd suggest waiting to see the new diesels that VW and Honda are coming out with.
Reaganomics worked better for the little guy.
but maybe just for a day or three?
Anyway, when gasoline exceeds $4/gallon in the northeast i am going to PARTY LIKE IT'S 2999! WOO HOO!
hopefully diesel prices will drop below premium-gas price as usual when springtime arrives, so when $4 arrives this summer, it will be for 91 or 87 octane gas, with diesel a bargain at $3.99 or 3.69 or 3.49 .
in addition to the 2999 partay, i' might tend to drive my 22 mpg (gas) Holden less and my 45 mpg (diesel) VW more, such as on my yearly cross-country commute. [in my world, commuting the TDI cross-country gives me carbon-credits so I can feel warmer and fuzzier about burning rubber and fuel gratuitously/locally on boston highways where the 100hp TDI gets no highway-respect (tailgators/cut-off-ers) and the 400hp Holden maintains absolute dominion over all the mean drivers!].
a great advantage of $4 or $5 or $10/gallon fuel is that it will make just about everyone THINK more.
happy $4/gallon leap-year everyone!
I might trust a Honda or Toyota diesel, but not anything out of Europe.
Still, I don't think diesel has much of a future. The same goes for gasoline engines.
We're on the verge of the lithium age. Currently, lithium ion batteries appear to be in the final stages of development for hybrid cars. There are other lithium-based batteries being developed that will take at least an 80% recharge within 5 minutes or less and go over 200 miles between recharges on the highway. With that kind of performance, an engine and tranny will no longer be necessary. Without an engine and tranny, a vehicle would cost less, weigh less (unless it has a huge battery pack), and be a lot less complex. No more engine and tranny maintenance and no more complicated exhaust systems, to name a few biggies. Air filters will be for cabin purification, not engine breathing. Everything else like heat, A/C, P/S, will run off the battery pack. No belts or hoses will be needed - just additional electrical wiring.
Until then, a plug-in lithium ion battery will do just fine. Recharging stations will probably begin showing up at gas stations before engines are eliminated. Plug it in, slide your credit card for a set time, and you'll soon be on your way with an adequate recharge.
What I'd like to see is a renewable energy source supplying electricity to service stations for recharging. That'll satisfy the greenies! It does make a lot of sense, when you get past the initial knee-jerk reaction and think about it. Whether it be wind, solar, or hydrogen fuel cell power, we've got to get serious about getting away from burning stuff for power.
I just found this story about Toyota's new plug-in hybrid: hybridcar.com
as for Lithium batteries, don't hold your breath. I'm afraid even a middle-aged moronic flatulator like myself will not live to see Lithium batteries power vehicles. the lithium batteries tend to get very hot and combust even at low current-draw - imagine the fireworks in a high-current-draw application!
hydrogen fuel cells, pffffft. hydrogen is big-$ to produce. no free lunch there.
wind power is nice, maybe that's a real free lunch. but the greenies oppose windmills because some birds will get splattered, and because windmills ruin the view from their estates on the Mass-bay islands.
solar might be nearly a free lunch, except that it tends to move the albedo of the planet in the wrong direction. (could a *white* photovoltaic cell work?)
unfortunately i don't have time to read 3000 messages to see what such an esteemed flatulator as yourself will do when gasoline is above $4/gallon, so if you wouldn't mind reiterating for me, that would be a gas.
Wind generation is going great guns just a few miles up the road from me on the Campo Indian Reservation. No green wackos can block them on the Rez. Too bad that some of the supposed environmentalist like Ted Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy Jr have blocked the Wind generators that would be an eyesore while they are out sailing their yachts.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20050829/news_1m29wind.html
The point of this forum is what about 4 dollars and up per gallon?
As gas goes up in price we will continue to surrender to the abuse by the oil and auto industries we need to send a message that we are willing to move forward with new technologies - such as hybrid and electric cars.
I agree that the "Fuel Cell" seems fishy to me too. If it does become viable, it seems like a sure fire way for the current industries to maintain control as the market shifts from "Gas" to Fuel Cell.
The people that say that Batteries will never be ready are not following the current news. They are here and it is only a matter of time and desire to move that way.
(Look at the Tesla link title) Also many are driving EVs all over the world. I think that we need to move away from fossil fuels altogether. I have purchased a Prius. I know that the gas savings will not offset price between a Prius and some econobox like a Yaris or an Aveo. (People keep making that comparison. I have owned a Chevy Colt and a Toyota Corolla and would not try to compare them to a Prius. It is in a different class in many ways). Anyway you have to start somewhere.
Some of the people who say the lithium batteries will not be appropriate for cars are indeed following the current news but are skeptical engineers. I admire Tesla and the engineer who bailed-out of the internet-boom and designed much of it. But my advice would be: sell tesla short. I think pure-electric cars will remain forever-incapable of meeting the driving requirements of USA consumers for the next decade or three, but would love to be wrong about that.
i think EVs can be a niche part of 'the solution' but unless they are charged via solar or wind, the inefficiency of charging them via remote power plants is more polluting & more wasteful of energy & more-expensive than just burning gasoline.
ttfn... happy leap-year!
If that is the case, why not in the USA? Or are you referring to NEVs that are used on golf courses and in many retirement communities? I have test driven the only EV that is available in the USA. It was the Xebra. Hardly usable for anyone needing to go on streets posted over 45 MPH. I think the EPA & the NHTSA will block them for safety reasons. The home brew EV is probably the best bet.
My guess is the Tesla will go the way of the Tucker. Some great ideas that will never make it to the marketplace. Hope you did not plunk your $30,000 down. The company looks to me to be in total disarray.
First, as I've found in my Civic Hybrid, the electric boost drops noticeably in cold weather. And Texas certainly doesn't get the kind of cold that northern states do. So I imagine that EVs would suffer performance and range issues during winter.
That brings up the second problem, which is EV range in any weather. Even if an electric car can get 200 miles per charge, that doesn't qualify it as a choice for anyone who ever wants to leave one city and drive to another.
Sure, we do 90% of our driving within 50 miles of our homes. But occasionally we want to drive from Dallas to Kansas City to see the folks. That's 500 miles, and represents a major hurdle for an EV. Would we have to stop every 200 miles for a recharge? And for how long? Does a 7-hour trip now become a 9-hour one?
Obviously, an EV won't cut it for a road trip. So we'll have to retain a traditional gas vehicle for those occasions. That renders EVs a step in the right direction (like hybrids), but not a solution.
And then there's the price.
No one outside of Hollywood is going to pay $100,000 to wear a "greener-than-thou" badge. Tom Hanks drives an $80,000 electric Toyota SUV, but how many of those are parked in your neighbors' garages?
GM says its Volt will cost $30,000, and be ready in 3 years. I don't believe either claim, but I do hope that Bob Lutz proves me wrong. In any case, I think even $30 grand is pushing the price envelope. I struggled with paying $21,000 for the HCH, and that price only worked because I drive more than 20K miles per year. $30,000 is a financial deal-breaker, which means the Volt will be a political statement, not a practical choice. More Hollywood.
I hate OPEC as much as anyone, and I'm willing to pay a little more to someone else (Honda) to pay a little less to them. But ONLY a little more.
.
Yes like this morning where I had to warm-up the car and clear the windows. So I would be cutting the range right away by using window/mirror defrosters and to generally heat the car. And how about the loss from lights and the radio.
And my work or anywhere else certainly do not have any accomodations for recharging. Even where I live - in an apartment complex, I'd have no idea where or how I'd recharge it. I can't see that every parking spot in America would be setup with a recharger. By the time you lay the high-amp cables and put the weatherproof recharger there, and a payment system on public ones, you're talking quite a bit of $.
The Tesla is a nice engineering example; if I had a lot of $, and a garage for the recharging, didn't need a rearseat or large trunk, and lived somewhere warm, I'd say it was practical as a 2nd fun car.
Tesla Motors is not a publicly traded company.
Some of the people who say the lithium batteries will not be appropriate for cars are indeed following the current news but are skeptical engineers.
The Honda Clarity will be using a Li-ion battery pack. I have no idea how expensive this battery pack is but it is obviously capable of an automotive application.
i think EVs can be a niche part of 'the solution' but unless they are charged via solar or wind, the inefficiency of charging them via remote power plants is more polluting & more wasteful of energy & more-expensive than just burning gasoline.
That's a meaningless statement. You use the term power plant as if it represents some fixed standard in terms of efficiency and pollution.
Worst case scenario is if you get 100% of your electricity from a coal fired power plant. These produce 2 lbs of CO2 per delivered kWh. An ICE produces 20 lbs of CO2 per gallon burned. A typical EV can travel 4-5 miles on a kWh. So unless you're driving a Prius you are generating more CO2 than you would be by driving an EV that is getting recharged from coal. If your power plant uses natural gas then it produces half as much CO2 as coal. If your power plant employs nuclear or hydro they you aren't generating any CO2. In addition to that the cost of electricity is roughly the equivalent of 80 cents/gallon gasoline and it is domestically produced. The benefits outweigh the drawbacks even if you're burning coal.
If/when gasoline prices go above $4/gallon a lot more people will start considering the merits of an EV. Sure they will have some limitations when compared to an ICE but it will be a matter of trade-offs. Will people put up with the inconvenience of re-charging on the occasional long trip in order to save $2,000/year in fuel and maintenance costs? The people that answer yes to this question represent more than a niche market.
OPEC will milk the Pakistan turmoil until gas hits $4/gal.
Secondly OPEC countries have invested much of the money they've made in the last 35 years in western economies - stocks. They have done so to the point where it would be foolish of them to see oil go so high as to trigger even a small recession which would cause a 10-20% reduction in the markets, and their wealth.
The price of oil is driven by a bunch of analysts on Wall Street and London, and other financial markets. Oil contracts are bid-on and sold. It's not much different then how the price of corn or wheat is determined for farmers. And you're right Pakistan (or Nigeria) could be an issue.
Now people could buy used cars which saves a lot of money for gas; as long as the car is not too old and expensive. i'm thinking the best deals are on 1 and 2 year old cars which are still under warranty for 1 or 2 years.
But a new wild-card will be entering the market soon. If the Chinese bring copies of cars like the Civic or Corolla to market with quality that is 80-90% of those vehicles, and does so for under $10K, then you'll have consumers with a whole bunch of freed-up $ for gasoline.
So that will be another option for the car-buyer in the not too distant future. If you think the Chinese can't make decent quality products, you should reconsider because the majority of what you've probably bought in the last few years (especially electronics) is from China!
On a bicycle it would cost nothing.
http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080102/wall_street.html
What were all those folks saying about the "unthinkable" $100/bbl mark as recently as 2 years ago? That it would be the end of the economy as we know it? And yet, here we are in what is probably at worst a mild recession so far, and most of the so-called experts won't even come right out and call it THAT.
But I am sure this means $4 gas come early spring for us northern Californians....
:-(
2014 Mini Cooper (stick shift of course), 2016 Camry hybrid, 2009 Outback Sport 5-spd (keeping the stick alive)
According to some experts, higher energy and fuel prices won't have as much of an effect on the economy as they would have several decades ago.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22475646/
as for Tesla Motors not being publically traded, maybe there was a nonzero amount of meaning in my 'sell tesla short' comment just the same?
as for OPEC and the larger oil-producers, it's their oil, they should charge whatever the market will bear, and produce as much as they want, or embargo as much as they want. i said exactly the same thing as a 12-year-old in 1973, a lone/unpopular voice in my class.
Thats not true, it will cost you the time and time is money. Not only that but being stinky when you get to the office, getting wet when in rains or snows and freezing to death on days like today.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Besides, many businesses have shower facilities - mine does. And time is only money if you're not riding fast enough.
A 50% power loss is ridiculous. The highest value I've heard is 30%. Do you have a source. And even if that is true it is such an extreme example as to not be relevant. Much like when you talk about the efficiency and pollution of "power plants". It's like saying that something is the color of fruit. I agree that if you take the dirtiest coal power plant and transmit its electricity across the country it might not be all that clean or efficient. Is that the benchmark you're using for forming your opinions? If so then yes, it is meaningless. Electricity can be transmitted in a cost effective manner at distances over 3,000 miles. In 1995 the average power loss due to transmission in the US was around 7-8%. Trivial when you compare the 90% efficiency of an electric motor to the 30% efficiency of an ICE.
Regardless, most people don't care as much about efficiency as they do about cost. At $3/gallon the typical ICE vehicle will cost over 10 cents per mile for gasoline. At 10 cents per kWh the EV will cost 2 cents per mile.
I have no problem with OPEC cutting it's production. I don't see this happening. They are as dependent on oil revenue as we are on their oil. Then again this is the region that cultivates suicide bombers.
anyway, if the transmission lines are long enough, the loss will be arbitrarily high, approaching 100%!
i do recognize your points and they are well-taken, except that your analysis an "90% efficiency" number is not an apples-to-apples comparison - it omits the efficiency of the power generation itself - we must multipley that efficiency by that of the electric motor, as well as the efficiency across whatever length of transmission lines. also the cost/efficiency of obtaining the fuel factors in, but maybe that's a wash if we assume the fuel is "oil" for both the power plant and the ICE vehicle.
your point about cost per mile is especially well taken - that number is what might cause some consumers to buy EVs, if their driving requirements are wimpy enough that an EV could suffice. Those of us who have multiple vehicles might be especially interested - we could drive the EV for city-ish short-commutes, and then use a real car (ICE) when we were doing a distance road-trip.
One thing that i would add to your cost discussion is the TCO/total-cost-of-ownership. even with fuel cost > $3/gallon, fuel is barely 20% of the total cost of ownership even for the least-expensive/most-mpg vehicle.
we could probably have an interesting and agreeable discussion about your comment about opec & suicide bombers but that would surely go beyond the scope of this forum.
I probably like the idea of an EV as much as anyone here, except those that have a home built EV. The one thing being left out in the equation is safety. As far as I can tell the EVs offered till about 2002 were not crash tested. The RAV4 EV for example. For the EV to go mainstream it will end up with a ton of safety crappola. Will that load it beyond its usefulness? The Prius only has about 90 LBs of battery to contend with. What happens to those crash test scores when you add another 500 lbs of batteries? The Prius is not as safe as Corolla with just a little battery.
Has the much touted Tesla had any crash tests? I doubt it. I also doubt it could pass the current requirements. So will the NHTSA drop their regulations to accomodate the EV? Again the only EV sold in CA that can go on 35 MPH streets is a 3 wheeler is registered as a motorcycle. Entities such as CARB & NHTSA will present more stumbling blocks to the EV than where to plug it in at night.
2021 Kia Soul LX 6-speed stick
Personally I believe that factors like low-polluting, abundant domestic supply, low cost are all more important than the overall efficiency.
You might want to calculate the area required to generate a sizable fraction of our energy use - it's amazing. So there's the cost to produce the panels, plus the cost to take square miles of land and convert them to solar energy farms, plus the cost of maintaining backup electrical generating capacity for cloudy days. Lots of other costs involved...
I believe that Berkeley, CA has a program where they'll pay the upfront costs of installing a PV system on your house and you can pay it off through your utility bill over the course of many years (not sure the exact number).
A lot of my neighbors have PV cells on their roofs and in their yards. I have not gotten their opinions yet on the practical aspects. We get a lot more sun than downtown San Diego year round. That makes them a little more attractive economically. Not esthetically.
1. live to far away from their job, and/or
2. have to carry kids and cargo, and/or
3. are too lazy.
to ride a bike.
We've got it all screwed up in this country.
Instead of spending billions on adding new lanes to existing superhighways, we should be spending that money PERFECTING PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION.
If the City buses, light rail, and subways in all the major cities could have enough routes to get anyone anywhere within 45 minutes, then many thousands of more people could and would use it.
And if you're the typical 2 or 3 car family, wanting to recharge their EV's everynight, how much more would that be?
In a grid-tied system you could let the grid store your excess energy for when you needed it.
I've lived in the mid-Atlantic and New England for years, and at this time of year it is usually cloudy, and we get about 9 hours of low-intensity daylight. So electrical storage would be important. physically how and where do you envision this energy-storage? And if we add in the storage requirements for all the additional EV's that you propose, where is that stored?
Solar energy might not be quite ready for prime time but it's getting close.
You should modify that to - it is close technically (not economically w/o incentives) to meeting current non-EV needs in select areas of the country.
That's a problem since you'll never get anything perfect. Why don't we look at reality in a city that has very good public transportation. I don't know how Boston would rank, but I can tell you what I think of that example - IT IS NOT AS GOOD AS A CAR, though it is less $.
I won't even get into the issue of sharing space on a train or bus with people who may be ill or stink. First I have to drive a number of miles to a train-station, and pay to park, getting there early to make up for variables such as traffic, or trouble finding a parking. Then I have to walk to the ticket window, and then wait on the platform. Then the train takes me to a station. I then have to either walk a bit to my destination, or walk to a bus and again wait. Then get off and walk some more.
You just can't make this any shorter; and it is inconvenient. I do not want to walk and wait. The car allows people to control their environment and to go door-to-door, and you're not going to beat that convenience, unless you have Star Trek transporters in mind for public transport.
For every 5 miles your vehicles are driven add 1 kWh.
PS
You are not even allowed to carry a gun to protect yourself from thieves that are well armed. Mass transit is worthless.
Kernick touched on the other reasons such as smelly and crazy people. Plus, confining a large number of people in a small, enclosed space facilitates the spread of everything from tuberculosis to influenza.
And those same crowded circumstances create appealing targets for terrorist attacks. Watch the video of the Spanish train station bombing a few years ago.
We all want a cleaner environment, but we're not willing to fight crowds, get sick, and possibly die in order to accomplish that.
.
If you've ever spent much time commuting on the DC beltway during rush hour I don't think you would use the word convenience. DC may be an extreme example but it is an indication of where we are heading as a result of our short sighted approach to urban planning in this country. The amount of time and gas being wasted in congestion is growing at a fairly rapid pace. The policy of building and trying to maintain more and more roads has already become unsustainable.
I've known several people that lived in the South Bay area of SF that would drive their car a couple miles to the train staion and then take the train into the financial district to work. They all thought it was great and it had nothing to do with saving money. The appeal was purely the convenience of being able to sit down, read a paper, sip on their coffee and not bother with the traffic.
I have spent a lot of time in Asia and Europe and have used many public transit systems. I am always impressed with how easy it is; I can't read Japanese, Chinese or German, yet I have never had an issue getting to where I need to go due to the intuitiveness of the system, and the closer proximity of the cities themselves. Few people drive to the train in Asia or Europe; there is a station within walking distance of a lot more people than would be possible for here. This also makes the job of buses more realistic and effective...they can be used as a support system instead of the primary transit system [like it is used here in Seattle].
Could Americans design clean transit systems that are easy to understand? Of course we could; we're pretty clever when we want to be. But the current model of urbanization here really makes it nearly impossible, no matter how well designed it is. I'm not saying sprawl is good or bad; it just is... :confuse: Does it mean that we should continue to accept this lifestyle because it already exists? Or should urban planners consider the possibility that gas and the auto may not be forever and think differently in the future?
I certainly don't know the answer, but am interested in the debate.
25 NX 450h+ / 24 Sienna Plat AWD / 23 Civic Type-R / 21 Boxster GTS 4.0
I ended up eating tons more, causing food shortages. This also drove the price of food way up.
Then there were methane emissions. The eastern seaboard became flammable, basically. You thought forest fires were bad?
My muscle sores meant one thing - prescription drugs. I became addicted so that made health care unaffordable for America.
It also started the addiction to prescription drugs. Just don't call me Rush Limbaugh.
I lost my job, and that created the unemployment problem. Then homelessness.
I had to burn the rubber tires to stay warm in winter. You guessed it - pollution and global warming resulted.
Sorry 'bout that.
But yeah, the DC Beltway can look pretty ugly during rush hour. Or when there's construction. Or an accident. Route 50 going into DC (mornings) or coming from it (evenings) can be pretty sickening, too. :sick: