fuel economy in car commercials

"Daniel J. Stern" wrote:

> On Wed, 23 Mar 2005, Magnulus wrote:
>
> > A modern diesel makes less pollution than a gasoline engine from a few
> > decades ago.
>
> That depends on both engines' state of repair and the type of fuel burned.
> Remember, North America still has filthy high-sulphur diesel fuel.
>
> > Given that over half of air pollution is due to old, worn-out cars and
> > trucks on the road
>
> FABRICATED STATISTIC ALERT! aWHOOga! aWHOOOga!

It also has filthy high sulphur gasoline!

Phil.

Lloyd Parker wrote:

> In article >,
> "Magnulus" > wrote:
> >
> >"Lloyd Parker" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> Then why hasn't anybody done so? Everybody's jumping on the hybrid
> >> bandwagon -- Toyota, Honda, Ford, and others coming.
> >
> > If you notice, they are mostly making hybrid SUV's.
>
> Ford and Toyota. Honda isn't -- Civics and Accords.
>
> > This is an easy way
> >for them to meet their CAFE requirements- in many cases they are paying
> >penalties for having vehicles not meeting CAFE standards.
>
> Not really, since even the smallest, car-based SUVs get classified as
> trucks, even things like the PT Cruiser, and trucks have a CAFE 7 mpg lower
> than cars.
>
> > It does nothing
> >for overall fuel economy. If they cared about fuel efficiency, they would
> >be pushing small cars.
> >
> > There are off the shelf technologies that could make more efficient
> cars,
> >and cars do use them, but there are few cars that put them all together.
> >Many Japanese engines already have variable valve timing- for instance
> Honda
> >or Toyota engines.
>
> Also BMW, Mercedes, Saab, etc. But Detroit, and especially GM, sticks with
> 1960s-era technology -- pushrod OHV engines.
>
> > A few also are lean burn (Civic, Insight).
>
> Lean burn doesn't work so well with the fuel we have in the US -- BMW's
> engines are set to burn much leaner in Europe than in the US.

It's the high sulphur in US fuel that's the problem, it kills the catalyst
(the same problem as with diesel in the US).

Phil.

>
>
> > The
> >integrated starter motor is used in several European cars and also is the
> >basis for the Honda IMA hybrid system (it's actually more of an "advanced"
> >starter motor generator, with generative braking capability). VW/Audi
> also
> >has a highly efficient direct shift gearbox, which is essentially a
> computer
> >controlled manual transmission.
>
> And similar SMG (sequential manual gearboxes) are used by Ferrari,
> Lamborghini, Maserati, Toyota, BMW, Aston-Martin, etc. But some don't work
> very well, from the reviews I've read.
>
> >
> > The bottom line is it will take higher fuel prices to motivate people
> to
> >change. You are starting to see that pressure with gas averaging over
> 2.12
> >per gallon, but it will take higher prices to really push people. Only
> by
> >ending subsidies to the oil industry and forcing drivers pay the full
> costs
> >of using the roads will people make better choices. Of course, higher
> gas
> >taxes are politically hot water.
> >
> >
> Exactly. But I'd rather pay a higher price and have some of it go to build
> roads, fund health care, etc., than go to Exxon and Saudi Arabia.

Magnulus wrote:

> "The Real Bev" > wrote in message
> ...
> > You think anybody in power cares about those potholes? Yeah, right.
> >
> >
>
> That's why higher fuel taxes should only be spent on two things:
>
> 1) better roads- road improvement. Add more roads, add different
> intersection types, resurfacing, etc.
>
> 2) grants to local areas for public transportation projects
>
> I don't see how either one of these are wastes of money. If anything it
> will make the roads better to drive for everybody. Public transportation
> will get the slugs off the road and better roads will make driving better
> and faster.

Trouble is you get governors like Christie Todd-Whitman who when they come
into power spend the transportation trust fund to reduce taxes!
There needs to be a true 'lock box' otherwise politicians see that money and
go after it for their pet projects.

Phil.

On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 11:29:55 -0500, "Phil. Felton"
> wrote:

>Trouble is you get governors like Christie Todd-Whitman who when they come
>into power spend the transportation trust fund to reduce taxes!
>There needs to be a true 'lock box' otherwise politicians see that money and
>go after it for their pet projects.
>
>Phil.

You liberals sure like to throw around make believe terms about
government.

"DTJ" > wrote in message
> You liberals sure like to throw around make believe terms about
> government.

Cooking the Books
Ari Berman

George W. Bush has a plan to cut the deficit. It's called cooking
the books.

By now it's well known how Bush turned the $127 billion surplus he
inherited in 2001 into a historic $413 billion deficit by 2004. It's
less known that Bush's economic advisors incorrectly predicted a
considerably larger $521 billion shortfall last February. Amazingly,
the White House is sticking with that imaginary number--instead of
the actual $413 billion--so Bush can claim he's already cut the
deficit by $100 billion. If the fictional $521 billion somehow falls
to $260 billion, Bush can falsely claim he's cut the deficit by
half, thus fulfilling his campaign pledge.

"I've been watching this more than 30 years, and I have never seen
anything quite this egregious," Stanley Collender, senior vice
president for the large international consulting firm Financial
Dynamics, told The New York Times. "They are cutting the deficit
from a number they never believed in the beginning."

Far from shrinking the deficit, Bush's second term priorities will
likely cause it to balloon. The cost of extending the tax cuts ($1
trillion), repealing the alternative minimum tax ($500 billion),
paying for Medicare "reform" ($500 billion), and funding the war in
Iraq (news - web sites) ($100 billion) totals $2.1 trillion. And
that figure doesn't include the massive costs of privatizing Social
Security (news - web sites), which if passed by the Republican
Congress could add $2 trillion more over the next decade.

Bush claims he can compensate for the reckless spending by
increasing tax revenue. But, because of the huge tax cuts and
corporate giveaways, federal tax revenues comprise only 16.2 percent
of US GDP (news - web sites), the lowest level since the early
1950s.

In Bush's faith-based fantasy world, things can't get better until
he lies about making them worse.

DTJ wrote:

> On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 11:29:55 -0500, "Phil. Felton"
> > wrote:
>
> >Trouble is you get governors like Christie Todd-Whitman who when they come
> >into power spend the transportation trust fund to reduce taxes!
> >There needs to be a true 'lock box' otherwise politicians see that money and
> >go after it for their pet projects.
> >
> >Phil.
>
> You liberals sure like to throw around make believe terms about
> government.

Which terms I used do you think are make believe? What makes you think it's a
liberal position to distrust politicians?

Phil.

On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:42:15 -0500, "Vendicar Decarian" >
wrote:

>
>"DTJ" > wrote in message
>> You liberals sure like to throw around make believe terms about
>> government.
>
>By now it's well known how Bush turned the $127 billion surplus he
>inherited in 2001 into a historic $413 billion deficit by 2004. It's

Hey retard, there was no surplus. Your "lockbox" for SS was a fraud,
and your favorite Ken Lay supporter, slick willy klinton, used all the
SS money to make it appear, to low life incompetent fools like
yourself, that he had a surplus.

On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 10:25:37 -0500, "Phil. Felton"
> wrote:

>DTJ wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 11:29:55 -0500, "Phil. Felton"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >Trouble is you get governors like Christie Todd-Whitman who when they come
>> >into power spend the transportation trust fund to reduce taxes!
>> >There needs to be a true 'lock box' otherwise politicians see that money and
>> >go after it for their pet projects.
>> >
>> >Phil.
>>
>> You liberals sure like to throw around make believe terms about
>> government.
>
>Which terms I used do you think are make believe?

transportation trust fund
true 'lock box'

DTJ wrote:

> On Sun, 27 Mar 2005 10:25:37 -0500, "Phil. Felton"
> > wrote:
>
> >DTJ wrote:
> >
> >> On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 11:29:55 -0500, "Phil. Felton"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >Trouble is you get governors like Christie Todd-Whitman who when they come
> >> >into power spend the transportation trust fund to reduce taxes!
> >> >There needs to be a true 'lock box' otherwise politicians see that money and
> >> >go after it for their pet projects.
> >> >
> >> >Phil.
> >>
> >> You liberals sure like to throw around make believe terms about
> >> government.
> >
> >Which terms I used do you think are make believe?
>
> transportation trust fund
> true 'lock box'

NJ did have a 'transportation trust fund', however when Whitman took over it was
spent down in order to fulfill her campaign pledge to reduce taxes.

Phil.

In article >,
DTJ > wrote:
>On Sat, 26 Mar 2005 19:42:15 -0500, "Vendicar Decarian" >
>wrote:
>
>>
>>"DTJ" > wrote in message
>>> You liberals sure like to throw around make believe terms about
>>> government.
>>
>>By now it's well known how Bush turned the $127 billion surplus he
>>inherited in 2001 into a historic $413 billion deficit by 2004. It's
>
>Hey retard, there was no surplus. Your "lockbox" for SS was a fraud,
>and your favorite Ken Lay supporter, slick willy klinton, used all the
>SS money to make it appear, to low life incompetent fools like
>yourself, that he had a surplus.
>
>
1. SS has a surplus, a trust fund, that is invested in gov't bonds.
2. For 2 years under Clinton, the gov't had a surplus, not counting SS.

Retard, look to the beam in your eye first.