# Smart Cars Will Hit the US Soon



## MrFSS (Nov 27, 2007)

Will they catch on here as they have in Europe?

Full story is *HERE*.


----------



## jamesontheroad (Dec 3, 2007)

MrFSS said:


> Will they catch on here as they have in Europe?


They will just as soon as your gas prices rise to match those that we pay. Regular unleaded fuel here in the UK costs around £1/litre. There are 3.78 litres to one US gallon, and approximately $2.06 to £1. That means I pay approximately $7.79 per US gallon. Or at least I would do, if I owned a car :lol:

In fact, I've just been to see Crude Awakening at my local cinema. The film is a pretty sound documentary about 'peak oil' - that point at which the earth reaches its peak of oil production. By all accounts, we're either at that point now or approaching it. The situation is bleakest for the USA, because the entire country has been designed around the car, or rather the concept of personal mobility. Hybrid cars are a con, since they are incredibly labour intensive and polluting to produce, and leave rather nasty acid batteries once they reach the end of their lives. Ethanol fuel is also a non-starter, embraced by big oil and the big four automakers because it's a relatively quick fix to make it look like their doing something. But by all calculations, farming ethanol crops to produce oil requires almost as much energy to produce the fuel as the finished product can provide. The American automakers attitude is to use these dead end technologies to sustain current standards of automobiles, i.e. with hybrid Hummers or ethanol-compatible SUVs. But the only solution looks like a very drastic downshifting in our daily energy expectations and consumptions. The Smart, and other compact vehicles, will inevitably be part of that solution. They won't replace Ford F350s, but they will replace many other vehicles. Your fear of being rear-ended by a big rig or a truck will be significantly reduced when you notice how few people will be able to afford to drive them :lol:

*j* :blink:


----------



## George Harris (Dec 3, 2007)

jamesbrownontheroad said:


> Ethanol fuel is also a non-starter, embraced by big oil and the big four automakers because it's a relatively quick fix to make it look like their doing something. But by all calculations, farming ethanol crops to produce oil requires almost as much energy to produce the fuel as the finished product can provide.


Some people feel that when an honest total calculation is done, production of ethanol is a negative. In other words, it takes more energy to produce it than it provides. However it fulfills that most important of political criteria: Look like you are doing something. It also plays well in the farm states as it is a new market for corn, and therefore their congresscritters like to encourage it.

I feel like the whole global warming issue is a sideshow, a diversion, or worse. We must reduce DRASTICALLY how much oil and all other fossil fuels we burn because they are finite resources. Whether the globe is warming, cooling, or staying the same is irrelevant to that fact.


----------



## jamesontheroad (Dec 4, 2007)

George Harris said:


> We must reduce DRASTICALLY how much oil and all other fossil fuels we burn because they are finite resources. Whether the globe is warming, cooling, or staying the same is irrelevant to that fact.


Note to Amtrak: 85% (?) of your trains are diesel powered. Diesel is made from oil. Oil is a finite resource (see above). You have maybe a decade left before oil will leap in price, and maybe less than a century until it's gone. Better start thinking about alternate methods of propelling d'em trains sooner rather than later. And don't bank on your government helping you (although to be honest, has Amtrak ever expected that?).

*j* :blink:


----------



## Guest (Dec 4, 2007)

There is a rumor floating around investment circles that an unacceptable byproduct of burning ethanol is strychnine. Perhaps some of you in the midwest can extrapolate on this or discount it entirely.


----------



## gswager (Dec 5, 2007)

Guest said:


> There is a rumor floating around investment circles that an unacceptable byproduct of burning ethanol is strychnine. Perhaps some of you in the midwest can extrapolate on this or discount it entirely.


What is "strychnine"?

Producing ethanol from corn is 1 oil: 4 ethhanol.

From what I've heard from Brazil is 1:15(?) on sugar cane.

Right now US is exploring using switchgrass which supposedly to increase the ratio.

I do not know if it is includes on using farm equipments & transportation or not.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jan 3, 2008)

Amtrak will look more and more attractive as fuel prices rise. Diesel costs good money- I know that because my car is diesel. But jet fuel costs more money. And planes use a lot more jetfuel than trains use diesel. The costs will affect airline ticket prices more than Amtrak ticket prices.


----------

