Image: Matt Collins
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
On May 19 President Barack Obama announced a new federal gas mileage standard: by 2016 the nation's entire car and light truck fleet should average 35.5 miles per gallon. Or just slightly less than the highway mileage I get in my 17-year-old Honda Civic.
The increase in the mileage requirement is actually modest. "The automakers' fleet average has been 27.5 mpg for years," according to an automobile insurance expert I spoke to. "However, this 'whole fleet average' is [expletive]. The rules by which they are allowed to achieve the fleet average are a joke." So when the rubber meets the road, 35.5 will be more like 32 or 28 or, more frighteningly, whatever number General Motors's stock happens to be trading at in 2016."
Nevertheless, the new standard may seem like a valiant (a mediocre Plymouth I drove in the 1970s) initiative on the horizon (a truly lousy Plymouth I owned in the 1980s) to make the country a bit less reliant (a crummy Plymouth I somehow avoided) on foreign oil, as well as less polluting and more innovative. But some fossil-fuel fans were aghast. Oklahoma senator Tom Coburn seemed near tears as he softly asked, “What if you want to drive a gas hog? You don’t have the right any longer in this country to spend your money to drive a gas hog?”
Senator, I feel your pain. But I offer you a solution, based on American ingenuity, sweat and spirit: with proper maintenance and driving behavior, it’s possible to ooze many fewer miles out of a given gallon of gas than whatever standard the feds might impose on us. Here are some tips for turning even the most fuel-efficient vehicle they can force us to drive into a gas-guzzling petroleum pig:
- Always do jackrabbit starts. It’s easy, wastes gas and makes enough noise to let your fellow drivers know that you’ve got money to burn.
- Make sure to accelerate and brake a lot as you drive, which can lower your highway mileage by a third.
- Banish the phrase “cruise control” from your lexicon, unless you’re trying to keep Tom from expounding on the history of psychiatry or from jumping on Oprah’s couch.
- Keep the tires underinflated. It’s a small thing, but every 3 percent loss in energy efficiency is a waste worth working for.
- Never, ever get tune-ups. Such vigilant lack of vigilance should squander about another 4 percent.
- Idle whenever possible. The only thing more efficient at being inefficient than this zero-mpg activity is to put the car up on blocks and run the engine with a brick on the accelerator. (If you commit to that latter effort, be sure not to do it in the garage—despite what some other members of Congress may insist, carbon emissions can be dangerous!)
- Never stow anything in the truck if you can tie it on the roof. Aerodynamic drag will also drag down the mileage. Run the air conditioner with the windows open to increase wind resistance as well.
- Never combine trips. If the supermarket and the dry cleaner are right next to each other, go to the supermarket, go home to drop off the groceries, then go back to the dry cleaner. (They probably need the extra time to finish the Martinizing, anyway.) Best time for these elective trips? Rush hour. Getting stuck in traffic is always a great way to decrease mileage.
- Finally, carry as much deadweight as possible. Pull all those back issues of Scientific American out of the basement and load them into the trunk. And the backseat. And the floor. Other magazines, newspapers and books also do a dandy job of filling space with weight that fritters away fuel. If you’ve gone digital on the reading front, try filling the car with lumber, concrete blocks or gold bars. Which may come in handy for buying gas in 2016.
For more valuable tips such as these, go to the federal government’s gas mileage tips Web site, www.fueleconomy.gov, and do the opposite of the advice listed. Because, Senator Coburn, they can make the fleet average higher. But they’ll have to pry the gas pedal from my cold lead foot.
Note: This article was originally printed with the title, "Waste Management."
Already a Digital subscriber? Sign-in Now
If your institution has site license access, enter here.
See what we're tweeting about
19 Comments
Add CommentWe could do without the non-scientific snarky tone. But if you do want to include politics and be snarky, you could have also added the comment that "clearly, our nanny state government can make better decisions for us than separate individuals spending their own money as they choose".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisProviding information on how to save money is a good thing. But the individual should make the choice on how their individually earned money is spent, it should not be dictated.
The author seems to think that 35.5 mpg is no big deal since his tiny old car can achieve that mark. However, out here in the real world many people have needs incompatable with that type of car. This fact alone makes the 35.5 mpg requirement not feasible without drastically increasing the cost of the vehicle or restricting the size and power, rendering the vehicle useless for its intended purpose.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf you're so worried about carbon emissions, how about advocating for a transparent means to achieve the same end. By transparent I mean honest and straightforward. The mileage standards amount to a hidden tax and arbitrary government intervention. If you simply tax the item you want to restrict (fuel), you will have reductions with less distortion of the economy.
Actually the article is spot on. Many people THINK they have needs incompatible with that TYPE of car, but they are deluded by group think. It was only little more than ten years ago when the SUV kick got started. First the LandRovers, then everyone had to have an Explorer, and it grew from there. Before that, most people drove sedans.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAverage mpg is the wrong measure, we need a "gpm" standard.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSay I sell two cars, one with 1000 mpg and one with 10 mpg. Both drive 10 miles, and average fuel economy is (10 + 10)/1.01 = about 20 mpg, *not* 505 mpg.
This is avoided by using gallons per mile instead (assuming similar average miles driven for each value of gpm), or by dividing total miles driven by total gallons used across the entire fleet.
Also, I agree a gas tax would be even better than a gpm standard. That would avoid problems of people driving more when they get better gas mileage, and would amount to people directly internalizing the negative externalities they are imposing on everyone else by burning fuel.
Are you actually crying about the message the report is trying to send? Senators in Congress should not be this childish and I view it as an insult to what our goal as Americans should be. Anyone who has children should be all about a cleaner, brighter future instead of worrying about not being able to play with a 12 mpg 3/4 ton gas hog. A little FYI, All the people that I know that drive these gas hogs all strive to get or wish they could get better mileage. But when the government wants to help this issue along, all of a sudden it's a matter of taking my rights away. Way to go, Bass Ackwards America.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAre you actually crying about the message the report is trying to send? Senators in Congress should not be this childish and I view it as an insult to what our goal as Americans should be. Anyone who has children should be all about a cleaner, brighter future instead of worrying about not being able to play with a 12 mpg 3/4 ton gas hog. A little FYI, All the people that I know that drive these gas hogs all strive to get or wish they could get better mileage. But when the government wants to help this issue along, all of a sudden it's a matter of taking my rights away. Way to go, Bass Ackwards America.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThank you Severian for instructing me as to what I should think. I will assimilate ......... now, I'm sure, I can tow my camper with a Prius. I'm sure I can take 6 soccer players to a game with my Prius. Before I was thinking I needed a more substantial vehicle. I guess I really have been deluded by group think.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe same loads that today "require" a giant-sized F140 or Silverado to haul around were being pulled just as well by the relatively tiny pick-ups we used to have back in the 80's. Performance-wise there is no difference in vehicle capacity. The only reason people think they need these ridiculous oversized vehicles today is because they are affected by the spectre of consumerism, ie, 'more (bigger) is always better'. This is a joke and a plague on any effort we make to reclaim efficiency in the tools we use to get things done.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBy the way soccerdad, are all six of those kids your own? Because if not, it seems to me you wouldn't need that big SUV if their own parents could take some time to drive them once in a while. Or is that too radical a concept?
Funny article. Funnier still are all the comments of people whining about their supposed loss of freedom. For all you flag waving, pickup driving, socialist (yes you are too) toads, there will still be plenty of heavy junkers of substandard quality iron flowing out of Detroit for years to come. They will be subsidized by GM "Gov't Motors" and built by the Unions that are paid with your tax dollars.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGee galaxy-man. Thanks for pointing out that we are hallucinating when we decide on which vehicle we are going to purchase. We really don't know what will work for us. Are you available on a consulting basis so we can check in and find out what we really need?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd by the way, I'll bet your place of residence is bigger then it needs to be. In the name of saving energy, I believe congress should restrict each person to a living space about the size of a dorm room. Even for AlGore. That's all you really need. Our ancestors lived in caves smaller than that.
And the soccer games - we are carpooling to games which are generally 100 miles or so away from our home town. So, we can take 2 cars for that number of players and parents, or we can take my vehicle which is too big for my needs in your view. Maybe you're right and all the parents should drive their own kid to the games.
Hahahaha, American slaves to material greed. "Ohh but I NEED an escalade!" How did those filthy, primitive, pre-SUV humans ever make it this far? How did they haul their litters around with them? And their mountains of cheap consumer goods??? Jesus musta done it.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisEverybody should buy the biggest, most excessive, polluting hogs they can. The stupid die first, and humans are proving to be fatally stupid. So have fun dying of cancer! You asked for it, now it's your and your kids turn to pay for it, with toxic death. A shame you'll take so much other innocent life down with you, but then whatever survives will be able to handle anything.
Homo Sapiens did pretty well until the dreamt up the agricultural revolution. A few bright spots along the way, but all downhill from there.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGreat article and good fun especially as it brings out people like soccerdad.
Soccordad, why are you not demanding 8 passenger vehicles that get 50 mpg? It's not that hard to do by building smarter, lighter, more aero and using electric drive with a very small engine to charge the batts for over 40 mile trips.
Nor does it take so much power to tow. Until the 60's many semi's only has 100-130hp. A 4cyl S10 can easily tow most anything you want. One with a 1cyl engine and a 100hp electric drive could easily tow the same.
These are not technical problems, but political ones.
My EV's get 250 and 600mpg equivalent and the most economical, heavy hauling vehicles, train are all electric drive.
One thing he said in the article I don't think is well known is the new CAFE standards have so many loopholes it does increase much over the present standard though $4/gal gas next yr will handle that. I too think a gas tax is the simple way and those who waste gas can just pay the cost.
Why do I not want a vehicle which can haul 8 and gets 50 mpg? I don't want to pay for it! For the most part, vehicles like hybrids will not pay for themselves in gasoline savings. And hybrid technology really doesn't do you much good for highway miles. You still need to pay for electricity for the plug ins. Besides, I'm predicting severe shortages in electricity as coal is restricted in the years to come.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBy the way, I'm worried about hotblack. I think we need an intervention.
We should mandate tire pressure checks. Install acceleration monitors. Have cruise control automatically turn on after 5 minutes of maintaining the same speed. Ticket anyone that drives with 3 or more passenger seats empty, etc.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisFederal Government is known to be the most efficient and incorruptible type of organization, so we should continue to turn more of our daily decisions over to it rather than the extremely inefficient markets that have resulted in the US having the worst economy in the history of the world, nay, they universe!
Why does everyone believe that shooting the messenger will solve all of their problems?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thischrisff,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYou are joking ....... right?
your math is loopy,
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisif you sold two of the 1000mpg cars, and they both drove 10 miles, you would have 20/.02, which is much higher than what your point would have it mean.
Stop trying to confuse people out of thinking for themselves.
The only way to get Real Men to give up their gas guzzlers is to equate such vehicles with certain implied anatomical deficiencies. Proposed TV ad: Steve Studley drives up in his Honda Civic. As he alights from the car, nearby babes ogle his obvious "charms". Next to arrive is Bubba in his Dodge Ram. The giggling ladies mock his obvious lack of equipment in their time honored way (the "thumb and forefinger" gesture).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHere in the tropics it is air conditioning that consumes so many kilowatts of electrical power.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOur home is one of the few here that have insulation in the ceiling and walls.
However, I wish that the media would address this.....
Why must we remain "married" to the COMBUSTION of fuels? Except for wind and solar, surely there are some really smart folks out there that can find something really different and efficient. Does nature have a model of efficiency? Our best combustion engines still waste 65% or more of the energy contained in the fuel.