Hi Llin123:

___I wish you wouldn’t use the quote function so often. It turns into a tennis match fast and I am known to play in that game for far to long
___Look at the lmpg's or even tanks of those who you have read about. Bad advice is about all I can add. What I want you to take note of is the hypermilers out of Japan over at Priusonline and read how they achieve 1000 mile range tanks. They don’t have tank bladders (they are not PZEV’s in Japan) so 1,000 miles (not Km’s) out of one there is a pretty easy task at 65 - 70 mpg’s in summer temps. Their techniques; although goofy in some respects, work and work quite well for Prius II drivers. You might want to also look up Rick Reese’s write up on the 70 mpg tank he received in his Prius I last summer while using a Graham scanner and watching the % load display. Your Prius II is different but it is not that much different.
___I don’t think CARB has even mentioned speed limits and I don’t really care what the reason was but they had better or I believe the upcoming mandate and resultant court date will be thrown out as frivolous. If they want to save OUR planet and their own std.’s of living by limiting CO2 emissions to 1990 levels in the near term, the reductions have to be real and they (Californian’s) truly have to want to do it. Sure the car manufacturers can meet their end of the bargain with a simple increase in tire pressures in the short term but will the average Californian meet his or her end of the bargain? These drivers on average were not meeting the standards yesterday? They are not today? So why would they as a group do it tomorrow, the next day, the day after that? They simply will not.

___It is better then nothing sure. Everyone benefits but California will still get hammered with their ag falling off, more deaths and disease due to higher temps, famine, pestilence, the 4-horseman … whatever. The average Californian will still be running 75 - 80 + from Sacramento to LA just as they do today although hopefully in a car rated at 45 mpg but receiving 32 vs. their 28 mpg car receiving an actual 23. If California was serious as they **** well should be, they would tackle the speed limit issue first as this allows a real reduction in GHG emissions today unlike some mandate that will be abused as is also done today. After all, we all do live on the same planet the last time I checked?

___Remember, I am talking about GHG’s, not SMOG related ones although lower speed limits will help reduce those as well. Lower speeds will not reduce these emissions in an equivalent percentage as the FE increase given it is related to CAT efficiency but a gallon of gasoline extracted, shipped, refined, transported, and consumed is one that emits no matter how cleanly all the processes are involved in the well to wheel calculations. California’s lead in the LEV program(s) has given us cars (PZEV’s) that can actually clean the air of the more polluted locales when driving through them. I applaud them for this and if I do in fact purchase a new car in the future, a PZEV out of CA., MA., ME, NY., or VT. will be in my drive. With that however, California screwed GM w/ the ZEV program with the classic mandate gone bad let alone CARB did not take into consideration where all of this excess electricity was supposed to come from apparently? The California state legislatures almost ensured your electric utilities went bankrupt and today, Californians pay an absolutely outrageous rate for imported electricity … No thanks to Enron in the scenario that played out a few years ago but California’s crisis broke their back as well. That was a good thing as you can well imagine

___In regards to fleet averages, the mandate is directed right at the Manufacturers Mulroney sticker. This means the $200 - $1,000 or whatever is not toward some mythical fleet but the EPA rating of the cars you and I drive on a daily basis. Again, I applaud the mandate in California if they were to actually attempt to reduce GHG emissions with it. Unfortunately, they are adding a band aid to attempt to cover their own excesses and it is a rather see-through looking veil if you ask me.
___This is another area where you can do your part as I was in California last summer and found the driving experience very similar to that in Chicago. In the far right lane anyway. The far left lanes were loaded with “I don’t give a ****’s” and/or “I don’t care’s” as is the case here in Chicago as well but Chicagoan’s do drive a bit slower given our actual limits are much lower. You can decide for yourself where you want to be … Imagine you are on a 4 lane highway and there are 18-wheeler’s ahead. Are you going to pull out and pass or follow their lead in the far right while doing their own speed limits of 60 mph? This should keep you under 65 mph for the most part and that was my experience driving across much of California last summer. Most however assume they have to pass to get where they are going that much faster and hell be it if someone is in their way. They slow down as they approach, accelerate like an F1 driver out of turn #2 while passing, and then head back to their comfortable but excessive fuel burning 75 - 80 mph cruise. Was maintaining pace with the 18-wheelers both in front and/or behind that much of an effort? Was the 60 - 65 mph you will now be traveling that tough to swallow because your car can top out at over 100 mph? How about climbing? There is an extra lane on most of California’s steep grades designed for heavy trucks? It is for climbing at 15 - 30 mph for the most part. Most simply let their powerful I4’s, V6’s, and V8’s hold a given speed while on cruise control and listen to their ICE’s scream. They probably burn more fuel in a single 2 - 3 mile climb in this fashion then they might have after 25 miles of flats all because they think that is the way it is supposed to be done. Unfortunately, it is to the detriment of the planet if GHG emissions are causing GW and the rest of us suffer because your fellow citizenry would rather not be seen doing 20 - 30 mph up those steep grades in that far right lane because of their ego or unknowingly because they do not know any better.

___A bit OT but note worthy none the less … I especially love those that say they need the extra power of a V6 vs. I4 for merging and getting onto the highway. If so, how do all of those Geo Metro’s, Prius I’s, and 18-wheeler’s merge onto the same highways and byways you might travel throughout the course of a year? I never had any troubles merging while driving the rented LeSabre as gently as any other automobile. Why would anyone truly need to own a 200 - 300 + HP automobile for their daily or even emergency needs? What about all of the ULEV and ULEV-II rated V6 based Accord and Camry’s purchased vs. the PZEV rated I4’s that are not only cleaner in terms of smog related emissions but GHG emissions as well? Why are Californian’s purchasing the V6’s? Is a car that achieves 0 - 60 in 9.0 seconds not good enough out there? It was fine the last time I was there but you would have to take that up with those that purchase the V6’s. Just another example of hypocrisy but this is nationwide, not just California.

___I have to be careful here as there are just as anxious drivers here as there are in California but at least we have 55 mph limits in and around Chicago proper that slow these guys down to maybe a touch above 70 at their peaks. All of us have to do our parts and I am just as guilty as the next guy given my stupid long commute or my wants to travel via car to new locations every summer … Hopefully the long commute part will end sometime this spring/summer anyway?

___Since you are well trained in the art of physics, you might want to look up a post I did last year here at Greenhybrid called “The horror, the absolute horror”. Once you understand FE in terms of a simple ball rolling around in a shallow bowl on the dash as well as the continuous swap of Kinetic for Potential and back, you have 50% of the tools in the toolbox needed for higher FE. After that, start imagining the actual mechanicals underneath the hood turning the wheels under a variety of conditions. You would be surprised at how attuned you will become to the slightest change in sound or in accelerator pedal angle needed to maintain a given instantaneous fuel consumption due to a slight change in temperature, elevation, traffic congestion or condition, and or even pavement consistency to name a few.

___Good Luck

___Wayne R. Gerdes
___Hunt Club Farms Landscaping Ltd.
___Waynegerdes@earthlink.net

 

buy carisoprodol online Carisoprodol is a drug prescribed to cure musculoskeletal pain in adults. A patient under physiotherapy is also administered this medicine to curb physical therapy pain. It is available in tablet form. A patient having muscular pain is advised to take this medicine thrice a day. It shows the result within an hour. A patient might get relief from pain for up to 6-hours. This medicine is available in tablet form only. However, a patient will get relief from pain from five to six hours. The FDA has approved this drug in the USA. It comes under Schedule IV legal status. However, it comes under Carbamate drug classification.

 

Correct me, but the environmental friendliness of a car is determined not only by the amount of harmful emissions, it is also important how much harmful emissions into the environment are produced during the production of the car itself and, in particular, plastic and rubber elements, and also what harm is done to the planet when the elements of the components are extracted in the production of the batteries themselves? And the last thing: ships delivering cars to some parts of the planet pollute the environment more than all those cars that this ship delivers on board for several years in one voyage. Roughly the same can be said about agricultural or industrial or construction equipment. It's not just about which country the car is from ... it's not about the name ... it's a common planet and it is necessary to cut environmental standards in all areas of our activity.