It's about time someone explained peak oil theory in a way I can understand:
It's quite a simple theory and one that any beer drinker understands. The glass starts full and ends empty and the faster you drink it the quicker it's gone.
Does this mean we're running out of beer? OK, now I'm panicking.
So what does this mean for the price of "beer"? - does it go up the further down the "pint" (glass) you go??
What effect does this emptying of the glass have on the price of wine or for southern Americans - whiskey?!?!
;)
Posted by: Mark C R UK | June 14, 2007 at 08:40 AM
If you understood peak oil, then you would understand how useless high-mileage vehicles are to combat global warming. If demand exceeds supply, then 100% of produced oil is being burned. Then it is only a matter of how many cars are doing the burning, rather than how much is being burned in aggregate (which is the only thing that matters for global climate change).
This means that you would understand that high-milage cars are not more 'environmental', they are just more economical. The environmental reputation is just a publicity stunt to make profit.
Posted by: vorpal | June 14, 2007 at 03:07 PM
speaking about costs of energy when are you guys going to talk about the external costs of a prius vs a hummer report?
http://cnwmr.com/nss-folder/automotiveenergy/
Posted by: joshua corning | June 14, 2007 at 06:39 PM
Come on Joshua, that old PR piece has been debunked many times. In fact, I'll phrase it to you as a question - can you read their report with a critical eye and find the core assumption they made to achieve that result?
Posted by: odograph | June 15, 2007 at 09:45 AM
Come on Joshua, that old PR piece has been debunked many times. In fact, I'll phrase it to you as a question - can you read their report with a critical eye and find the core assumption they made to achieve that result?
You need to actually read the piece and their response to the criticism.
But I do find it funny that you have west coast blue state papers criticizing a data that shows that the actual use of a car made in a non-union red state factory in the south is less environmentally friendly then a car made in a union blue state factory in the Midwest.
You mention assumptions...i think that is the disconnect here...the study is not based the theoretical potential of how long or how well a prius or Hummer could be used...but actual data on how they have been used by the people who buy them.
yes they say hummers go 300,000+ miles and the prius 100,000 miles for the life of the car...but that is what is happening in the real world. Not assumptions but real world data.
Some of us tend to think that actual environmental improvement is the goal.
Posted by: joshua corning | June 15, 2007 at 12:05 PM
When I responded to this early last year, with real data, I wrote "if you want to be honest guys, run it again with 152,000 miles for cars and 180,000 miles for trucks. Or even better, get from the NHTSA the numbers for the actual models you are considering."
Their recent handwaving BS doesn't address that, it just tries to redirect the eye away from the facts ...
Posted by: odograph | June 15, 2007 at 01:09 PM
Their recent handwaving BS doesn't address that, it just tries to redirect the eye away from the facts ...
I am afraid you are incorrect Odo...it is not hand waving...they accumulated real data on real use of these vehicles in the real world...this is how the cars are used...not hypotheticals on how much they could be used or how much you think they should be use but in fact how they are used and how long they really last.
Yes if the Prius consumers used the cars like you describe they would have less environmental impact but sadly they are not being used the way you would like them to.
Posted by: joshua corning | June 15, 2007 at 01:36 PM
Come on, why would I assume that "CNW Marketing Research" did a better or more complete job than the NHTSA?
Why would I assume, especially that they can predict better than the NHSTA what a new model introduced in 2005 to a new market sector will do?
They are obviously doing their job, which is Marketing Research, and not research in the dispassionate and scientific mode.
Posted by: odograph | June 15, 2007 at 01:57 PM
oops, Prius "II" was introduced in 2004
it is kind of early for anyone to definitively call it's final lifespan ... but as a hint, I think gas prices in 2014 will have a baring.
Posted by: odograph | June 15, 2007 at 01:59 PM
Prius versus Hummer..??!?!?
Lifecycle speaking.... the Prius is going to win - over the long term efficiency of manufacture and disposal/recycling will mean the Prius will continue to improve.
Reading the comments - from Josh and Odo... I can see the battle of ideology from here over the pond!
- I'm going with Prius personally. Hummers are overweight, overpowered etc.
Posted by: Mark C R UK | June 16, 2007 at 06:55 AM
I think you should have given me "rejection of ideology" actually, for having gone with the independent (and non-"marketing") source.
Posted by: odograph | June 16, 2007 at 07:31 AM
No - what I meant like - it sounded like the same old same old Democrat v Republican - issues..... on the sly.
Well there was a hint of both in each to me reading them here.
Posted by: Mark C R UK | June 18, 2007 at 08:05 AM
I'm not sure there is a Republican or a Democrat involved. ;-)
That's a problem, when people merely read past a fact-based argument, and assume skewed numbers on both sides.
"They're arguing, you can't trust either one."
And that my friends, shows why people like CNW Marketing Research get paid their money. It also shows why it doesn't particularly matter how they came up with their B.S. Prius life (and their Hummer H3 life).
They "put people off" either way.
Posted by: odograph | June 18, 2007 at 09:36 AM