Climate Change

[LasVegas]

Just put yours in your uninsulated garage and it will not need to turn on most of the year.

Right! I bought a new house recently and the water heater is in a small “closet” upstairs. My old house had it in the 1000 degree garage.

[devildeac]

When I was young (junior high - high school), my dad had a few Honda civics. This was circa 74-79.

I can swear I remember that they got 40+ MPG highway. This was around gas crisis II time. Each successive model and competitor vehicle seemed to outdo the prior on fuel economy.

Am I remembering correctly?

If I am, why have we not progressed beyond that and even regresses in fuel economy?

Was better mileage possible with leaded gasoline? Why can't hybrids get 75-80-90 mpg.

What am I missing here?

Our family owned a VW Dasher which was rated about 22 city/33 highway and a Fiat wagon (134?) that may have been a bit higher. Our first car purchase when we got married was a VW Rabbit that was probably about 24/36 and we routinely reached 36-38 highway MPG. I don't recall the Civics doing that well but I'd guess it was close.

My guess would be a combination of the unleaded fuel requirements and a lot of other emission devices, plus the engine sizes and horsepower #s are significantly higher now. I'd estimate the Civics had 1.4L engines and 90-100 HP as our Rabbit had very similar #s. Later, we also owned a 1981 VW Jetta diesel (PoS) that would routine get 50+ MPG on the highway and had about 90 HP.

I share your sentiments about hybrids now should be able to get the #s you quoted above.

[fuse]

When I was young (junior high - high school), my dad had a few Honda civics. This was circa 74-79.

I can swear I remember that they got 40+ MPG highway. This was around gas crisis II time. Each successive model and competitor vehicle seemed to outdo the prior on fuel economy.

Am I remembering correctly?

If I am, why have we not progressed beyond that and even regresses in fuel economy?

Was better mileage possible with leaded gasoline? Why can't hybrids get 75-80-90 mpg.

What am I missing here?

Not that they are remotely the same vehicle, a 1974 Honda Civic weighed under 1500 pounds. A 2019 Honda Civic weighs about 3000 pounds.

The 74 Civic was about 50 HP, and the base 1.5L 2019 Civic is about 174 HP.

Today’s Civic likely does 0-60 in under 7 seconds.
I couldn’t find a good stat for the 74 Civic. If it were about 15 seconds 0-60 that would not surprise me.

I’m sure I will make real engineers and physicists cringe when I bring up E = mv^2 as lightweight explanation why the 174 HP Civic is working exponentially harder than the 50HP Civic to get from 0 to 60.

Its far afield from a climate change dialog, Colin Chapman from Lotus had it correct: “to add speed, increase lightness”.

Safety , which for the most part translates to added weight, reduces fuel economy. Air bags, seat belts, disk brakes, ABS, car cameras, car anti collision systems, 7” in dash monitors all add weight.

Catalytic converters to burn fuel more cleanly also are a fuel economy factor (cost of precious metals and rare earth elements aside, should be a net environmental benefit).

[devil84]

Wow, that is expensive. We owned a 2010 Civic Hybrid and passed it on to our younger daughter and her husband (you know, the devildeac delivery service) and they had the hybrid battery replaced at about 7Y/90K miles as Honda had a recall and replaced it for free and extended the warranty to 10Y/150K, IIRC. Otherwise, it would have cost them $3-4K . Haven't had to address that yet with our Prius, currently at 6Y/78K miles but our son and his wife currently have a 2008 (?) Prius with almost 200K miles and no hybrid battery issues. Yet.

We have a 2004 Civic Hybrid. We just replaced the battery for a third time (Honda did the first under recall). The vehicle had maybe 140K on it when we replaced the batteries last fall. It's $3500 to replace. So, in addition to the premium cost of the car, we've put in another $7K to replace the batteries, and four sets of batteries had to be first manufactured, then disposed of. That's in addition to normal maintenance and repair. We -- well our grad student son -- gets about 36 mpg on average for that car (potentially less than usual because it has a roof race and has a bike or two on the top for most highway trips). If batteries last about 50K miles, that's an additional 7 cents per mile to drive. That's not affordable for many Americans.

Being better for the environment sometimes costs substantially more and we're willing and able to do so. But we are wondering about the environmental costs of the batteries since they seem to go bad so frequently. We buy cars and drive them until they are on their last gasp, so total cost to own over 15 years means a lot. Because of this battery issue, we opted to replace the '99 Maxima with a 2018 Subaru Legacy gasoline engine. It gets about the same highway gas mileage as the(very old) hybrid -- so same emissions -- and doesn't have additional batteries that have an environmental cost.

We don't do a lot of driving, we keep most of our cars 15 years or more (unless they die sooner) and haven't put 200K on any of them. We are fortunate that can reduce emissions by driving a hybrid and by driving less. While we really like the Civic, it has been the most expensive car to maintain by a whole lot. We see a need better and more affordable battery technology.

[fuse]

There is an article on Wired about making EVs more affordable and accessible for lower income families.

No link as the context includes political aspects.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

I drove a 1993 Honda Accord across America in 2000. I could swear we got 40+ mpg on the highway.

[YmoBeThere]

I’m sure I will make real engineers and physicists cringe when I bring up E = mv^2 as lightweight explanation why the 174 HP Civic is working exponentially harder than the 50HP Civic to get from 0 to 60.

Its far afield from a climate change dialog, Colin Chapman from Lotus had it correct: “to add speed, increase lightness

1) It has been 25+ years since I've thought about some of this, but I believe a) your equation is slightly incorrect and b) your interpretation is also incorrect.

a) E(nergy) = 1/2 m(I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.) * v(elocity)^2 (where v is significantly less than c, the speed of light) so just missing 1/2

In comparing 174 HP Civic to 50 HP Civic you note a velocity, 60 MPH or more appropriately a change in velocity from 0 to 60 MPH, in each case V is equal for both vehicles.

b) this eliminates the exponentiality that you note when looking at the energy required.

So, the real variance between the energy needed by the two vehicles at 60 MPH is driven by the mass that has doubled.

However, in the long run I think you really want to talk about drag force and the work (power * time)to move the vehicle over a distance. This goes to Mr. Chapman's statement. You also really want to decrease drag as well as weight or then you are forced to exponetially increase the power capability of your vehicle to go faster(that is where your v squared comes in). Ultimately, you are using an energy equation to describe work. They are related but not the same thing, work is the change in kinetic energy. I'm sure I've made a logical error somewhere but I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

[rthomas]

E(nergy) = 1/2 m(I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.) * v(elocity)^2 (where v is significantly less than c, the speed of light) so just missing 1/2

Einstein would be appalled.

[DukieInKansas]

I had a Camry Hybred for just over 9 years. It averaged about 10mpg better than the 13 year old 5 speed Altima I replaced. I don't drive very much - very short commute to work and not many long trips. I went with the hybrid because I couldn't get what I wanted in a manual transmission so going hybrid for the environment was my excuse for an automatic. I replaced the Camry last August when it was going to need a major repair. I did not go hybrid this time as I will never make up the cost differential and I had given up on a manual transmission.

My sister had to replace her Prius in June last year - run in with a deer. It was a 2004, I believe, and still on it's first battery.

Devil84 brings to mind my questions on hybrids and electric vehicles - once you factor in the batteries or how the electricity is generated to recharge the vehicle, how do the environmental costs compare to a gasoline vehicle?

[-jk]

Another factor - highway speeds used to be capped at 55 MPH. Way better gas mileage than driving 70+...

And I'm not sure the old Honda CVCC could do 70!

-jk

[devildeac]

We have a 2004 Civic Hybrid. We just replaced the battery for a third time (Honda did the first under recall). The vehicle had maybe 140K on it when we replaced the batteries last fall. It's $3500 to replace. So, in addition to the premium cost of the car, we've put in another $7K to replace the batteries, and four sets of batteries had to be first manufactured, then disposed of. That's in addition to normal maintenance and repair. We -- well our grad student son -- gets about 36 mpg on average for that car (potentially less than usual because it has a roof race and has a bike or two on the top for most highway trips). If batteries last about 50K miles, that's an additional 7 cents per mile to drive. That's not affordable for many Americans.

Being better for the environment sometimes costs substantially more and we're willing and able to do so. But we are wondering about the environmental costs of the batteries since they seem to go bad so frequently. We buy cars and drive them until they are on their last gasp, so total cost to own over 15 years means a lot. Because of this battery issue, we opted to replace the '99 Maxima with a 2018 Subaru Legacy gasoline engine. It gets about the same highway gas mileage as the(very old) hybrid -- so same emissions -- and doesn't have additional batteries that have an environmental cost.

We don't do a lot of driving, we keep most of our cars 15 years or more (unless they die sooner) and haven't put 200K on any of them. We are fortunate that can reduce emissions by driving a hybrid and by driving less. While we really like the Civic, it has been the most expensive car to maintain by a whole lot. We see a need better and more affordable battery technology.

That is bad/disappointing. If I knew before purchasing that a hybrid battery would only last ~4Y/50K miles and cost me $3500 to replace each time, I'd choose the gasoline engine and make it a ~40 MPG highway Honda/Subaru/Toyota, too, like you did with your Legacy. It will be interesting over the next decade/generation to see how much market share electric cars will command.

[devildeac]

I drove a 1993 Honda Accord across America in 2000. I could swear we got 40+ mpg on the highway.

We've owned the following Accords: 1986, 1990, 1994, 1997, 2000 and a few others since then (oldest child started driving around 1998), mostly with manual transmissions. I don't think we ever got 40 MPG highway but often clocked in at 36-38, rarely driving > 5 MPH greater than the speed limit.

(Above posted for informational/personal data/observations only and not intended to doubt your memory and advanced stats .)

[devildeac]

1) It has been 25+ years since I've thought about some of this, but I believe a) your equation is slightly incorrect and b) your interpretation is also incorrect.

a) E(nergy) = 1/2 m(I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.) * v(elocity)^2 (where v is significantly less than c, the speed of light) so just missing 1/2

In comparing 174 HP Civic to 50 HP Civic you note a velocity, 60 MPH or more appropriately a change in velocity from 0 to 60 MPH, in each case V is equal for both vehicles.

b) this eliminates the exponentiality that you note when looking at the energy required.

So, the real variance between the energy needed by the two vehicles at 60 MPH is driven by the mass that has doubled.

However, in the long run I think you really want to talk about drag force and the work (power * time)to move the vehicle over a distance. This goes to Mr. Chapman's statement. You also really want to decrease drag as well as weight or then you are forced to exponetially increase the power capability of your vehicle to go faster(that is where your v squared comes in). Ultimately, you are using an energy equation to describe work. They are related but not the same thing, work is the change in kinetic energy. I'm sure I've made a logical error somewhere but I did not stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.

That's quite the analysis. Even more amazing is to try and discern the reason for the wankerization .

[devildeac]

Another factor - highway speeds used to be capped at 55 MPH. Way better gas mileage than driving 70+...

And I'm not sure the old Honda CVCC could do 70!

-jk

It would if you pushed harder/faster!

[elvis14]

If you're truly concerned, given the 2nd floor location, then you might want to install an auto-shutoff valve. They're relatively easy and quick to install.

Good point, I have not checked on this option. I should.

And a moisture sensor/alarm.

I do have a one of these. This is a good reminder to go check the battery.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

We've owned the following Accords: 1986, 1990, 1994, 1997, 2000 and a few others since then (oldest child started driving around 1998), mostly with manual transmissions. I don't think we ever got 40 MPG highway but often clocked in at 36-38, rarely driving > 5 MPH greater than the speed limit.

(Above posted for informational/personal data/observations only and not intended to doubt your memory and advanced stats .)

You are probably right. The intervening years may have bloated the stat line.

Or, wide open on I-40 through Oklahoma and Texas could have added 2mpg.

[duke79]

We have a 2004 Civic Hybrid. We just replaced the battery for a third time (Honda did the first under recall). The vehicle had maybe 140K on it when we replaced the batteries last fall. It's $3500 to replace. So, in addition to the premium cost of the car, we've put in another $7K to replace the batteries, and four sets of batteries had to be first manufactured, then disposed of. That's in addition to normal maintenance and repair. We -- well our grad student son -- gets about 36 mpg on average for that car (potentially less than usual because it has a roof race and has a bike or two on the top for most highway trips). If batteries last about 50K miles, that's an additional 7 cents per mile to drive. That's not affordable for many Americans.

Being better for the environment sometimes costs substantially more and we're willing and able to do so. But we are wondering about the environmental costs of the batteries since they seem to go bad so frequently. We buy cars and drive them until they are on their last gasp, so total cost to own over 15 years means a lot. Because of this battery issue, we opted to replace the '99 Maxima with a 2018 Subaru Legacy gasoline engine. It gets about the same highway gas mileage as the(very old) hybrid -- so same emissions -- and doesn't have additional batteries that have an environmental cost.

We don't do a lot of driving, we keep most of our cars 15 years or more (unless they die sooner) and haven't put 200K on any of them. We are fortunate that can reduce emissions by driving a hybrid and by driving less. While we really like the Civic, it has been the most expensive car to maintain by a whole lot. We see a need better and more affordable battery technology.

I owned a 2006 Honda Civic Hybrid and I had to replace the battery pack powering the electric motor at about 126,000 miles. Luckily, it was covered under the warranty (that was originally 8 years or 100,000 miles) but had been extended as a result of a class-action lawsuit against Honda for defective battery packs. Saved me the $3500 (that I wouldn't have paid). I got 40 to 53 miles per gallon with car, with the higher mileage for highway driving (60 to 70 MPH) and lower mileage for around-town driving. Mileage definitely went down in the cold weather months. It was a fairly nice car (for what it was) but did not have much acceleration or torque. I got rid of it with about 160,000 miles.

[budwom]

I don't know if it's been mentioned, but there's a great book review in one of the latest NY Times Book Reviews ...review is by Richard Rhodes (Mr. Nuclear), book is called "A Bright Future...How some countries have solved climate change and the rest can follow"

very good read, recounts the observation that it takes almost a century for a new source of primary energy (coal, petroleum, natural gas, nuclear power) to command half the world market; just to grow to ten percent from one percent generally takes 50 years...written by a Swedish engineer and some other professor, it opines that over the next 30 years, world energy consumption will grow fully 50%...if you don't believe that, they say, think of four billion Asians tapping into air conditioning.

Anyhoo...premise is that nuclear power will be required to supply this level of energy in that timeframe (I take no personal position in this, though the numbers are compelling)...in critiquing Germany's huge move away from nuclear, they point out that Germany has only substituted one carbon free source (renewables) for another (nuclear) and CO2 emissions are not decreasing at all. Interesting read...final observation: in August 2015, an Iranian city suffered a heat index of 165 F, the proper internal temperature of a cooked chicken.

p.s. evidently in Yerp and elsewhere, nuclear has not been hobbled by nearly as much litigation and regulation as it has here...(yeah, some regulation is probably a very good idea).

[camion]

That is bad/disappointing. If I knew before purchasing that a hybrid battery would only last ~4Y/50K miles and cost me $3500 to replace each time, I'd choose the gasoline engine and make it a ~40 MPG highway Honda/Subaru/Toyota, too, like you did with your Legacy. It will be interesting over the next decade/generation to see how much market share electric cars will command.

The original warranty for the battery pack on Toyota hybrids is 8 years/100,000 miles (10/150,000 in California). I like my Prius, but I'm considering trading it in a few years from now when it becomes a 7 year old. We'll see.

[devildeac]

The original warranty for the battery pack on Toyota hybrids is 8 years/100,000 miles (10/150,000 in California). I like my Prius, but I'm considering trading it in a few years from now when it becomes a 7 year old. We'll see.

Hmm, makes me start thinking about that, too, with our 6 year old Prius with 78K miles on it now.