Legislation has been passed to raise the vehicle-fleet fuel efficiency standards of the Big 3 American automakers to 54.5 mpg by 2025 (current standard is 28.3).
This will reduce fuel consumption by 40% and carbon emissions by 50%.
This is obviously more about America reducing it's dependency on foreign oil than being environmentally conscious, but it still has that nice side effect to it.
Doesn't mean that much, the amount of vehicles on the roads increases every year so the net effect maintains current consumption. Also, semi's, boats, trains, etc aren't getting any better. I doubt any of this will have that great an effect on overall consumption.
Automobile sales in India grew at a record 27% in the financial year through March to 15.51 million units, but the industry expects the pace this year to be around 12%-15% due to the higher sales base.
Total vehicle sales in China, the world's largest auto market, reached 1.38 million units in May, down 3.98% compared with the same month a year earlier, and following a 0.25% year-to-year decline in April, the association said. Sales in the January-May period reached 7.9 million units, up 4.06% on year.
The Following User Says Thank You to Frequitude For This Useful Post:
Bad for Canadians who supply the biggest chunk of US oil. I hope they start driving more 2mpg Hummers.
Or maybe Canada can take this as another hint that it needs to start getting more involved in the clean-energy game, instead of just hoping for the status-quo to continue. Even if oil doesn't go away (and I doubt it will) a move towards cleaner energy is already happening considering the growing demand in Asia. Canada, and especially Alberta, has a lot of engineering skills and brains....it's all a matter of whether you guys want to be a leader in the energy of tomorrow and make some money off of it, or not.
Nobody says all you engineers have to only work with oil and gas. Why can't Alberta also become the Silicone Valley of clean energy too?
The Following User Says Thank You to Table 5 For This Useful Post:
Doesn't mean that much, the amount of vehicles on the roads increases every year so the net effect maintains current consumption.
A valid point. But at least those new vehicles will be more fuel efficient. So at least the fuel consumption won't be increasing proportionally to the amount of new cars on the road.
Or maybe Canada can take this as another hint that it needs to start getting more involved in the clean-energy game, instead of just hoping for the status-quo to continue. Even if oil doesn't go away (and I doubt it will) a move towards cleaner energy is already happening considering the growing demand in Asia. Canada, and especially Alberta, has a lot of engineering skills and brains....it's all a matter of whether you guys want to be a leader in the energy of tomorrow and make some money off of it, or not.
Nobody says all you engineers have to only work with oil and gas. Why can't Alberta also become the Silicone Valley of clean energy too?
Exactly. Boob jobs for all women!
__________________
If you don't pass this sig to ten of your friends, you will become an Oilers fan.
The Following User Says Thank You to Shazam For This Useful Post:
Bad for Canadians who supply the biggest chunk of US oil. I hope they start driving more 2mpg Hummers.
Consumption will still be high for a long time. There may be more fuel efficient vehicles in the future, but there will be more of them.
As well, there are many other uses of oil and fuel than just passenger vehicles.
Lastly, it should be pretty obvious to all energy companies right now that the world is slowly trying to ween itself off fossil fuels. If they can't adapt and change their business plans and strategies to keep themselves profitable, than it's their own fault.
Lastly, it should be pretty obvious to all energy companies right now that the world is slowly trying to ween itself off fossil fuels. If they can't adapt and change their business plans and strategies to keep themselves profitable, than it's their own fault.
There are no alternatives to fossil fuels. It will be decades before alternatives appear. Perhaps never.
Lastly, it should be pretty obvious to all energy companies right now that the world is slowly trying to ween itself off fossil fuels. If they can't adapt and change their business plans and strategies to keep themselves profitable, than it's their own fault.
If it was viable and could turn some profit they'd be all over it alternatives
If it was viable and could turn some profit they'd be all over it alternatives
It just takes some work and imagination. They're poised better than pretty much any other company or group to do it.
But I guess you can't teach old dogs new tricks. I know some oil companies have talked about becoming energy companies and how they will have to shift, so it's not a pie in the sky idea at all.
When I hear 'American gas guzzler' i think of big 1960's cars, when there were few imports.
I would say now that Armada's and Tundra's and Sequoias are just as much gas guzzlers as NA cars. Of the cars sold in NA, the 'american' ones probably have the same economy as the rest of them on average.
__________________
When in danger or in doubt, run in circles scream and shout.
When I hear 'American gas guzzler' i think of big 1960's cars, when there were few imports.
I would say now that Armada's and Tundra's and Sequoias are just as much gas guzzlers as NA cars. Of the cars sold in NA, the 'american' ones probably have the same economy as the rest of them on average.
Agreed. But even saying that trucks and SUV's are gas guzzlers isn't the whole picture either. Lots of those German cars have big thirsty engines on par with trucks and SUV's but without the bad rep.
Hey, I'm not saying it's going to be easy, but what are the alternatives? Besides, oil is going to be worth lots for decades anyway. I doubt we really get ourselves off it in a meaningful way in less than 50-100 years. Yes we will get more efficient at using it, but there will be more people, more machines, and more demand as well.
Hey, I'm not saying it's going to be easy, but what are the alternatives? Besides, oil is going to be worth lots for decades anyway. I doubt we really get ourselves off it in a meaningful way in less than 50-100 years. Yes we will get more efficient at using it, but there will be more people, more machines, and more demand as well.
Erm, fossil fuels are energy. Stored in a nice little package.
The alternative is massive starvation, the collapse of every first world economy, and self-sufficient living. And no NHL.
__________________
If you don't pass this sig to ten of your friends, you will become an Oilers fan.
I posted this in another thread that broke down into evolution vs creationism. Daradon and a few others have seen it, but I think it applies to this thread too.
Erm, fossil fuels are energy. Stored in a nice little package.
The alternative is massive starvation, the collapse of every first world economy, and self-sufficient living. And no NHL.
(facepalm)
I know that. I mean alternatives for energy. And no, starving is not the only other alternative. I mean, I guess if you turned off the fossil fuel switch tomorrow, yes, sure I get that. But that's idiotic, it would never happen, and no one is arguing for that! Why does it have to be so black and white for posters like you? We're talking about building our way to other solutions over periods of time. Like I said, I'm sure we'll be using significant amounts of fossil fuels for 50-100 years yet. And I was saying that the current oil companies are probably the best positioned to do this, so if they eventually do go bankrupt, they don't really have anyone to blame. At least they can say it was a good run.
The fact that we will be using significant amounts of fossil fuels for a while yet is why I first responded to the post saying good cars would be bad for Canadian oil companies. There will still be lots of demand in the near to moderate future and better emissions standards probably aren't going to add up to much when it comes to the bottom line.
The End of the American Gas Guzzler?
