Category Archives: gasoline claims

Feds Credits To Trade In An Old Inefficient Car – It’s called the Clunker or the Gas Guzzler Bill

Posted on by
Reply

It is not law yet, but if it will become law and it looks like it will. Waiting to buy a new car until it passes could be well worth it. I say this because it is unclear whether you will be able to take advantage of both the Clunker Bill and the Tax Credit for buying specific cars. In other words if you trade in an old car (getting a government rebate) and buy a Prius (getting a Tax Credit) would both apply? If they would you could get like nearly 10K off the price of the car making Prius or any other hybred car affordable. Since it is a House of Reps. Bill on first read in the Senate I can not tell you what it will say in the end but as I say, first the Proposed Tax Credit.

Not there silly here:

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d111:9:./temp/~bdJxBz::|/bss/|

H.R.2751
Title: To accelerate motor fuel savings nationwide and provide incentives to registered owners of high polluting automobiles to replace such automobiles with new fuel efficient and less polluting automobiles.
Sponsor: Rep Sutton, Betty [OH-13] (introduced 6/8/2009)      Cosponsors (59)
Related Bills: H.R.2640
Latest Major Action: 6/11/2009 Read the second time. Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 74.

:}

Interpreted in a sick way here:

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/bailout-watch-554-cash-for-clunkers-passes-house/

Bailout Watch 554: Cash For Clunkers Passes House

By Edward Niedermeyer
June 10, 2009

The House of Representatives has passed Rep Betty Sutton’s $4 billion scrappage scheme [download full text here], reports CNN Money. The bill now goes to the Senate. Under Sutton’s bill, clunkers with a combined 18 miles per gallon rating or worse would be eligible for a scrappage rebate. Purchasing new vehicle which exceeds its replacement’s rating by four miles per gallon would earn a $3,500 rebate. Improve the combined EPA average by 10 mpg and snag $4,500. Offer good for one year. Or until we tear through $4 billion in a wholesome, American display of redemptive consumption. I’m sorry, I mean “shore up millions of jobs and stimulate local economies . . . improve our environment and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. The [Consumer Assistance to Recycle and Save] act demonstrates that we can free ourselves from the false argument of either you are for the environment or you are for jobs. You can do both, you must do both.” As the bill’s author modestly puts it.

CNN Money »

:}

I hate to be pessimistic but anytime you involve the Feds, the House and the Senate in legislation that directly effects, OIL, Gasoline and the Internal Combustion Engine, I think you have troubles ahead my friend. Here is a site that is very optomistic:

http://www.webwire.com/ViewPressRel.asp?aId=94525

A ‘Cash for Guzzlers’ website was launched to help keep consumers informed and aware about the pending approval of the Cash for Guzzlers bill. The measure, if approved by Congress and signed by President Barack Obama, would offer up to $4,500 in the form of a voucher for consumers who would trade in their old gas guzzler for a more fuel efficient car.

The new bill aims at improving environmental conditions by encouraging consumers driving old cars to trade in their vehicle for a voucher of up to $4,500 that can be used towards the purchase of a more fuel efficient vehicle. If passed, the new bill could lead to the purchase of over 1 million fuel efficient cars, a measure some say could help the US become less dependent on foreign oil. The bill is expected to be passed before Memorial Day weekend.

According to the proposal, consumers would get a $3,500 voucher if they trade in a car that gets less than 18 mpg for a new car with mileage of at least 22 mpg. Vouchers of $4,500 would be awarded if the new car gets at least 10 mpg more than the old.

More information for consumers is available at the recently established website for the Cash for Guzzlers bill, http://www.cashforguzzlers.net/

:}

This one kinda thinks NOT:

http://www.ohio.com/news/nation/44956957.html

Gas-guzzler voucher plan hits roadblock Calif. senator criticizes compromise for failure to boost fuel economy

By Kevin Freking
Associated Press

Published on Thursday, May 14, 2009

WASHINGTON: Legislation that would give car buyers a government voucher up to $4,500 when they trade in gas guzzlers hit a speed bump in the Senate amid concerns that a compromise between the White House and House Democrats doesn’t go far enough to protect the environment.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who authored the ”cash for clunkers” bill in the Senate, said Wednesday that she can’t support the compromise announced last week after House Democrats met with President Barack Obama on global warming.

”Essentially what it means is that perfectly good vehicles would be scrapped, so that vehicles with below average fuel economy could be purchased,” Feinstein said.

Rep. Betty Sutton, D-Copley Township, introduced the House version in March, reviving an effort that failed in Congress earlier this year.

The program is supposed to serve two purposes: Help the struggling automobile industry and the environment by replacing gas guzzlers with more fuel efficient autos.

:}

Stay tuned. It is going to be a long global warming summer.

:}

Feds Tax Credits For New Cars – What a bold attempt

Posted on by
3

With gasoline prices headed towards 3 $$$ and consumers sitting on their hands, this is not a bad first attempt to get the internal combustion engine off the road. Discussing this credit takes us away from residential issues but unless you live in one every household in America is effected by this. The more money you save the more you can put back into your house. You might want to wait until the Gas Guzzler or “Clunkers”  law goes into effect because you could get a whole lot more money with 2 credits…depending on how they word it…but that is a subject for tomorrow. First the Tax Credits.

Not there silly here:

http://www.energystar.gov/index.cfm?c=products.pr_tax_credits#s3

Cars Hybrid gasoline-electric, diesel, battery-electric, alternative fuel, and fuel cell vehicles   Based on a formula determined by vehicle weight, technology, and fuel economy compared to base year models There is a 60,000 vehicle limit per manufacturer before a phase-out period begins. Toyota and Honda have already been phased out. Credit is still available for Ford, GM and Nissan.For more information visit: Fueleconomy.gov Exit ENERGY STARUse IRS Form 8910 PDF Exit ENERGY STAR for hybrid vehicles purchased for personal use.Use IRS Form 3800 PDF Exit ENERGY STAR for hybrid vehicles purchased for business purposes.
Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles   $2,500–$7,500 The first 250,000 vehicles sold get the full tax credit (then it phases out like the hybrid vehicle tax credits).Effective January 1, 2009.

1Subject to a $1,500 maximum per homeowner for all improvements combined.

Efficient Cars

Starting January 1, 2009, there is a new tax credit for Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, starting at $2,500 and capped at $7,500 for cars and trucks (the credit is based on the capacity of the battery system). The first 250,000 vehicles sold get the full tax credit (then it phases out like the hybrid vehicle tax credits).

Tax credits are available to buyers of hybrid gasoline-electric, diesel, battery-electric, alternative fuel, and fuel cell vehicles. The tax credit amount is based on a formula determined by vehicle weight, technology, and fuel economy compared to base year models. These credits are available for vehicles placed in service starting January 1, 2006. For hybrid and diesel vehicles made by each manufacturer, the credit will be phased out over 15 months starting after that manufacturer has sold 60,000 eligible vehicles. For vehicles made by manufacturers that have not reached the end of the phase-out, the credits will end for vehicles placed in service after December 31, 2010. See the IRS Website for updated information Exit ENERGY STAR.

:}

So if you are wandering around wondering what are the most efficient cars I could buy. Well:

http://www.greenercars.org/highlights.htm

Greener Choices 2009

A Selection of Gasoline Vehicles that Score Well

TOYOTA PRIUS
HONDA CIVIC HYBRID

TOYOTA YARIS

HONDA FIT

FORD ESCAPE HYBRID

HYUNDAI SONATA

SUBARU OUTBACK WAGON

NISSAN ROGUE

TOYOTA TACOMA

FORD RANGER

TOYOTA SIENNA

CHEVROLET TAHOE HYBRID C1500

I can go into more detail. for that you will have to go to the website…I was not able to copy the total graph.

:}

For really clean cars:

http://ecomodder.com/forum/showthread.php/magazine-green-car-journal-5211.html

Magazine: Green Car Journal

Hello -My friend gives me copies of this magazine because he knows I am an MPG nut :Electric Cars & Hybrid Cars | Green Car .comIt doesn’t spend too much time saying what’s wrong with the automotive industry. It’s focus is to spotlight the good things that are happening. Here are some example articles from the features section :

Preview: 2010 Ford Fiesta for U.S. | Green Car .com

Quote:

Ford Motor Company, responding to customer demand for smaller and more fuel-efficient vehicles, is accelerating its efforts to bring six small vehicles from Ford’s respected European lineup to the North American market sooner than originally planned. To accomplish this, several of Ford’s large assembly plants will be converted from truck and SUV production to build the new-to-America models.

The automaker is banking heavily on its EcoBoost gasoline turbocharged, direct-injection engine technology and engine downsizing to reduce fuel economy by 20 percent and lower CO2 emissions by 15 percent. Plans are to have the capacity to build more than a million North American four-cylinder engines by 2011. 

Kewet’s New Electric City Car | Green Car .com

Quote:

 When it comes to promoting the use of battery electric vehicles, Norway is probably the world’s leader. Helping are policies like exemption from road taxes, tolls, and parking fees as well as permitting EVs to drive in bus lanes. The result is that the Th!nk, once planned as a Ford product, is back in production. Now it has a competitor in the form of the Norwegian-built Buddy.

Like the Th!nk that was born in 1991 as the Pivco City Bee, the Buddy has a history that also dates back to that same year, when Knud Erik Westergaard founded Kewet in Denmark to produce the Kewet electric car. In 1995, production was transferred to Nordhausen in the former East Germany. By 1998, Kewet was bankrupt with over a thousand Kewet electric cars and vans built. Rights to the Kewet were acquired in 1999 by Kollega Bil A/S in Norway. With a name change to Elbil Norge AS, it is now offering the improved sixth generation of the model, now simply called the Buddy. It’s aimed initially at the Norwegian market but plans are to distribute the car throughout Europe. …

:}
These guys want mileage and they want it now.

:}

Norway could ban gasoline-powered cars – OK so this is me being a google slut again

Posted on by
1

(Its Jammin Friday but don’t tell anyone – http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0d1HilfLxA )

But I post the title and what follows just to show the difference between a forward looking country concerned about the world and a backward looking State like Illinois as best exemplified by the

ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATORY GROUP.

You would think with a name like that they would be concerned about the environment, right? But in the never never land that is Springfield they are more concerned about keeping profits high and the STATE at bay.

http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2007/05/23/Norway-could-ban-gasoline-powered-cars/UPI-94421179951119/

I also find it interesting that I had to go to the second GOOGLE page to get remotely close to the original article published in 2007 by UPI

:}

OSLO, Norway, May 23 (UPI) — Norwegian lawmakers are working on a proposal that could lead to a ban on the sale of gasoline-powered cars, a published report said Wednesday.

Ruling Labor, Socialist Left and Center party members of the Parliament’s transportation committee have aired the proposal, and the Transport Ministry is determining if such a ban would be legal, Oslo’s Verdens Gang newspaper reported.

“This is not a problem to arrange,” Labor transportation committee member Truls Wickstrom said. “In Brazil over 80 percent of cars sold run on bioethanol.”

“Most of the major car makers are banking on flexi-fuel,” Wickstrom said.

A flexible-fuel vehicle, or dual-fuel vehicle, has two fuel tanks and can alternate between, for instance, gasoline and bioethanol, also known as gasohol.

Banning sales of gasoline-powered cars “would pressure the automobile industry into developing technology faster than it otherwise would,” Center Party committee member Jenny Klinge said.

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T58A2w61dD4&feature=related )

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/norway-considers-banning-petrol-powered-cars/

So this was 2 years ago at least:

Norway Considers Banning Petrol-Powered

Cars

By Frank Williams
October 12, 2007
800px-pivco-piv3.jpg

No seriously. The Kingdom of Norway may become the first nation on God’s green Earth to ban all gasoline-only cars. Citing Brazil’s success with bioethanol as their rationale, Norwegian lawmakers are considering ditching petrol-only machines completely, in favor of biofuel-powered transportation. The United Press International reports that Center Party committee member Jenny Klinge feels banning sales of gasoline-powered cars to her country’s 4.7m residents “would pressure the automobile industry into developing technology faster than it otherwise would.” The Norwegian Transport ministry is trying to determine if such a ban would be legal. Meanwhile, Norway’s many corn, soybean, and sugar cane farmers are excited about the prospects of a new market for their crops.

:}

But here is IERG’s response if you believe Deedee Hirner Executive Director:

http://www.sj-r.com/archive/x1098184794/Letters-to-the-Editor-April-26

Making ‘polluters’ pay a disingenuous idea
Ron Burke’s suggestion for solving Illinois’ budget woes (“OK clean-energy law to help achieve 2 goals,” April 15) sounds painless — “making polluters pay.” He offers this, rather than increasing taxes, to raise billions to shore up state revenues. We believe Burke’s suggestion is disingenuous.

“Polluting businesses” provide gasoline to fuel our cars, electricity for light, heat, computers and high-def televisions, laundry detergents, beverage sweeteners and toothpaste. “Polluters” provide products that we, the consumers, demand. To promote “they” will pay more while “we” pay less is nothing more than a verbal shell game.

Burke states that Illinois is a significant contributor to global warming, and it is time to take responsibility for our emissions. We note that since 1980, Illinois’ population has increased 32 percent, vehicle miles traveled increased 101 percent and energy consumption increased 29 percent, while overall emissions decreased 49 percent.

Further, according to the World Resources Institute that facilitated the Illinois Climate Change Advisory Group’s work, since 1990, greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation and residential sectors increased 18 percent and 3 percent, respectively, while those in the industrial energy sector decreased by 14 percent. It would appear that Illinois industry already has, to paraphrase Burke, seized the opportunity to get ahead of the curve.

Congress is expected to act soon on climate-change legislation. We believe the federal, not single- or five-state regional level, is the appropriate place for action. Burke implies opposition to regional regulation stems from a desire to hide. We strongly disagree — over-arching national policy evens the playing field for business and industry across all states.

Finally, a clean-energy law cannot achieve two goals. Proponents of charging for emissions to reduce global warming advocate that fees be revenue neutral. Revenue is not to be retained by government to solve budgets woes, but refunded to energy users to mitigate “negative impacts,” or provide incentives to reduce CO2 emissions.

Deirdre K. Hirner
Executive director
Illinois Environmental
Regulatory Group
Springfield

:}

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kXj1hmDI7Q&feature=related )

Yah THESE PEOPLE

http://www.ierg.org/

REGULATORY GROUP

IERG’s primary objective is the development and negotiation of environmental regulations and laws in Illinois. IERG is committed to the principle that environmental regulation and policy be grounded on sound science and produce demonstrated environmental improvements commensurate with the costs involved for compliance.

Because of the diversity of these regulations – and the way in which responsibilities are spread over state government – IERG is involved with an ever expanding universe of state agencies and departments. To this end, IERG expends effort to actually draft both regulatory language and detailed comments on proposals put forth by the regulatory agencies. On behalf of IERG members, staff is involved early in the effort to provide sound and technically defensible input throughout the regulatory, policy or legislative process.

:}

That Hang out with THESE PEOPLE:


(Expanded Members)

Abbott Laboratories


Robert Wells

Ameren Services Company


Michael L. Menne

Archer-Daniels-Midland Company


Mark E. Calmes

 

Atlantic Richfield Company
Thomas G. Tunnicliff

Aventine Renewable Energy, Inc.
Steve Antonacci

Bunge North America, Inc.
Loren L. Polak  

Buzzi Unicem USA, Inc.
Kathy Brady

Cabot Corporation


Amy Clyde

Caterpillar Inc.


Patricia Ludewig 

Chrysler Corporation


Mark Werthman

CITGO Petroleum Corporation


Matthew W. Klickman

Cognis Corporation


Maureen Haller

Commonwealth Edison Company


Lorinda Alms  

Conooco Phillips Petroleum Company
Gina P. Nicholson

Corn Products International, Inc.


Alan L. Jirik

Deere & Company


James Nitzschke

 

Dominion Kincaid Generation, LLC


Al Rinozzi

The Dow Chemical Company


Bill Pedersen

Duke Energy
Patrick Coughlin

Dynegy Midwest Generation
Rick Diericx

Electric Energy, Inc.


Bruce Parker

Equistar Chemical, LP


Robert Steele

ExxonMobil Corporation


Robert S. Elvert

 

Flint Hills Resource,. LLC
Gale Newton

Flint Hills Resources (Huntsman)


Mary Steinbach 

G.E. Plastics


Timothy Thompson

General Mills


Theodore M. Slavik

 

Illinois Cement
Gene Hodges

Kinder Morgan Inc.


Thomas J. Bach

Lonza Inc.


Robert E. Miller

Marathon Petroleum Company LLC


Alan Mayo

MGP Ingredients
Bob Taphorn

Midwest Generation EME, LLC


Basil G. Constantelos

 

Morris Cogeneration, L.L.C.
Carolyn Gibson

Nicor Gas Company


Somali Tomczak

Nucor Steel Kankakee, Inc.
Ray Smith

Olin Corporation


Phillip Sutton

ONDEO Nalco Company


Mary Lee

 

Peabody Coal
Bryce West

Peoples Energy


Michael Jouras

Prairie Power, Inc.
Randy Fisher

S & C Electric Company


Robert Sullivan

 

The Sherwin-Williams Company


Paul Barding

  

The Solae Company


Mark Sheppard

Southern Illinois Power Cooperative


Dick Myott

 

Springfield City Water, Light & Power


William A. Murray

Stepan Company


Daniel J. Muno

Sterling Steel Company,  LLC
David Long

Tate & Lyle
Richard Dickinson

United States Steel Granite City Works
Larry Siebenberger

 

Viscofan USA, Inc.
Jack Webster

Waste Management, Inc.
Lisa Disbrow

(Expanded Executive Committee)
Chairman & Manufactured Equipment, Materials,             David Long

Vice Chairman &
Transportation, Equipment &
Services Sector 
Patricia Ludewig

Secretary & Chemicals Sector
Anu Singh

 

Treasurer & Oil Sector 
Bob Elvert      

Utilities Sector
Rick Diericx

Past Chairman & Food & Pharmaceutical Sector           Alan Jirik President & CEO,
The Illinois Chamber
Doug Whitley

IERG Executive Director
Deirdre K. Hirner

:}

Why don’t I just write a Letter to the Editor?  The State Journal Register quit printing mine.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79UU8kcEG5I  )

Nuff said.

( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3jhja8rIMc&feature=related )
:}

Small Fuel Efficient Cars ARE NOT Dangerous – Everytime the Auto Industry is pressed for changes

Posted on by
2

this is how they respond. They lie. They spend a lot of money and hope the World Goes away:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hTKeo4w7npA

or maybe it sounds like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFE0C_5gtzE

or this original:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1_1TqRgPbTI

But it usually looks like this:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2009-04-14-big-cars-safer_N.htm

Crash tests show small car ratings are misleading

By James R. Healey, USA TODAY

Buyers choosing the smallest cars for low price and high gas mileage could be endangering themselves and their passengers, says a major auto-safety researcher.

In new crash tests, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety rammed three automakers’ smallest cars into their midsize models. Although the small cars had passed other IIHS tests, they flunked in collisions with larger but still-fuel-efficient sedans. “The safety trade-offs are clear,” IIHS President Adrian Lund says. “There are healthier ways to save gas.”

IIHS, funded by auto insurers, usually crashes cars into stationary barriers at 40 miles per hour. This time, it was car into car, each going 40 mph.

Barrier tests, in effect, show how a car holds up crashing into one like itself, Lund says. These tests show colliding with a larger car at the same effective speed as the barrier test.

IIHS picked three small cars that got its top rating of “good” in barrier tests. In these tests, they fell to “poor” The report comes as small cars take a larger share of U.S. new-vehicle sales. While R.L. Polk registrations show 13.8% of vehicles on the road are classed “small cars,” their share of new-car sales rose from 14.5% in 2006 to 18.1% last year, says Autodata.

:}

But wait later in the article:

Dave Schembri, president of Smart, says, “If you carry this to the nth degree, we’d all be driving 18-wheelers.” And, he says, fewer than 1% of crashes are as violent as the IIHS test.

Lund says the car vs. car tests are meant to mimic killer crashes, not fender benders. He also says that the only difference between the barrier test, in which Smart got a “good,” and the latest test is the size of the obstacle the Smart ran into.

Cynthia Sholander. of Fairfax, Va., praises Smart. She survived a horrific rear-end crash last October that sent her Smart sailing off Interstate 95, into trees, then bouncing back. Sholander says she suffered a concussion but no other injuries.

:}

The point here is they PUT THE CARS THROUGH TESTS THEY NEVER PERFORM.

Fact is roughly 37,000 people die in cars every year. This has been true since the mid 1960’s. Do you find this shocking? You should. That is again roughly 3,000 deaths a month. Even with the use of seat belts and airbags. Why? Because there are millions more drivers and cars then back then and the increase of large long and short haul trucks. But to slam a much larger vehicle into a much smaller vehicle head on and then “tut tut” that the smaller cars are more dangerous is just dumb. Top that off with Walter Williams and  Robert Novak trembling on about the destruction they cause and you can tell the state of emotional alarmism echoing around the far right. That is until Novak ran over a pedestrian with his Corvette for God’s sake. The truth is:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Head-on_collision

Road transport

Head-on collisions are an often fatal type of road traffic accident. U.S. statistics show that in 2005, head-on crashes were only 2.0% of all crashes, yet accounted for 10.1% of US fatal crashes. This over-representation is because the relative velocities of vehicles traveling in opposite directions is high. A head-on crash between two vehicles traveling at 50 mph is comparable to a vehicle traveling at 100 mph striking a stationary vehicle.

Head-on collisions, sideswipes, and run-off-road crashes all belong to a category of crashes called lane-departure or road-departure crashes. This is because they have similar causes, if different consequences. The driver of a vehicle fails to stay centered in their lane, and either leaves the roadway, or crosses the centerline, possibly resulting in a head-on or sideswipe collision, or, if the vehicle avoids oncoming traffic, a run-off-road crash on the far side of the road.

Preventive measures include traffic signs and road surface markings to help guide drivers through curves, as well as separating opposing lanes of traffic with wide central reservation (or median) and median barriers to prevent crossover incidents. Median barriers are physical barriers between the lanes of traffic, such as concrete barriers or wire rope safety barrier. These are actually roadside hazards in their own right, but on high speed roads, the severity of a collision with a median barrier is usually lower than the severity of a head-on crash.

The European Road Assessment Programme‘s Road Protection Score (RPS) is based on a schedule of detailed road design elements that correspond to each of the four main crash types, including head-on collisions. The Head-on Crash element of the RPS measures how well traffic lanes are separated. Motorways generally have crash protection features in harmony with the high speeds allowed. The Star Rating results show that motorways generally score well with a typical 4-star rating even though their permitted speeds are the highest on the network. But results from Star Rating research in Britain, Germany, the Netherlands and Sweden have shown that there is a pressing need to find better median, run-off and junction protection at reasonable cost on single carriageway roads.

:}

So what are they afraid of and what are they spending billions to avoid? The “old car warrior”:

http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0809-06.htm

 

 

Published on Friday, August 9, 2002 by CommonDreams.org

 

The Quest for the Fuel Efficient Car

By Ralph Nader

Once again the Congressional toadies for the auto industry have beaten back efforts by legislators such as Democrat, Senator John Kerry and Republican John McCain to gradually increase fuel efficiency standards from the abysmally wasteful levels now inflicted on your pocketbook. Instead of choosing the path of reduced pollution, consumer savings, efficiency of engines and less reliance on imported oil, these indentured lawmakers turned their back on automotive engineers who know how to do the job but are not allowed by their bosses.

The Sierra Club has decided to stop spinning its wheels on Capitol Hill and go directly to the people. In surveys of likely voters in Missouri and South Dakota, 79 percent of the people wanted the auto industry to be required to increase fuel efficiency and that included light truck owners. The voters do not buy the auto company propaganda that more fuel efficient vehicles means less safety. Sixty percent of these voters say they would pay more for a higher mileage vehicle in return for its much larger dollar savings.

Long time car owners know that fuel efficiency overall is no better than what vehicles did in 1980! They are wary of the sudden spikes in gasoline prices. They also know that the companies spend lots of money on engine hyper-performance rather than on engine hyper-efficiency. Despite massive advertising by the auto companies to the contrary, they do not believe them.

Bolstered by public opinion, the Sierra Club announced a three year campaign to pressure automakers to improve fuel economy. Executive Director, Carl Pope, said “The technology exists today to allow the automakers to continue offering their most popular models, but with significantly improved fuel economy. These new safe, fuel-saving SUVs and pickups could be on the shelf very soon.” (see www.sierraclub.org for specific examples)

The Sierra Club is publicizing a “Freedom Option Package”, which is a set of fuel-saving components that could be added to most standard models and that, taken together, could put the fleets of the Big Three on the road to 40 miles per gallon.

Dan Becker, the Club’s Clean Energy director says that “Detroit wants to sell option packages featuring seat warmers and cup holders” instead. He is mobilizing the Club’s 700,000 members across the country to hold events at local auto dealers. Becker has enlisted a prominent Chevrolet dealer, Chuck Frank in support of this initiative.

The Sierra Club, once enthralled by Bill Ford’s environmental statements and assurances of major increases in Ford’s SUV’s is now so disappointed with his company’s joining the other auto giants to lobby against fuel-efficiency laws that it has singled him and Ford Motor Company for special pressure by motorists.

Soon to come (September 17th) is the most jolting book against the auto company executives since Unsafe at Any Speed came out in 1965. I am referring to New York Times reporter, Keith Bradsher’s devastating expose of the SUVs which he calls the world’s most dangerous vehicles and how they got that way. Titled The High and Mighty, this book explains how the auto industry’s grip on Congress got these SUVs (hoked-up, over-priced light truck) exempted form safety, fuel efficiency and pollution requirements that were imposed on automobiles. That was accomplished when these vehicles were a small percentage of overall sales. Now they are a large part of sales; they kill their occupants in roll overs three times the rate of cars; areuniquely dangerous to other motorists and will become more serious when drunks, teenagers, typically the worst drivers on the road, start buying the older used SUVs, Bradsher says.

With an impressive attention to detail and special documentation, Bradsher reports on the enormous advertising money ($10 billion spent since 1990) to deceive their customers and persuade Americans to switch from cars to the very profitable SUVs. While, he declares, “Gas-guzzling SUVs emit one-third more global-warming gases per mile than cars, and up to 5.5 times as much smog-causing nitrogen oxides per mile.”

If the media grasps the importance of this book, September will be a hot month for the high and mighty in Detroit’s executive suites. And long overdue.

:}

I think the automakers are in real trouble.

:}

Energy And Environmental Blog’s – What my competito….friends have been up to lately

Posted on by
Reply

This site is not for the average reader or for the weak at heart. This is hard core energy news with BLOGS by people who DO, teach not…. as Yoda might say:

http://www.energyblogs.com

Interesting ideas and viewpoints are constantly emerging on EnergyBlogs.com.  We have enhanced the topics available for categorizing blogs so that you can easily reflect the dynamic conversations taking place within the global power industry.

To assist in this transition, existing blogs have been recategorized into the appropriate topics.  We encourage you to review the recategorization to make sure the topics best reflect the content of your blog and update the categories if appropriate.

As always, we encourage you to start a new blog on one of the engaging new topics!  If you have any questions, please contact service@energycentral.com.

1-20 of 801 items listed      First Previous Next Last
Blogger Photos

To Dr. Chu: Align Stimulus to Clean Energy Reform

02/08/2009 at 08:22 PM   |   Jose Antonio Vanderhorst-Silverio – Electricity Without Price Controls Blog

A system architect should lead a high leverage clean energy reform transformation of the power industry for DOE to distribute as soon as possible the …
Blogger Photos

Bacteria to Power Up the Carwash? – By Lance Winslow

02/06/2009 at 08:29 PM   |   Lance Winslow – Lance Winslow’s Online Energy Think Tank Blog – Articles by Lance Winslow Blog

By Lance Winslow   Alternative energy is bolder rage and it makes sense to take this technology and apply it to his many possible industries …
Blogger Photos

VENDORS UPBEAT – Really!!! – Distributech Musings

02/06/2009 at 01:00 AM   |   Martin Rosenberg – From the Editor’s Desk Blog

Before we get to the meat of this posting, I offer a snippet from a conversation I snagged early this week with Neal Schmale, president and chief oper..

:}

When this guy is on he is really on, but again this site is only for the hard core wonk:

http://thefraserdomain.typepad.com/

December 01, 2008

EPA Raises Raises Requirements for Renewable Fuels

An item of interest to ethanol producers and other supporters of ethanol is this announcement by EPA, as further clarified by this announcement by EERE:

Epaseal1

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced on November 17 that the 2009 renewable fuel standard (RFS) will require most refiners, importers, and non-oxygenate blenders of gasoline to displace 10.21% of their gasoline with renewable fuels such as ethanol. That requirement aims to ensure that at least 11.1 billion gallons of fuels will be sold in 2009.  . . . While the RFS requirement is increasing by about 23%—from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 11.1 billion gallons in 2009—the percentage requirement is increasing by nearly one third, from 7.76% in 2008 to 10.21% in 2009.

…

:}

He also only posts when he feels like it. The last post was in December. Did the Obama Election scare you away?

Then there is the worldwide wonks. Don’t look if you do not really really care.

http://peakenergy.blogspot.com/

Monday, February 09, 2009

Let engineers make Britain great again

The Guardian has a fairly technocractic article on the low value accorded to engineers in Britain and the value of implementing some large scale and tecnically complex infrastructure to rebuild the economy on “solid foundations” – Let engineers make Britain great again.
Orson Welles said film-making was the biggest electric train set a boy ever had. He was wrong. A new high-speed train line would be, if the boy or girl grew up to engineer it.

But in Britain, the train set is broken and has been packed away in the attic. We’re not proud of industry and we certainly don’t want our kids to grow up to be engineers. It’s a tragedy. It never used to be this way. We need to rediscover the power of engineering, its impact and contribution. It can stimulate young minds and it can stimulate the economy. …

So the young are innately curious about how and why things work. Yet what happens between childhood and adulthood? We stamp it out of them. Engineering gets stigmatised and we encourage our kids to become “professionals” – lawyers, accountants, doctors. Unlike in France or Germany, engineers are a bit of a nonentity here. Engineering is almost a dirty word. We’re told it’s “old industry” and that we are a “post-industrial nation”.

Part of the problem is that engineers are not accorded the status they deserve. We celebrate designers and architects, but forget the clever people who turn the theory into reality. The Millau bridge in France was designed by Norman Foster, but it was French engineer Michel Virlogeux who made it work. A magnificent achievement, but whose name do people remember? In 2005, Ellen MacArthur became the fastest person to sail round the globe, but little was made of Nigel Irens, who engineered her trimaran. …
:}

Damn it man…Engineers are important…but so are their mothers and they never mention them.

So YOU think YOU are into renewable energy, huh. Better eat your Wheaties for this one.

http://renewenergy.wordpress.com

 

CPUC Says CSI Doubled Installations in 2008

2009-02-06 by renewenergy

 

The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) issued a quarterly staff progress report on the California Solar Initiative, showing that in 2008 Californians installed twice as many megawatts (MW) of solar power than the year before, and that demand for new solar projects continues to hit record levels.

Read Full Story

Posted in Policy, Solar Energy | No Comments »

 Fraunhofer Sets CPV Efficiency Record of 41.1%

2009-02-06 by renewenergy

 

Researchers at the Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems (ISE) have achieved a record efficiency of 41.1% for the conversion of sunlight into electricity using a concentrating solar PV system.

Read Full Story

Posted in Efficiency, Research, Solar Energy | No Comments »

 

Texas Approves US $5B for Transmission

2009-02-06 by renewenergy

 

In 2006 Texas overtook California to lead the nation in installed wind power generating capcity. Now, just three years later, wind turbines generating 8005-megawatts (MW), more than all the turbines spinning in California, Iowa and Minnesota, have outstripped the capacity of the high-voltage grid to move the power from windy west Texas to major cities where it’s needed.

Read Full Story

Posted in Economics, Electricity, Policy | No Comments »

 

 

:}

But to lighten up a little bit, then there is the financial side of things:

 

http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/

February 9, 2009, 2:10 pm

Crude Reality: Oil Bulls See Hope in Stimulus Package

Posted by Keith Johnson

Crude oil futures in New York are still climbing Monday, jumping more than 5% in early trading before settling down to a more modest 1.5% increase.

What’s driving the uptick? There are theories for all tastes.

On the supply side, OPEC now says it is doing better at sticking to reduced production targets than most outside analysts give the cartel credit for. OPEC’s secretary general said today the cartel has already cut 80% of the 4.2 million barrels it’s meant to take off the market, and the cartel is ready to cut again at its March meeting.

On the demand side, President Obama’s cheerleading for the $800-odd billion stimulus package and signs the Senate could pass its version tomorrow are giving bulls hope there’s a quick fix in store for the battered U.S. economy that will rekindle demand for oil. Given that natural-gas futures are also up on Monday—the first four-day winning streak for gas since last autumn—there’s something to be said for the idea of a light at the end of the tunnel for the U.S. economy.

But the imminent passage of the stimulus package could be bullish for oil prices—without ever stimulating a lick of oil demand in the U.S.

:}

Fun stuff huh? Then there is the LONGEST running serious Energy Bog oh blog started in 2005

http://www.leonardo-energy.org/drupal/seblog

Sustainable Energy Blog

Printer-friendly version

Insuring electric cars

Submitted by Bruno De Wachter on Thu, 2009-02-05 06:30.

 

Cheaper or more expensive than conventional cars?

When the cost of a plug-in vehicle is mentioned, it mostly refers to the purchasing and maintenance expenses. Sometimes, tax reductions given to electric vehicles (EVs) are taken into account, but the insurance cost is rarely discussed. This is somewhat strange, since the insurance on a conventionally fuelled car accounts for roughly one quarter of its fixed cost of ownership. So, what happens to this cost when switching from a conventional car to an EV?

:}

Tomorrow I will try my hand at Alternative Energy Blog sites. They are funner.

:}

Archer Daniels Midland Should Lead To The Future Not Repeat The Past – Deep well injection is so last century

Posted on by
2

ADM  just got their Permit to inject CO3 into Illinois’ soil. Why would they want to throw away the chance to produce the fuel of the future? They are so proud of it they want to spend 66 million $$$ of your money on it.

http://www.admworld.com/cgi-bin/search/naen/search.asp?Realm=Admworld_NAEN&Terms=deep%20well%20injection

ADM, MGSC and ISGS

Announce Carbon

Sequestration Project

Project to study

technology to reduce

greenhouse gas

emissions

Archer Daniels Midland Company (ADM), the Midwest Geological Sequestration Consortium (MGSC) and the Illinois State Geological Survey (ISGS) announce that they are working together on a carbon sequestration project. The project will involve the capture and storage of carbon dioxide from ADM’s ethanol plant in Decatur, Illinois. In this project, carbon dioxide will be stored in the tiny spaces of porous rock deep below the Earth’s surface. This technology is one method of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by permanently storing carbon dioxide in the ground rather than releasing it into the atmosphere.

The project is designed to confirm the ability of the Mount Simon Sandstone, a major regional saline-water-bearing rock formation in Illinois, to accept and store 1 million tons of carbon dioxide over a period of three years. The carbon dioxide will be provided by ADM from its Decatur, Illinois, ethanol plant, and the project will be located on ADM’s Decatur property.

“Carbon sequestration is a promising technology to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions. Our goal for this project is to further demonstrate its safety and effectiveness,” said Robert Finley, director of the ISGS Energy and Earth Resources Center. “Deep saline rock formations, like the Mount Simon Sandstone, offer the greatest potential for sequestration of large volumes of carbon dioxide.”

“ADM is pleased to work with the geologists from the MGSC and ISGS, and be a part of this important, timely research,” said Dennis Riddle, ADM president, Corn Processing. “We see potential for carbon sequestration to improve the environmental footprint of biofuels by further reducing greenhouse gas emissions.”

:}

Yet they could be doing this instead:

http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/articles/2009/01/02/science/975algae010109.txt

Trying to Turn San Diego into the Green Houston

Thursday, Jan. 1, 2009 | In the early 1990s, San Diego’s moribund economy was revived by a bunch of scientists who figured out how to do things like turn a mobile phone into a multi-media entertainment center and develop a diabetes therapy out of lizard spit.

Now, with the economy tanking again, another bunch of scientists is telling anyone who will listen that the region’s next economic boom might be borne out of pond scum.

Algae that is — green gold, San Diego soda.

San Diego, already home to dozens of companies involved in solar or wind energy, would be a major player in the nation’s multi-trillion-dollar energy economy if a group of local researchers succeed in turning algae into a commercially viable transportation fuel, something they think they can do within a decade.

“[It] is the scientific challenge of our generation,” said Stephen Mayfield, a cell biologist and associate dean at the Scripps Research Institute, referring to the need to cure America of its 200-billion-gallon-a-year oil addiction. “And algae is the answer.”

And a top-notch research infrastructure, a thriving biotech sector and proximity to cheap land in Imperial County, where the plant could be grown on a large scale with plenty of sun, combine to give San Diego a strong foundation for building on algae’s future.

Mayfield is one of several scientists at both Scripps institutions and the University of California, San Diego who are considered among the word’s foremost algae researchers. Other prominent names are Steve Kay, dean of the division of Biological Sciences at UCSD, and B. Gregory Mitchell, a biologist at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography.

:}

:}

The Hummer Cheaper To Operate Than The Prius – 2008 seems to be an entirely different than 2007

Posted on by
Reply

Again the theme this week is Silly Energy Uses:

:}

http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/8/27/124134/961

pima_728×90_expo.jpg

grist.gif

Dust to dumb

Prius easily beats Hummer in lifecycle energy use; ‘Dust to Dust’ report has no basis in fact

Posted by Joseph Romm (Guest Contributor) at 12:42 PM on 27 Aug 2007

Read more about: cars | Prius | energy | ecological footprint | insanity | electric vehicles

Tools: print | email | + digg | + del.icio.us | + reddit | + stumbleupon

hummer-prius.jpg

A study came out recently claiming to prove a Hummer has lower lifecycle energy use than a Prius. Because the result was so obviously bogus — and in sharp contradiction with every other major lifecycle analysis ever done — I didn’t spend time debunking it.

But it made it into the comments of my blog and continues to echo around the internet, and the authors keep updating and defending it. A couple of good debunking studies — by the Pacific Institute (PDF) and by Rocky Mountain Institute (PDF) — haven’t gotten much attention, according to Technorati, so let me throw in my two cents.

The study’s title is revealing: Dust to Dust: The Energy Cost of New Vehicles From Concept to Disposal, The non-technical report, from CNW Marketing Research, Inc. Yes, although lifecycle energy use is probably the most complicated kind of energy analysis you can do, this 458-page report is “non-technical” and by a market research company to boot.

Their website says the report “does not include issues of gigajuelles [sic!], kW hours or other unfriendly (to consumers) terms. Perhaps, in time, we will release our data in such technical terms. First, however, we will only look at the energy consumption cost.”

Wouldn’t want to confuse consumers with unfriendly technical stuff like kilowatt-hours, like those annoying electric utilities do every month. No, let’s put everything in dollar terms so no one can reproduce our results. When you misspell gigajoules on your website — and have for a long time (try googling “gigajuelles”) … you aren’t the most technical bunch.

I am mocking this report because it is the most contrived and mistake-filled study I have ever seen — by far (and that’s saying a lot, since I worked for the federal government for five years). I am not certain there is an accurate calculation in the entire report. I say this without fear of contradiction, because this is also the most opaque study I have ever seen — by far. I defy anyone to figure out their methodology.

(:=})

So what is a sillier use of energy, saying that a Hummer is cheaper overall than a Prius or debunking it? Wouldn’t it be simplier to just point out that they are industry FLACKs that have been sucking up to the auto industry since 1984?
View the index page


Phone Numbers

For e-mail addresses of CNW contacts, click here.Bandon Office: 541-347-4718Vista del Lago Conference Center: (To come)

Fax: 541-347-1174

Cell Numbers: (Being changed. Will post shortly.)

Important Policy Note

While CNW is always available to answer general questions from anyone interested in the auto industry, our clients and 10,000-plus subscribers come first. To assure an accurate answer to your automotive question, please e-mail your question to Mailroom@CNWMR.com or click through to The Brain Trust in the left bar. Due to the volume of requests, we cannot answer questions by phone.

Company Background

Founded in 1984, CNW Marketing/Research began as Coastal NW Publishing Company. Through the years, clients and subscribers have spread from the Great Northwest to include every state of the union (except Alabama), Australia, Europe, Asia and Canada. Clients include major automobile manufacturers, banks and lending institutions, Wall Street brokerage firms and consultants. Besides publishing LTR/8+ (America’s most quoted source of leasing information), CNW publishes new and used vehicle industry reference guides and study summaries, a monthly Retail Automotive Summary of sales and trends, as well as our online research distribution center, CNW by WEB.  CNW holds an annual conference in Los Angeles in connection with Time Inc. Mr. Spinella is available for Executive Sessions for a limited number of clients.

Oil Falls To 57$$ A Barrel – We are all going to die!

Posted on by
Reply

We are all going to die….well not just yet.

 

https://censys.org/wp-admin/post.php?action=edit&post=756

 

Why are oil prices dropping?

The price of oil this morning is $72 a barrel — half of what it was three months ago. Ashley Milne-Tyte looks into some factors influencing oil markets, including the disappearance of some speculators.

http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/o/oil_petroleum_and_gasoline/index.html?excamp=GGBUoilprice&WT.srch=1&WT.mc_ev=click&WT.mc_id=BI-S-E-GG-NA-S-oil_price

Countries like Russia, Venezuela and Iran that were flush with rising oil revenue saw that change reflected in newly aggressive foreign policies. But some unexpected countries reaped benefits, as well as costs, from higher prices. Consider Germany. Although it imports virtually all its oil, it has prospered from extensive trade with a booming Russia and the Middle East. German exports to Russia grew 128 percent from 2001 to 2006. The high price of gas became an important issue in the presidential campaign. Senator John McCain in particular made energy a focus, proposing to suspend the gas tax during the summer. He also made fervent calls to expand domestic drilling for oil, while his opponent, Barack Obama, emphasized the need for alternative fuels. The surge in prices hit automakers hard, as sales of the truck-based models that had been Detroit’s most profitable product dropped sharply. Mass transit systems across the country reported a sharp increase in riders. As prices fell in the fall, the question facing Opec and car makers alike was whether those shifts would reverse, as they had in previous downturns, or whether a tipping point had been reached.

:}

Drill Here Drill Now     

      Drill Here Drill Now             

              Drill Here Drill Now

                                      Drill Here Drill Now                                                                 

                                                          Drill Here Drill Now

Build An Electric Car – Skip natural gas and go directly to the future

Posted on by
Reply

Many people are building their own electric cars because they are tired of waiting for Detroit, Japan or Germany to build them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4JoUJ7yiTIE

video

gas car to all electric power. Instructor Michael Yonan gives it a test drive. Video/editing: Tara Cuslidge Recordnet.com …  

Views: 2,019

5.0

02:13

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RK_6JFay5TI

 

video

Rising gas prices have some Nebraska students looking at the next big wave in travel. … gas electric car …

 http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=build+electric+car&search_type=&aq=1&oq=build+electric+

video

How to Build an Electric Car … electric car diy hot to renewable energy green power …

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eul229WFug

video

Build Your Own Electric Car and Save Money on Gas

:}

You get the general idea save the drive trane and the chassey/frame and put in batteries and an electric motor. WOW now that is simple and cheap. 2 things auto makers and energy companies don’t get. But what if you really wanted to live in the future with a solar powered car. What would you do? I know, added solar panels to an electric car. Easy enough right? Well actually it is. 

:}

 http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=build+electric+car&search_type=&aq=1&oq=build+electric+

video

 

 Infinity Miles Per Gallon: Art Haines and the Solar Car

Want a solar Car? Mechanical designer Art Haines, of Maine, built one from scratch with the help of high school students.

Tri Cars, Trikars, 3 Wheelers and Modified Motorcycles Come To Springfield, IL – I had hoped to have Sarah’s story to tell today

Posted on by
3

Sarah O’Shea has some kind of Tri Car. It is pink, little, a convertible and cute. I really wanted a firsthand perspective. How does it handle? Is it loud? What is the ride like? But she does not seem interested, so I will just point people to places for 3 Wheelers. The funniest and long standing site is:

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze6omtd/jorysquibb/id1.html

He calls himself MoonBeam and he is a hoot. He also gets 72 miles to the gallon. yikes:

How to build Moonbeam, a 100 MPG microcar

How to Build Moonbeam

1: CHOOSING THE DONOR VEHICLES                               (It takes two, remember?)        

 It’s good to think well before you choose which motorcycles or scooters to chop up for your microcar. I decided that I wanted the following characteristics: 100 miles per gallon, a four-stroke engine with water cooling; an occasional small second-passenger capacity, but usually one passenger and 6 grocery bags; no gear shifting with hand controls only; an enclosed vehicle with a heater for all-weather operation; easy interior access with lots of light; and finally, a nice looking machine, that you looked back on admiringly as you walk away. All in a budget of $2000, including the donor vehicles and 400 hours of labor. A half-time, half-year project. Ha! What an underestimation!

:}
Then he says a bunch very funny things and offers these helpful websites:

www.micromuseum.com    www.ccpc.net/~jaho/3link.html    www.3-wheelers.com   www.maxmatic   and www.rqriley.com 

The coolest one is the 3-wheelers site. They have some really cool stuff.

:}

The scooters I chose,  I completely stripped, carefully bagging and labeling all parts, and then sawed through the frame tubes right where the tube enters the rear subframe. I used a reciprocating hand power saw, commonly called a Sawzall, and kept handy a large pack of 14 tooth blades. Gasp! It was hard to destroy a beautiful red motor scooter! See photo 1, which also shows what I am calling the subframe.

II: BUILDING A STRONG MINIMAL CHASSIS

     I wanted to build a minimal frame first and test the vehicle on the road before I went too far with building the body. As you will see, my idea was to join the scooter rear end into two front ends of the same scooter.  See the ‘improvements” page for, in retrospect,  an easier way.

I bought an 8’ length of steel rectangular tube which was 2″ X 4″ in section and an eighth inch thick and sawing 45 degree angles created a “U” shaped piece of chassis. I chose 40″ inches as the car’s width, so the sides are 40″ on center and the arms extend 18″ forward, with caps welded on the open ends. This strong main frame shows in Photo 3, the first road test.

A 40″ width, with a wheelbase of about 57″, turned out to be a nice size. But when 2 adults are seat belted side-by-side, THEY NEED TO BE ON FRIENDLY TERMS! It’s better if the second passenger is a child.

I would strongly recommend that you think in terms of a 1.5 passenger vehicle. These are only 10″ tires. There are drum, not disk, brakes. Especially important, the front suspension, which mainly supports the passengers, has limited travel. Two adults going over a large pot hole might well bend something.

You might choose a larger format, but my interest was always to see how small a vehicle I could use with dignity. I might have gone to a 63″ wheelbase and used the extra length for more legroom. But remember: size makes weight. Moonbeam weighs 112 on each front wheel, and 162 on the back, for a total of 386 lbs. It accelerates quickly up to 40 MPH, then slowly on up to 52, but with two adults aboard, it does labor up steep hills.

I didn’t know how to weld, so bought a Hobart Handler “MIG” welding set with helmet, gloves, cart, etc. and had the salesman give me a crash course in welding. Before I started welding the chassis, I forced myself to spend a day practicing on all types of welds on all thickness of steel. Even so, my welds were always amateurish. The MIG welder, which uses inert gas, does make welding a lot easier.

I then welded this “U” chassis to the scooter rear sub-frame, using scrap flat 1/8″ metal gussets to strengthen all connections. On the sub-frame, I also lengthened the rear springs by 1″ to raise the height a little, and then re-installed the motor unit in the sub-frame.

To begin understanding some of the 3-wheel technical stuff, read everything in this site: www.rqriley.com/download.html Especially note all the front end geometry stuff, and the fact that: “The center of gravity should no farther than 35 percent of the wheelbase from the side-by-side wheels of a three wheeler”. This means that the driver will sit further forward than you might imagine.

To position the two front forks, I built a stand, shown in photo 2, which supports both forks at 40 inch spacing, angled together at the top 1-2 degrees (camber) and leaning back 10 degrees (caster). The motor scooter caster of 27 degrees would make steering too hard. With this wooden stand screwed with dry wall screws to the rectangular plates which  already exists on the Honda fork tubes, and which show in front of my right shoulder in Photo 1; the stand supports the forks as I eventually wanted them. I then removed the forks, bearings, tires, etc. and sawed off the level part of the round scooter frames parallel with caps on the front of the chassis I had just made, and welded them to the chassis arms. The round scooter down-tube is also an eighth inch thick, which makes for easy welding. Then I put the forks back in, cleaning and greasing the steering head bearings, removed my wooden stand and jumped merrily on the chassis to test it. Hooray! A rolling chassis.

 

III. SETTING UP THE STEERING

     I wanted to steer with handlebars using all the original Honda electrical controls, brakes, throttle, as well as the speedometer cluster. This is such a major simplification! So I welded a temporary steel box channel between the steering heads, and pivoted the old Honda handlebars in the middle. I welded flat steel ‘steering plates’ leading forward from the scooter’s forks right below the lower bearings, spacing them outward 23 degrees from straight ahead. These show well in photo 4. This would give correct “Ackerman” angles to the wheels when fully turned, the wheel on the inside of the turn needing more angle than the outer. 

     Another way to calculate this 23 degrees, is that the outer ball joint end of each radius rod, sighted straight through the lower steering bearing, should point exactly to the ‘contact patch’ the rear wheel makes with the road.  On your car, using a different tread and wheelbase length, it won’t come out 23 degrees.

Later in construction, when I fine-tuned the passenger position, I removed the crossbar mentioned above, which was too obstructive, and used a post jutting out toward the driver from the curved forward frame member.  See Photo 7.  This maximized the ease of getting in and out.  The radius rods themselves are the limiting item for legroom.

Then, after welding in the crossmember,  and reassembling the forks, with upper and lower bearings well cleaned and greased, I created adjustable “radius rods” using 3/8″ hardware store rod, which I threaded to match the spherical ball joints, called Heim fittings”,  which I bought at the local auto parts store. ( Dorman 116-203, box of 5) I carefully drilled out the plates leading forward from the forks, using a 6″ radius and 23 degrees outward spread and assembled the radius rod to two back-to-back Heim fittings on an arm from the handlebars. These fittings are mounted exactly one above the other in order not to change the toe-in length when the wheels are turned.  See Photo 7

To set the correct toe-in, I then lashed two sticks along the outside of each front tire and adjusted the rods until the separation of the sticks behind the tire was 1/8″ more than in the front of the tire. Hooray! The wheels turned smoothly together

IV: ROAD TESTING THE VEHICLE

      The beauty of this cycle-car, is that it uses so much of the wonderful engineering of the original Honda. I simply needed to reconnect the wiring harness, reattach the speedometer to the handlebars, then attach the horn, ignition switch, fuse box, and radiator to my temporary front cross member, put a battery box near the engine, and press the starter button. VROOM!

But I needed at least one brake for the road testing, at best a rear brake. So, from my local scooter repair man, I got a Honda Aero 80 rear brake cable which was long enough to go to a modified bicycle hand brake which i clamped between the left side handlebar electric cluster and the rubber hand grip. I knew I wanted left side to be the rear brake, and right to be front as on most mopeds. This allows you to blip the throttle while braking the rear wheel. Once I had a good rear brake functioning on the left side lever, I donned my warmest clothing (on Groundhog’s day here in Maine) and pushed the beast out in the weak winter sun. Three intense months of building had passed! See photo 3 for the original road test.

I had registered and insured the vehicle as a motor scooter, using the donor vehicle information,  so with new plates, I slowly circled my immediate block and gradually traveled 10 miles. The steering was far too twitchy, but otherwise, given the lack of weight, which the eventual body would provide, the car handled beautifully up to my personal limit of 40 MPH.

    It was amazing to be driving a vehicle you had created yourself.  There was little feeling of safety or creature comfort.  The wind chill was bracing.  But what a great boost to morale!  Now I could again engage in such a long-winded  and humbling project.

Back in the garage, I shortened the radius of the handlebar steering arm from 6″ to 3″ and tested the car again. This time the handling was steady and predictable and the car could still “U” turn in the width of a road. The handlebars moved a quarter circle each side of center. I now felt confident enough to begin on the body, so I removed all the stuff I had installed for the road test. You might be able to see in the picture that I was using conduit for the passenger foot support, held up by red hold-down straps. Not reccommended at 40MPH!

:}

There is soooo much more that I could add from his site. He is so funny. So earthy  and he makes one telling point. He and everyone else in the alternative ground transportation systems are building Trikes because as soon as you add the 4rth wheel they become cars and the whole world changes. Hell you could just convert your car to Natural Gas. It is real easy to do. In fact Iran is in the process of shifting every vehicle in the COUNTRY to natural gas so they can sell us expensive oil. If you do that here you have to get a permit and inspection from the EPA for every vehicle. 

 

 

 

 

:}