He just mentioned an X-Prize-type deal to get a car that reached 100 mpg. I am ALL for that (although I would prefer that gallons of gas were out of the equation altogether)! We need more of that from government. Government is too expensive.The role for government is to encourage business. I am all on board with a government X-prize. Private businesses can spend 1 bilion much more efficiently than government.
Reader Interactions
71Comments
Comments are closed.
Ted
Same here. For all sorts of things. It’s cheap, in contrast to what the government spends on most things. Even a billion dollar prize for enterprises that come up with extremely helpful things like that is a tiny chunk.
Dreggas
Government should reward such innovation, they should have jumped all over the X-prize idea a long time ago. But I guess then boeing would, you know, have to really compete or something.
numbskull
“Private businesses can spend 1 billion much more efficiently than government.”
This sounds like a really kewl way to hand another billion of our tax dollars to a private entity. Privatize profits, make public the risk , eh Michael? Wasn’t the X-prize put up by private concerns? :)
100 mpg is a great goal. If GM builds it, and the market wants it, and the government gets that hell out of the way (as opposed to what Bush has done with efficiency initiatives), then they’ll do well. More likely, Honda or Toyota will beat them to it and they’ll sell like hotcakes.
ThymeZone
Psh. The 100 mpg car can be built today, it’s just a matter of performance, safety, and size.
The trick is to build a 100 mpg car that anyone would actually buy. That’s a whole nother thing.
Doug
Halliburton can spend $1 billion faster than just about anybody.
Ted
Yeah, I’d have to agree with the sentiment of numbskull; be careful with this statement. All anyone needs to do is bring up contractors in Katrina-affected areas, or most especially, Iraq.
Seems to me Government X-Prize handouts are actually a good idea because the company/entity doesn’t get the money until it completes the requirement.
louisms
This X-prize thing may well be a good idea. But we’ll just have to agree to disagree on the notion that “the role of government is to encourage business” That belief has historically led to tons of problems. Government must never serve as a mere handmaiden to private enterprise. To do its job, government very often has to mitigate the predictable negative social consequences of the unrestrained practice of free enterprise. I want a government that can both facilitate business and assume an adversarial position against it when necessary for the public good. I’d have thought that the antediluvian belief that what’s good for General Motors is good for the country would have long ago died a much-deserved death. Did we learn nothing from 19th century American history? Or the Reagan era?
RSA
Great idea! In fact, Michael D., why don’t you suggest to your company that your entire payroll is combined into one big prize, and the most effective employee takes it all?
That’s obviously just a bit of snark, but winner-take-all prizes involve a tremendous amount of risk, not to mention wasted effort. It might be argued that discoveries made along the way by the losers will make their efforts worthwhile, but if that’s the case, then why aren’t those folks pursuing these efforts even without the incentive of a big prize?
ThymeZone
Honda is reportedly working on a Fit-like product with a hybrid powertrain, capable of 80 mpg.
And, the Fit is not a microcar. It’s surprisingly capacious, and so far, hybrids have been as peppy as the conventional-power systems they replace.
demimondian
Other than the fact that a 100 MPG car is physically impossible, there’s nothing wrong with the idea.
Oh? You didn’t realize that rolling resistance is necessary if a car is to be able to stop? Oops. Sorry. I forgot that Michael D., counterfactual glibertarian extraordinaire, asked the question.
RSA
This is actually the car I’d like to have, already in prototype form: 264 mpg.
ThymeZone
Like I said, the thing is doable now. The problem is that while you can build it, you probably can’t sell it in mass quantities to this market. People want capacity, safety and performance, and they will pay for those things, including paying for them in the cost of fuel.
And … is the mythical car a one-passenger commuter? Two seats? Family car? Is it like the original Mini Cooper, a tiny fragile econobox?
The 100 mpg standard means nothing unless Dr. Pangloss Hucksterbee fleshes out the requirements.
OxyCon
I think Huckscabee is really good at blowing smoke up everyone’s asses (something many baptist evengelists excel at). There already is a prize for making fuel effecient cars and Toyota is cleaning Ford, Chevy and Chrysler’s clock.
ThymeZone
Toyota has licensed elements of its technology to other automakers.
What Toyota has done that is significant is taken bold steps in terms of product congfiguration to grab hybrid market share. For example, its investment in Prius was a smart and successful move.
Meanwhile GM markets a “hybrid” Malibu that isn’t a real hybrid at all, gets only 1-2 mpg more than the non-hybrid version, and costs a lot more. Dumb.
calipygian
Isn’t it easier just to pray to the baby Jeebus for a 100mpg car?
ThymeZone
Faith based product improvement …. I like it!
tballou
A prize is nice, but why doesnt the federal government also require that its fleet of vehicles all get at least 35 or 50 or more mpg, and then also tell the states that they have to do the same to get federal highway funds? Once that happens, the auto companies will move to fill that void and then the rest of the country and world will follow suit.
Bob In Pacifica
The other day Huckabee said something about be a “populist.” At this rate they’ll find him in bed with a dead hooker or a live boy real soon.
The Grand Panjandrum
John Dingell (D-Michigan) is Chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committe and very close to the Auto Industry and the Auto Workers Union (Both are opponents of increased fuel efficiency requirements.) He’s also one of the most senior and powerful House members.
Oh, and Bush is still President.
JGabriel
Michael D.
Yeah, those Iraqi contractors are doing a bang-up job at efficiently spending billions. Given the efficiencies of private businesses, it’s a wonder Congress doesn’t opt for commercial health insurance instead of having the government provide it.
Ok, snark moment over. There are things, many things, that businesses can do better. And when it comes to governments, especially our government, giving out billion dollar contracts to private companies, what I’ve found the private are *REALLY* efficient at is directing those dollars to the CEO’s and other executives bank accounts.
One thing the government should be doing, in terms of energy policy and global climate change, is basic research and development into solar panels, specifically cheap to manufacture, efficient, cheap to install, solar panels. NASA may be the best place to do this research, maybe there are other departments that could handle it too.
But handing out a prize for a 100 mpg car that never makes it to production? Sorry, not seeing a big benefit there.
JGabriel
(snark tag)
Hey! Whatever happened to those hydrogen cars Bush pushed in the State of the Union a few years ago?
(/snark tag)
LiberalTarian
Huh. Well, I rather suspect Huckabee will be doing things to make his constituency happy, like setting Wayne Dumond free.
That worked out so well.
mrmobi
Michael, Michael, Michael.
That is the biggest, rankest, dumbest lie fake conservatives tell.
Do you mean the same “private business” that has raped us on Katrina contracts, on no-bid Iraq contracts, no-bid Boeing contracts, etc.? Do you mean that private business?
I understand, Michael, that Republicans know that businesses are perfect. That’s why all that “government regulation” is such a bad idea. Only the government is corrupt and in need of regulation. Private business is always efficient, ethical, thoughtful and kind. (see Katrina, Iraq, the health insurance industry, the insurance industry in general, etc.)
You might, however, want to consider that people can be greedy, unscrupulous and mean, whether they work for giant corporations or giant government entities. They are capable of some incredibly callous, cruel and, ultimately, stupid behavior. Who these people work for is relatively unimportant. What is important, is that in the government arena, misdeeds can actually be discovered and result in what we used to like to call “justice” in this country, at least before the current group of criminals took over.
In the modern idiom, “pro-business” has come to mean, “fuck the working person, let’s get ours.” Is this the political party you wish to associate yourself with? Is this your “shining city on a hill?”
Cuzco
Not quite 100 mpg, but there’s this car hacker in Kansas who is addressing American’s love for powerful cars and fuel efficiency. He’s had some remarkable successes and is currently working on an experimental Hummer hack that will double the power and get over 60 mpg.
More here: http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/120/motorhead-messiah.html
and here: http://www.saeenergy.com/09_about.htm
TenguPhule
This has been another edition of Michael D. doesn’t know what the fuck he’s talking about.
Laertes
Snotty crowd tonight.
demimondian
Cuzco…you might want to go read what happened to Kos when he advocated this guys work. Let’s just say he got his head handed to him.
The Grand Panjandrum
100 mpg cars are fine, but is that the most effective use of political capital? For a long term goal its fine, but we need some things to quickly cut emissions and consumption. The purpose would be two-fold:
1. Reduce green house gas emissions
2. Reduce and/or eliminate dependence on foreign oil. National Security!
Just for fun assume that the average driver puts 15,000 miles per year on a vehicle. Take the guy driving the big SUV (ahem) that gets 15 mpg and have him buy a 20 mpg SUV. That driver will use 250 gallons less per year. Now suppose someone else drives a 50 mpg vehicles and trades it in for a 100 mpg vehicle. That driver will use 150 gallons less per year. So who netted that largest savings? Its elementary school arithmetic but most journalists are easily distracted by shiny objects.
I know this example is a simplification (but not overly, so) of a complex problem. However it does illustrates that a large part of the solution to some of our fossil fuel consumption problem lies in ridding the road of the least efficient vehicles first. If we want a quick reduction, then raise CAFE standards at the bottom first.
Huckabee’s idea, while indeed noble, is essentially a nice shiny object for the easily distracted, and math illiterate press corps to ooh and aah over.
demimondian
Huck’s notion is no more noble than Bush’s hydrogen car idea. It’s a bs proposal to freeze progress in other areas.
The Grand Panjandrum
Good grief, I think my fucking head is going to spin around on my shoulders, because I actually have to be on the former Cheerleader’s side. Here is a production hydrogen car from Honda. Very little fueling infrastructure but it is a production car and it is one of Motor Trend’s Top 10 Cars of 2007.
Mylegacy
John, you believe the myth not the reality.
As a Canadian I see in the US a country that spends almost triple per capita of what we spend in Canada on healthcare and yet you still have 43 million uncovered and countless millions more undercovered. Look at tha poor girl that just died when her healthcare giver didn’t give.
The private sector MUST be the engine of the economy, no question. Private enterprise MUST be the rule. The exception is that none should die to honour the “rule” the “rule” must bend when the lives and health of all the people are at risk. Tonight the lines were clear – the Republicans were for the status quo the Democrats were for the people.
Obama or Edwards will return America to the people. The world will rejoice!
Incertus (Brian)
Is it possible Huckabee was talking about this? There’s already an X-Prize for a 100 mpg car, with these conditions.
Right now, my money is on the Aptera, and if I lived in California and could afford $30K for a car, I would be on the waiting list.
Cuzco
Really? Why? Looks pretty legit to me. If you Google the guy’s name there are numerous articles about him doing exactly what he claims.
I also checked out the Kos diary here: http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2007/10/30/153528/46/412/404372
While it’s possible that every person who has interviewed him and examined his cars in person has been bamboozled, I think it more likely that the Kos diarist is a bit too impressed with his own Google skills.
For this to be a fraud, it would mean that every reporter who’s written about or interviewed this guy failed to do a fact check and I just don’t think that’s likely.
At the sae energy site are a bunch of links: http://www.saeenergy.com/sae_news.htm
Kirk Spencer
Michael D, I’m going to jump on the bandwagon. But I’m not going to use the same clubs. Instead…
Are you aware the IRS outsourced collection of overdue tax payments? They had a bid, and the most efficient company won – the one that would return the highest proportion of each dollar collected.
The thing is, before the bids were submitted, the department did an analysis of what THEY spend out of each dollar collected. And the winning company is WORSE. But the people in charge wanted it outsourced, because regardless of what numbers showed “everybody knows” businesses are more efficient. Or – personal suspicion – somebody in government was feeding some friends in “business”.
FWIW, at a surface level many businesses look more efficient than government agencies providing equivalent services. The problem comes when you drop to a deeper level. As another example, consider the US Post Office. There are consistent calls to just turn it over to private business. The problem is that private business doesn’t want to ensure daily delivery in some more remote areas – to which the USPS delivers daily. They just want the ‘profitable’ locations. They’re definitely more efficient there, but don’t carry the burden of what we require of our government service for delivery everywhere. IF the USPO could drop the ‘unprofitable’ locations, they would look a lot more efficient.
The common wisdom that businesses are more efficient than government doesn’t hold up to a solid examination of the facts. Businesses don’t have to do a number of things we the citizens require of our government – both unprofitable services AND records to assure that we’re not being cheated. Make the business do that – or take the oversight and drag away from government – and the effect is amazing.
The Other Steve
The Grand Panjandrum is on to something. I was reading about this last week, and apparently up in Canada they show the fuel economy as gallons per mile. Or litres per 100 kilometers or something like that.
Fuel usage… 15,000 miles
A. 10 mpg = 1500 gallons
B. 15 mpg = 1000 gallons
C. 20 mpg = 750 gallons
D. 25 mpg = 600 gallons
E. 30 mpg = 500 gallons
F. 50 mpg = 300 gallons
G. 100 mpg = 150 gallons
My car gets 25 mpg. Some trading in a 10 mpg SUV and buying one that got 15 mpg would save more gas than if I sold my 25 mpg car and bought one getting 100 mpg.
Amazing, no?
Now, let’s list the fuel economy in gallons per 1000 miles, similar to what they do in Canada.
A. 100
B. 66.6
C. 50
D. 40
E. 33.3
F. 20
G. 10
Makes it easier to compare the actual cost of fuel usage in a vehicle, and shows you how dramatic the fuel savings actually is.
The Other Steve
As someone who works for a subprime mortage lender, I most certainly agree with Michael D.
We blew through $5 billion far more efficiently than the Government, and we had far less to show for it in the end!
JGabriel
Cuzco:
For this to be a fraud, it would mean that every reporter who’s written about or interviewed this guy failed to do a fact check and I just don’t think that’s likely.
Cuzco
Apples to oranges. The WMD reporters had no access to the classified CIA reports, “sites of interest” in Iraq or anything beyond “experts” and perhaps a rare CIA insider willing to talk.
The auto hacker on the other hand is completely accessible and several reports took place at the guy’s business. Beyond that, they have access to several high profile (and rich) customers like Arnold Schwarzenegger and Neil Young, so I doubt if these guys were ripped off, the guy would still be in business. They could sue him back to the Jurassic.
The Kos diarist just got carried away with his own pet conspiracy theory.
Redleg
“The role for government is to encourage businesses?” Nonsense. The development of a super-efficient gasoline engine will be more likely to come about from a government-funded collaboration of engineers, scientists, and designers than from the competition among companies vying for an f-ing monetary prize. The money needs to go into the research and development process rather than to the “winner” after the process is over.
Voice of Reason
I just hate this “let’s make a prize” incentiving scheme. The correct response to 9/11 (for red-state security pussies) or global warming (for green-state rational folks) would be “let’s fund energy independence on the scale of the Manhattan Project, or the lunar landing missioni”. This country can THINK big and DO big things, it just needs the political will. A little vision would help, too.
Door prizes for increased MPG are for unimaginative middle managers. I work for a big corporation and I know the breed.
Xenos
Late in the game for denouncing this as unsourced, unsupported glibertarian cant, but this sort of crap has to be challenged.
What private businesses do best is lose money, which can be a great way to privatize losses and socialize gains when developing technology and new infrastructure systems. My favorite example is all the excess optical cable that a plethora of privately funded companies installed in the late 90s. Many of the investors lost their shirts, but now there is lots of excess broadband capacity in our major cities. We now can access that broadband capacity at a substantial discount from the cost of its installation.
Scruffy McSnufflepuss
All technology is a result of miracles from God. It’s a known fact.
True. There are probably way more thieves working in the private sector. More gambling addicts, too.
LOL
Proof that the system works!
JR
“The role for government is to encourage business.”
Micheal D. remains an unreconstructed Republican. It would be better for this country if the “conservative” Repubs actually were held to their vaunted calls for “accountability” and made to take responsibility for what they’ve done to this county: then we would hear less of these stale lies they insist are Truth merely through endless repetition.
Jake
Somethings missing here …
Michael D. do you have a link to Huckabee’s comments? Did he give an amount for the prize, conditions of the prize, details. I see your figure of a billion efficiently spent dollars but can’t even tell if that was from sHuckabee or just a number you made up.
myiq2xu
If business had its way then people in rural areas wouldn’t have electricity. It wasn’t “profitable” to run power lines out to the countryside.
myiq2xu
Well Michael! Been hitting the kool-aid again? Looking for a job a FAUX News?
The Blogosphere is for those of us who don’t reside in Wingnuttia and want to avoid Right-wing propaganda.
I’m gonna give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you were snarking when you wrote this. Stick to that story and no one will call you a liar.
Oh, another thing Michael – when watching GOP debates and speechifying, don’t look into their eyes. You appear susceptible to the Jedi Mind Trick.
skip
Suppose (as many think long-term) it proves to be hydrogen. Where is the pump & station infrastructure going to come from without an Eisenhower-like program?
Up from the bootstraps sentiments feel good and all, but be realistic. This isn’t the Gossamer Albatross.
Jake
Lets consult teh 2nd coolest site on the internons for a definition of Spend:
If you keep 4 in mind when you read:
The statement is both sensible and accurate.
myiq2xu
Efficently is the adverb form of “efficient.”
efficient (comparative more efficient, superlative most efficient)
Positive
efficient
Comparative
more efficient
Superlative
most efficient
Making good, thorough, or careful use of resources; not consuming extra. Especially, making good use of time or energy.
An efficient process would automate all the routine work.
Anyone who has worked for a medium or larger business will laugh at the idea that they are “efficient.” And since it is “private” there is no outside mechanism to ensure accountability.
I worked in Loss Control for two major retailers. My theory was that the guys at the top wanted us to catch thieves because they hated competition.
Conservatively Liberal
In the world of today, I think that the differences in efficiency between government and business are a toss up. Business exists to maximize profit. Other than how they do it, that is the end of the story. Profit is what is left over after all is said and done. The less that is said and done, the more profit there will be. But will we be able to look over the balance sheets and see if the money spent wisely? Nope.
With government, at least we can try to get back to the old fashioned idea of accountability. I said ‘try’, but I don’t put much faith in that ever happening. So much of the technology we enjoy today came out of the military and aerospace industry, not from private industry. True, private industry was contracted to do the work, but coordination was via the government entity that procured it. The private companies did not get a blank check, everything had to be accounted for. Ahh, the good old days when personal responsibility actually meant something.
In too many cases, the big corporation of today is a blood sucking leech that attachs itself to the funding source and bleeds it dry. CEOs take ungodly sums from the system, boards of directors get their cut, and the stockholders get the last of the big money. Peons who actually do the work and make it happen get a mere pittance in comparison. Materials? Get the cheapest that will just do the job and screw the consequences.
Can you say High Fructose Corn Syrup? Sure, I knew you could.
I remember all of the talk about how efficiency in the workplace would lead to better working conditions and better pay for workers. Anyone seen that happen yet? Maybe they were talking about CEO pay?
Unbridled, unrestricted capitalism is no better than the worst form of communism, fascism or totalitarian rule. Given the chance, people will take advantage of and screw over anyone they can to get what they want. It is just the human way. That is why sunlight (in the form of open government and accountability) disinfects this problem. People are only moral when they are certain that others are watching them closely.
myiq2xu
Too often what “privatization” means is transferring tax dollars to private businesses that are not as accountable as government agencies. It is also a way to eliminate civil service protections.
Anyone who thinks privatization is efficient needs to look at Halliburton.
There is also the concept of “planned obsolesence.” I was perfectly happy with Windows 98SE, but I was told I had to upgrade to XP because it was so much better. Maybe it was, but was it necessary to buy a new program? Couldn’t 98SE be improved? Oh wait, then I wouldn’t have to buy a new program.
So I upgraded, and now I’m told that I’ll have to buy Vista soon, because XP won’t be compatible with new hardware drivers.
BTW – we had to buy a new wireless networking card for my mom’s new computer, because the old one was not compatible with Vista. It worked fine with XP and was fast enough for her needs, but had to be replaced because Vista isn’t compatible with old hardware.
Probably just a coinky-dink.
jrg
Shorter Michael D: “Private industry works better than Government, that’s why the risks of private industry should be shifted to the government”.
We already have financiers who do this sort of thing, they are called “Venture Capitalists”.
The one subtle difference between what VCs do and what Huckabee is proposing the government do: VCs don’t make money off of prototypes, VCs make money when people actually buy a product.
This is an insanely simple minded and naive proposal.
STEVEinSC
The role of government in this case might should be somewhat like “Let a hundred flowers bloom.” I am a longtime denizen of the mean old Federal Government, in it’s, more than most, technical side, NASA. (I know, I know, “…but Anne should I tell my fiance about my brother who works for NASA…”.) The most productive thing I ever saw was when the goverment was trying to develop remote sensing technology. A pot of money was set aside and a broad solicitation was announced. Ideas flooded in and some were funded. The instruments now used to study earth’s environment virtually all stem from this initiative in the 1970’s. Total program cost was perhaps $2-3 Million. Public (university, private) innovation, govenment stimulus with government management and review.
The least effective have been the manned space programs, darlings of Lockheed-Martin, Boeing, MacDac, etc. Gobs of money squandered to no identifiable good whatsoever.
The Civil Service at the trench level, works hard to do their duty to serve the public interest. They maintain a healthy suspicion of anything a contractor does. However, do not underestimate the duplicity of the politicians who make government the whipping boy for their anti-government fantasies by ensuring self-fulfilling prophesy.
myiq2xu
What happens when the Big Money boys fuck-up? Like with Sub-Primes and Hedge Funds?
Uncle Sugar to the rescue! Bailouts using our tax dollars. That ensures efficiency, doesn’t it?
What happens to us little peoples when we end up in the shit? We get nada, zip, zero nothing from our government. We might get the honor of seeing our home sold for less than it’s worth at auction though.
Walker
The success of both the X Prize and the DARPA Grand Challenge had little to do with money. They had everything to do with the PR that these research teams received. They were given exposure outside of the extremely small circle they normally interactive with. The PR they got will pay off in the form of future grants and funding from other sources for many years.
And I am with the rest of the posters here: Michael is way too naive and his claim has been shown to be demonstrably false many times over the past few decades. Just where did AT&T piss away all the money it was given by our government to update the telecom infrastructure? Your tax money was used to make them richer while countries in Asia leapfrogged us in terms of bandwidth and connection options.
Private corporations exist for one purpose and one purpose only: maximize shareholder value. When there is a lot of competition in a sector, then yes, one way this can be achieved is by making a superior product. But when competition is scarce (telecom, oil industry, etc), quality of your product just gets in the way.
myiq2xu
Quality and innovation are only important to business when they lead to short term profits. If they can make bigger profits selling stale shit, they will.
STEVEinSC
Look at one of the other “successes” of the get-government-off-the back-of-business crowd such as the S&L meltdown. Thievery and pillage at the (then) $500 Billion scale. Nothing was ever recovered from these gangsters and the taxpayer was tasked to make it right. On top of that the deficit spending meant the poor saps paying for it (us) ended up with inflated dollars. The thieves, I guess, bought Swiss Francs. You wouldn’t expect them to keep worthless dollars would you? This happens again and again. You’d think someone would kind of pick up on the idea of why they keep feeling that pounding in their asses.
jrg
VCs had nothing to do with the sub prime crisis, and little if anything to do with any hedge fund bailouts. VCs take a lot of risk, and the government has never had to reduce any of that risk for them.
My point is the system works fine as it is, and there is no point in any kind of government incentive plan, especially for something as meaningless as a prototype.
The market will keep rewarding the Toyotas of the world, as it should be.
I’m sorry to be the one to break this to you: if you don’t learn something about finance, there are plenty of snakes around who can teach you.
I’m no fan of bailouts (as a taxpayer). As a mortgage holder, and as someone who has been screwed out of money before, my sympathy only goes so far. What part of “adjustable rate mortgage” is so difficult for lenders and borrowers to understand?
gypsy howell
The role for government is to encourage business.
I know as a Republican you probably actually believe that. But you might want to check out the Constitution and find where it says anything like that. Just because Calvin Coolidge believed it doesn’t make it true.
As for who can spend money most efficiently… well, the jokes write themselves.
myiq2xu
The answer to that question is easy: my ex-girlfriend. She could spend money faster than G-Dub and the GOP Congress
Chris Johnson
…on gin. No pesky results to worry about, apart from a bit of vomit!
I like the poster who pointed out that if you measure by gallons per mile, it becomes obvious that improvements on the low-MPG end vastly outconserve improvements on the high-MPG end. Better to put the Hummers in a big landfill than to develop the 1000-mpg car for a single looney green-activist :)
I get a solid 30mpg in my old Buick and find it amusing and disturbing when I see newer (SUV-esque) cars which are actually less efficient than a 1992 buick six…
demimondian
Sorry, Cozco, you’re wrong. The mechanical engineer who did the back of the envelope upper bound on the gas mileage of a Hummer is right — it’s the nice thing about math, you can check it, you know. Kos was wrong.
All the reporters who checked the guy obviously DIDN’T check the guy. There were clear, basic errors in the reporting (putting a diesel into a Hummer? Of course you can). The basic rolling resistance computation? This, that, the other?
Yes, you can build a Diesel that gets roughly 100 MPG on the highway. You might want to look at the energy density of diesel fuel, though, and compare it to the energy density of gasoline. And then you might want to look at the NO_x emissions of high compression Diesel engines. And then you might want to include the energetic cost of removing those pollutants from the exhaust stream. And then you suddenly realize that the 100 MPG car is a pipe dream.
If you want to get 100 MPG, or 100 kpl, fine, it’s easy. Ride a motorcycle.
Jake
Simple: Scream about government interference AKA The Nanny State.
When European and Asian nations come a-calling because those US bond notes were backed by little more than puffs of methane hope they’re content with the heads and hides of the bastards who orchestrated this mess.
scarshapedstar
I’ll say. Even the government wouldn’t have thought of charging $100 for loads of laundry, but Halliburton did! Let’s give them the contract!
Remember, kids: if a corporation is headed by revolving-door government employees and a sitting vice president, it’s still totally private and stuff!
DR
Whoa!!! “Government is too expensive”?? Compare:
Cost of Government-run military vs “Private Contractors”
Cost of Government-run Health Care vs “Private” (LackOf)Health Care
Cost of Government-run NASA vs ?
Cost of Government-run Pharmaceutical Research vs ? (There is little to no privately funded pharma research, short of attempts at re-patenting old drugs; nearly all real research is done under the aegis of the NIH).
Cost of Government-run Roads and Bridges vs ?
There are a lot of sectors where the kind of economies of scale that Governments provide are a real boon. Fundamental research is definitely one of those. Competition leads to little gains wherever SHARING information is a fundamental key to success. Private corporations have a nasty little habit of considering research “secret”…
On the other hand, I actually agree that when it comes to APPLIED research, where the goal is to actually produce a marketable good, private interests are more efficient. A 100-mpg car X-Prize would fall into that category.
Think before you make blanket statements about the so-called inefficiency of Government: your life would be far different (as well as far shorter) without the Government.
myiq2xu
“Nasty, brutish, and short” in the words of someone who’s IQ was higher than mine.
louisms
Well, MICHAEL, whatdayasay? Do you have any facts to back up your contentions? Any response to the objections raised here?
myiq2xu
Mikey appears ashamed to show his face, as he should be.
Jake
No. SA2SQ Vol. XXVII(A)
No. SA2SQ Vol. XXVII(B)
Tom Levenson
Late to the party, but I just dumped all over both Huckabee and Michael at my tiny, wholly inconsequential blog (inversesquare.wordpress.com) and my mother told me never to say anything nasty behind someone’s back that you wouldn’t say to their face, so, Michael, here’s the link: http://inversesquare.wordpress.com/2008/01/06/huckabee-ignorance-dupes-energy-division/
Short version: Huckabee’s “idea” (sic) is so muddled as to be not even wrong. 100 mpg cars already exist, the prize he proposes at stupid public expense already exists, and efficient gas-powered cars are to energy dependence as is a bandaid on a sucking chest wound.
Other than that…keep up the good work!
Andrew
x2
Super-duper-nonsense to the point where it doesn’t appear that Michael has ANY IDEA WHATSOEVER what the role of government is.