glacier Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 Yeah, but road-head would be right out then Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 public road-head Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arlen Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 and where are the SUV hybrids? Since SUV owners obviously don't care about driving performance I cannot believe these have not been rushed to the market. You get the SUV look that everyone seems to want with at least some sanity under the hood. Â Ford Escape Hybrid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 I'm still waiting for my firewood powered VW Beetle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 i hear you can get a gerbil-flywheel powered renault now Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 Would that be the Feltcher special??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 The Habitrail 3000ZX Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 then there's THIS BABY!! Â beat the commute across lake washington in your personal floating hamster wheel! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted June 11, 2004 Share Posted June 11, 2004 BWAHAHAHAH...that's awesome! Â Would anybody consider that ford escrape hybrid? Â They didn't say, but I bet the 37mpg is for a 2WD version. As much as the escrape doesn't compell me, a 4WD hybrid would be cool... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 Here's something you probably don't know about the Bush Administration: (You won't read about it in Slate, or Salon.com)  EPA Issuing Tough New Diesel Rules Harmful Emissions Curbed In Bulldozers and Tractors  By Juliet Eilperin Washington Post Staff Writer Tuesday, May 11, 2004; Page A03  The Bush administration announced tough new rules yesterday to curb harmful emissions from off-road diesel-powered vehicles, pleasing environmentalists after brokering a compromise with industry on deadlines.  Off-road diesel-powered vehicles, such as bulldozers, tractors and irrigation equipment, are among the largest sources of pollutants that scientists have linked to premature deaths, lung cancer, asthma and other serious respiratory illnesses. The regulations, which Environmental Protection Agency director Mike Leavitt will sign today, would reduce the emissions of nitrogen oxide and other pollutants from diesel engines by more than 90 percent over the next eight years.  "This is a big deal," Leavitt said, standing outside the White House after he briefed President Bush on the matter. "Nearly everyone will remember when we took the lead out of gasoline. We are now going to take sulfur out of diesel. The black puff of smoke will be a thing of the past."  Although the administration usually comes under criticism from environmentalists, yesterday's announcement brought plaudits from members of the green community, who said the rules would protect public health by preventing deaths, heart attacks and asthma-related emergencies.  "It's remarkable that these strong rules come from the same administration that has otherwise turned back the clock on 30 years of environmental progress," said Emily Figdor, a clean-air advocate for the U.S. Public Interest Research Group. "It's great to see science win out over the special interests for a change."  In recent years, scientists and environmentalists have focused on the dangers associated with high sulfur levels in non-road diesel fuel, which produce microscopic particles that invade the lungs and can cause cancer, asthma and other respiratory illnesses. EPA officials predict that within 30 years, the new regulations will prevent more than 12,000 premature deaths and will save billions of dollars in hospital and medical costs.  The new rules require oil refiners to reduce the sulfur in non-road diesel fuel by 99 percent from its current level of 3,400 parts per million to 500 parts per million in 2007 and to 15 parts per million in 2010. It allows a slightly longer timeline for locomotive and marine engines, reducing sulfur to 15 parts per million in 2012. Figdor and other environmentalists criticized this delay, saying it was the one area in which the administration bowed to industry's wishes.  "With an opportunity to score a slam-dunk, at the last minute the Bush administration committed an unnecessary foul," said Frank O'Donnell, executive director of the Clean Air Trust. "It caved in behind closed doors to political pressure from oil companies and delayed cleanup for fuel used in marine and train engines."  For the most part, public health advocates and environmentalists embraced the administration's move.  "This rule will help protect seniors, children and people with lung diseases including asthma, who are the most vulnerable to the harm from air pollution," said John L. Kirkwood, chief executive of the American Lung Association. "According to the American Lung Association State of the Air 2004 report, more than one in four Americans live in areas with unhealthy levels of particle pollution. Exposure to particle pollution leads to premature death."  Leavitt said the health benefits resulting from the regulations are worth $80 billion a year, "nearly 40 times the cost" of compliance.  Diesel industry representatives voiced guarded praise for the policy shift. The National Association of Manufacturers praised the EPA for engaging in "a collaborative process with interested parties."  "While the rule has some problems, including stringent locomotive and marine fuel limits, blended fuel transportation and storage obstacles, and problematic compliance dates, the overall rule is a testament to how collaboration among affected parties can lead to a better way of achieving air quality reductions," said Jeffrey Marks, NAM's director of air quality.  Allen Schaeffer, executive director of the Diesel Technology Forum, an industry advocacy group, said that despite challenges ahead in meeting the new requirements, "there is no question about industry's commitment to meet these aggressive standards."  The administration left some questions unanswered yesterday, however, such as what changes locomotive and marine engine manufacturers would have to make to comply with the new rules.  © 2004 The Washington Post Company Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Off_White Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 Yeah, that should help offset those 30,000 unregulated Mexican trucks they're letting in. Â But you're right, it sounds like a good thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snoboy Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 i did the math last night converting from liters to gallons, and km to miles, and figured out my 90 subaru gets consistently over 20 mpg (It depends what grade fuel I use on the exact mileage). also it passes emissions testing every year with flying colours. so all you "my H2 is cleaner and more efficient than your old Subaru" guys can suck it  My 87 subie gets 27.8mpg in Canada, and 23.1mpg in the US. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dru Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 yesh but i'm the automatic with full time 4wd... it works out to about 25mpg commuting during the week and 28 roadtripping. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snoboy Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 mine's auto too. sounds about the same as mine. Â Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 It's probably a good thing that they're going to reduce sulfer in off road diesel, but I'm kind of sad. I love the smell of off road diesel; I'll miss it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Szyjakowski Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 when in paris last year, i saw very few suv's...mostly, motorcycles, mopeds, bikes, and small cars. Â i say fuc the suv! especially that piece of shit hummer! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairweather Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 Â i say fuc the suv! especially that piece of shit hummer! Â I still prefer the fuc over the Hummer. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
klenke Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 It's probably a good thing that they're going to reduce sulfer in off road diesel, but I'm kind of sad. I love the smell of off road diesel; I'll miss it. This Paccar job that I was offered/will be working concerns this very thing in regard to the diesel trucking industry. Apparently, in 2007, stricter emissions requirements will take effect. The plan is to use exhaust recirculation to raise the temperature of combustion or something like that as a means to reduce NOx emissions. This will in turn require better front end (radiator) cooling systems than are currently available. This is where my expertise comes in for Paccar. There is another requirement that's supposed to take effect in 2010. I can't remember what that one is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshK Posted June 12, 2004 Share Posted June 12, 2004 It's probably a good thing that they're going to reduce sulfer in off road diesel, but I'm kind of sad. I love the smell of off road diesel; I'll miss it. This Paccar job that I was offered/will be working concerns this very thing in regard to the diesel trucking industry. Apparently, in 2007, stricter emissions requirements will take effect. The plan is to use exhaust recirculation to raise the temperature of combustion or something like that as a means to reduce NOx emissions. This will in turn require better front end (radiator) cooling systems than are currently available. This is where my expertise comes in for Paccar. There is another requirement that's supposed to take effect in 2010. I can't remember what that one is. Â Expertise!? I thought your expertise was in naming obscure mountains for me? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.