Paul, I'm not sure of your point here or where you get your data.
A 72 VW "micro-bus" got around 20 mpg (less than a Subaru Forester, replete with airbags, crumple zones, and cup holders) and was one of the most dangerous vehicles on the road. A simple panic stop could put an unbelted driver through the windshield. Having busted my knuckles under too many 40 yr old cars to count I can tell you that few would allow installation of pollution controls without a major rebuild. Modern cars get roughly 2X the horsepower per cylinder displacement of even the most steroid pumped 60's muscle car. The impetus for this advancement came during the 70's oil embargo when engineers tried to squeeze as much energy as they could from a gallon gas. To accomplish this compression ratios were increased, cylinder heads were completely redesigned, additional intake and/or exhaust valves and spark plugs were added, carburetors were replaced with fuel injection and distributors with computers. To do that to a VW Bus would cost more than a TOYOTA 4 Runner. The benefit was not only increased fuel mileage but greatly decreased hydrocarbon emissions.
But I don't think any of this was the topic of the McDonough thread: Does replacing you 10 yr old car with a hybrid reduce your carbon footprint?
David Bryant On Feb 28, 2008, at 3:25 PM, Paul Cherubini wrote:
In Cuba it's routine to see 40-60 year old cars on the road. Cuban's realize a car's body and frame can last indefinately and all the drivetrain and suspension componets can be replaced as they wear out. Modern components such as engines with emission controls can also be installed in these old vehicles. But I don't believe the ecologists and environmental activists in the first world countries could stomach driving 30 year old, let alone 50 year old vehicles for a variety of comfort and convenience reasons such as: they can't accelerate and corner fast, they take some muscle to steer and brake (no power steering or power brakes) must be manually shifted, don't have air bags, crash protection beams in the doors and so forth. Practical example: 30-40 years ago the standard workhorse field vehicle for an ecologist was a Volkswagen Bus with a 4 cylinder engine, manual transmission, no air conditioning, marginal high speed cornering capability and took 25 seconds to accelerate from 0 - 60 MPH. Despite it's substantial size and interior roominess, a VW Bus weighed only 3000 pounds because it wasn't burdened with all the comfort, convenience and safety features todays ecologists and activists demand such as a powerful engine, all wheel drive, automatic transmission, power steering, power brakes, air conditioning, heavy steel beams in the doors and dashboard for crash protection, and so forth. Now ask yourself: would today's ecologists and activists in the first world countries be enthusiastically willing to buy old VW Buses instead of heavy and powerful Subaru's 4Runners and Jeeps to help save the planet if the VW's were still available? I think Exxon executives know the answer to that question and that's why Exxon predicts the world demand for petroleum and associated carbon emissions will continue to increase for the next 30 years. Paul Cherubini El Dorado, Calif.
