A A A A Search :
Toledo Talk   (musing about Lake Erie West and beyond)
From charlatan's workspace   

$8-a-gallon gas: Eight reasons higher prices will do us a world of good

http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/eight-reasons-youll-rejoice-we/story.aspx?guid=%7b82FCE1B0-1889-43B0-A465-E29BFEE95576%7d&print=true&dist=printTop

$8-a-gallon gas
Commentary: Eight reasons higher prices will do us a world of good
By Chris Pummer
Last update: 7:30 p.m. EDT May 28, 2008
SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- For one of the nastiest substances on earth, crude oil has an amazing grip on the globe. We all know the stuff's poison, yet we're as dependent on it as our air and water supplies -- which, of course, is what oil is poisoning.
Shouldn't we be technologically advanced enough here in the 21st Century to quit siphoning off the pus of the Earth? Regardless whether you believe global warming is threatening the planet's future, you must admit crude is passé.



Americans should be celebrating rather than shuddering over the arrival of $4-a-gallon gasoline. We lived on cheap gas too long, failed to innovate and now face the consequences of competing for a finite resource amid fast-expanding global demand.
A further price rise as in Europe to $8 a gallon -- or $200 and more to fill a large SUV's tank -- would be a catalyst for economic, political and social change of profound national and global impact. We could face an economic squeeze, but it would be the pain before the gain.
The U.S. economy absorbed a tripling in gas prices in the last six years without falling into recession, at least through March. Ravenous demand from China and India could see prices further double in the next few years -- and jumpstart the overdue process of weaning ourselves off fossil fuels.
Consider the world of good that would come of pricing crude oil and gasoline at levels that would strain our finances as much as they're straining international relations and the planet's long-term health:

1. RIP for the internal-combustion engine
They may contain computer chips, but the power source for today's cars is little different than that which drove the first Model T 100 years ago. That we're still harnessed to this antiquated technology is testament to Big Oil's influence in Washington and success in squelching advances in fuel efficiency and alternative energy.
Given our achievement in getting a giant mainframe's computing power into a handheld device in just a few decades, we should be able to do likewise with these dirty, little rolling power plants that served us well but are overdue for the scrap heap of history.

2. Economic stimulus
Necessity being the mother of invention, $8 gas would trigger all manner of investment sure to lead to groundbreaking advances. Job creation wouldn't be limited to research labs; it would rapidly spill over into lucrative manufacturing jobs that could help restore America's industrial base and make us a world leader in a critical realm.
The most groundbreaking discoveries might still be 25 or more years off, but we won't see massive public and corporate funding of research initiatives until escalating oil costs threaten our national security and global stability -- a time that's fast approaching.

3. Wither the Middle East's clout
This region that's contributed little to modern civilization exercises inordinate sway over the world because of its one significant contribution -- crude extraction. Aside from ensuring Israel's security, the U.S. would have virtually no strategic or business interest in this volatile, desolate region were it not for oil -- and its radical element wouldn't be able to demonize us as the exploiters of its people.
In the near term, breaking our dependence on Middle Eastern oil may well require the acceptance of drilling in the Alaskan wilderness -- with the understanding that costly environmental protections could easily be built into the price of $8 gas.

4. Deflating oil potentates
On a similar note, Venezuela's Hugo Chavez and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad recently gained a platform on the world stage because of their nations' sudden oil wealth. Without it, they would face the difficult task of building fair and just economies and societies on some other basis.
How far would their message resonate -- and how long would they even stay in power -- if they were unable to buy off the temporary allegiance of their people with vast oil revenues?

5. Mass-transit development
Anyone accustomed to taking mass transit to work knows the joy of a car-free commute. Yet there have been few major additions or improvements to our mass-transit systems in the last 30 years because cheap gas kept us in our cars.
Confronted with $8 gas, millions of Americans would board buses, trains, ferries and bicycles and minimize the pollution, congestion and anxiety spawned by rush-hour traffic jams. More convenient routes and scheduling would accomplish that.

6. An antidote to sprawl
The recent housing boom sparked further development of antiseptic, strip-mall communities in distant outlying areas. Making 100-mile-plus roundtrip commutes costlier will spur construction of more space-efficient housing closer to city centers, including cluster developments to accommodate the millions of baby boomers who will no longer need their big empty-nest suburban homes.
Sure, there's plenty of land left to develop across our fruited plains, but building more housing around city and town centers will enhance the sense of community lacking in cookie-cutter developments slapped up in the hinterlands.

7. Restoration of financial discipline
Far too many Americans live beyond their means and nowhere is that more apparent than with our car payments. Enabled by eager lenders, many middle-income families carry two monthly payments of $400 or more on $20,000-plus vehicles that consume upwards of $15,000 of their annual take-home pay factoring in insurance, maintenance and gas.
The sting of forking over $100 per fill-up would force all of us to look hard at how much of our precious income we blow on a transport vehicle that sits idle most of the time, and spur demand for the less-costly and more fuel-efficient small sedans and hatchbacks that Europeans have been driving for decades.

8. Easing global tensions
Unfortunately, we human beings aren't so far evolved that we won't resort to annihilating each other over energy resources. The existence of weapons of mass destruction aside, the present Iraq War could be the first of many sparked by competition for oil supplies.
Steep prices will not only chill demand in the U.S., they will more importantly slow China and India's headlong rush to make the same mistakes we did in rapidly industrializing -- like selling $2,500 Tata cars to countless millions of Indians with little concern for the environmental consequences. If we succeed in developing viable energy alternatives, they could be a key export in helping us improve our balance of trade with consumer-goods producers.
Additional considerations
Weaning ourselves off crude will hopefully be the crowning achievement that marks the progress of humankind in the 21st Century. With it may come development of oil-free products to replace the chemicals, pharmaceuticals, plastics, fertilizers and pesticides that now consume 16% of the world's crude-oil output and are likely culprits in fast-rising cancer rates.
By its very definition, oil is crude. It's time we develop more refined energy sources and that will not happen without a cost-driven shift in demand.

created by charlatan on May 29, 2008 at 08:30:29 pm     Comments: 40

print      source      versions

Comments ... #

I hope you die! really I do wtf your wallet is prolly so fat what does 8 bucks a gallon matter to you. I guess you would have to pump your on gas to understand!

posted by Inflamez on May 30, 2008 at 01:53:11 am     #



Here it is, plain and simple: MASS TRANSIT IS A SOCIALIST UTOPIAN WET DREAM THAT WILL NEVER HAPPEN. The FREEDOM of movement in your own vehicle, and its inherent sense of FREEDOM and privacy are why it's NEVER worked wherever it's been tried. THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE DON'T WANT IT-just a bunch of automobile-hating aging hippies.

posted by Darkseid on May 30, 2008 at 05:07:48 am     #



Soaring energy costs is a reality we will be dealing with for the foreseeable future; perhaps the rest of our lives. Mass transit will be a necessity unless we start addressing this problem now but you are free to bury your head in the ground and pump all of your income away.

posted by thetoledowire_com on May 30, 2008 at 08:29:24 am     #



Darkseid: Mass transit has "never worked wherever it's been tried"? Your ignorance is absolutely stunning.

posted by joshwoodward on May 30, 2008 at 09:04:28 am     #



Let me take this opportunity to affirm Josh's opinion. Mass transit serves as the vehicle of choice for a majority of residents of major cities all over the world. How you are unaware of that is perplexing.

posted by MoreThanRhetoric on May 30, 2008 at 09:53:52 am     #



As sort of a sidebar: I can fly to California; rent a car for two weeks, and a week’s worth of accommodations for what it would cost in gas to drive there.

posted by Offshore on May 30, 2008 at 10:02:27 am     #



Why not drill for oil right here?

We have plenty of oil nowhere near "running out".

We can start by opening ANWR where there is a minimum 30 year supply of oil to meet 10% of our needs.

Then there is the west coast.

http://www.mms.gov/omm/pacific/

Information about the MMS assessment report is available at: http://www.mms.gov/omm/pacific and a copy can be requested by e-mail from: na95pocs@mms.gov

The reports most significant findings include:

  • Nearly 11 billion barrels of undiscovered oil and 19 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered gas in the region may be recoverable using existing technology.
  • Relatively large volumes of undiscovered oil may exist offshore central and southern California, due largely to the presence of Monterey-type strata, which are potential source and reservoir rocks.
  • Half of the undiscovered, conventionally recoverable oil and gas in the region may be economically recoverable under existing conditions.

Cathie Dunkel, MMS geologist in Camarillo, Calif., served as the report's principal editor. She said the apparent extent of Monterey-type plays and the possible large volume of undiscovered oil in these plays offshore central California were the assessment's biggest surprises.

"Bottom-line, the volume of potentially fractured siliceous rocks offshore California is much larger than we previously thought," she said. "Only nine of the 46 plays we assessed contain these Monterey-type reservoir rocks, but those nine plays, all offshore central and southern California, are estimated to contain more than half of the undiscovered oil and about a third of the undiscovered gas."

11 BILLION barrels sitting off our west coast?

Currently we consume somewhere around 21 million barrels a day.

11 BILLION barrels of oil represent a 11000000000/21000000=5,523.81 days (over 15 years) meeting another 10% of our needs.

Then the biggest shock may be of all comes to oil
http://money.cnn.com/2006/05/09/news/economy/oil_cuba/index.htm

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) - Plans for foreign oil companies, some from India and China, to drill off the cost of Cuba are prompting calls from lawmakers to ease environmental restrictions that prohibit coastal drilling in most of the U.S., according to a report Tuesday.

At a time of rising soaring gasoline prices caused partly by a lack of supply, legislators are fuming that Cuba is opening up its continental shelf for oil and gas exploration while most of the U.S. continental shelf outside the Gulf of Mexico, which extends 200 miles from shore, has been off limits for drilling since the early 1980s, the New York Times reported.
Firms from China and India will be drilling for oil off the coast of Cuba, but U.S. companies are prohibited from bidding on the contracts, according to a recent report.
Firms from China and India will be drilling for oil off the coast of Cuba, but U.S. companies are prohibited from bidding on the contracts, according to a recent report.

Adding insult to injury, the Times said U.S. firms were invited to bid on the Cuban contracts, but were barred by the U.S. government due to the country's longstanding economic embargo of communist Cuba.

"Red China should not be left to drill for oil within spitting distance of our shores without competition from U.S. industries," Sen. Larry Craig, Republican of Idaho, told the Times.

snip

The cliche that the U.S. "won't ever drill its way to energy independence" just doesn't stand up. The 1.5 million barrels per day of oil from central and western Gulf waters is equivalent to our imports from Saudi Arabia. According to conservative estimates from the U.S. Minerals Management Service, there are about 52 billion barrels of oil in the Outer Continental Shelf off the lower 48 states.

I am reminded of the oft repeated refrain from enviromentalists that "it only meets 10% of our needs and at that will only last 30 years. It isn't worth going after.:

Utter garbage. Using this approach they're saying if walking down the street should you spot a $100 bill on the sidewalk just leave it be. The effort to bend over and pick it up wouldn't be worth it because the $100 wouldn't last you the rest of your lifetime.

Another often heard chant is "if we start drilling now we won't get oil for 10 years. So? If we had started drilling 10 years ago we'd be just getting it now so what's your point?

posted by Extoledoan on May 30, 2008 at 03:41:14 pm     #



As the idiot wishes for $8 gasoline he fails to recognize soaring fuel prices are not just going to cause a failure of the world economy but tens and millions of human deaths as well.

There isn't a shortage of oil in the world, new finds are constantly coming in (Brazil among the latest) but we do have a food shortage.

But then many envoiromental whacko's can accept the deaths of millions of human beings as long as the spotted owl has an old growth tree to land on.

posted by Extoledoan on May 30, 2008 at 03:45:17 pm     #



Or...how about we use something different than oil or fossil fuels in general? Something renewable. Something that doesn't lead to wars, global warming, etc...

posted by pink_slip on May 30, 2008 at 03:45:20 pm     #



I was talking about AMERICA and not Europe or anywhere else. Name me some places mass transit been a huge success here. A few yuppie enclaves, perhaps? That railway deal they tried in Detroit was a huge flop. And fuck you as well for the insults.

posted by Darkseid on May 30, 2008 at 04:45:53 pm     #



I'll say it again. The vast majority of Americans do not want mass transit, even though it's been tried again and again to be shoved down their throats.

posted by Darkseid on May 30, 2008 at 04:48:12 pm     #



Yay, another person who knows what America wants and doesn't want.

Take a number.

How 'bout some stats and studies to cite that omniscience?

posted by charlatan on May 30, 2008 at 06:17:43 pm     #



Saying that Americans do not want mass transit is far from the truth. In Toledo alone, Tarta has seen an increase of 46% since gas prices began to rise. The suburbs may act as if they are to good for Tarta, but there are still riders in that vicinity using it whether or not they want to admit it.

Toledo may be a smaller city to base the effectiveness of mass transit, so lets look at other cities in the United States.

City Daily Usage
Boston 1.1 million
New York 7 million (over 2 billion annually)
Chicago 1.6 million
Toledo 14,000 (2006)

Your ignorance is one of the United States biggest problems. We have a hard time evolving before it is already too late. Whether you believe in global warming or not, the pollution we create is having an effect somewhere. And these companies will not change anything as long as they are making money and the people do not protest their actions. Toledo Edison will still burn coal and raise our rates until we have had enough. Oil companies and automakers will still use gasoline engines until the uproar becomes overwhelming. The technology is there to solve both problems, we are just too ignorant to apply ourselves for change.

Whether the 8 steps are good or bad (which I agree with having done some international travel abroad), something should be done for our society and children after us. The problems are easy to solve now but will be difficult for them in the future.

posted by jssdecker on May 30, 2008 at 07:09:55 pm     #



Darkseid is on target and as he points out mass transit will never work except for a few densely packed enclaves.

Check the map out for Coldwater, Kansas. There's nothing here except for us that grow the food you eat.

If you want anything other then what is available in the local 7-11 you got to go to Dodge City which is 60 miles away.

I suppose we can look forward to $8 gasoline but you do know we will be forced to pass the cost on to you, right? You do understand that, don't you?

Not everyone lives in Toledo, Cleveland or Columbus and like it or not you need us or do you think the food at Kroeger simply appears on the shelves as if by magic?

Global warming, the greatest farce since Y2K and the home of the modern communist party.

Hype, hype, hype. Mars is warming http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=17977 and it looks like Jupiter is getting warmer too http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap080523.html

Thing is it is getting warming but this is caused by the suns output and there isn't a darn thing any of us can do about that.

Over the billions of years this earth has been here it has naturally got warmer and colder thousands of times.

W.we noticed that November 2007 was the coldest month since January 2000. Well, the RSS MSU satellite data prepared by remss.com show that December was even cooler. The December anomaly was -0.046 °C, compared to -0.014 °C in November. That means that December 2007 was also cooler than the average December from 1979.

Clue phone for you, the weather changes naturally.

So the modern communists dump global warming taking the mantle of global climate change since warming has been debunked. Anything to gain control.

But back to mass transit. We're not France, England or even New York City. We're to big, to spread out, for mass transit to work on a national scale.

posted by Extoledoan on May 30, 2008 at 07:18:28 pm     #



Yeah, global warming is just a communist conspiracy. Damn moonbat

posted by pink_slip on May 30, 2008 at 07:53:04 pm     #



First off, if you would study global warming, you would realize that the final effect is not just the warming of the earth, but the affects of extreme weather changes. The summers do get hotter but the winters get colder. So your colder December would suggest we are right on target. The weather will become more severe. The outbreak of the most tornadoes in the United States ever is just a random occurance this spring, probably god wiping off all those bad people in the world, right? Anyways… it is a reality…

Of course urban living will not be able to evolve into a mass transit system. I grew up in the country and I realize that driving is a necessity. These are the people that should be screaming for change the most. Work trucks and machinery are a must on a farm. Wouldn’t it be nice to run something other than fossil fuels for pennies instead of $4 a gallon? The jump in prices for their products would be part of the scream for change. The technology is there, hidden away, for a time when the average citizen says I have had enough.

posted by jssdecker on May 30, 2008 at 08:19:58 pm     #



http://www.heritage.org/research/smartGrowth/wm1607.cfm

posted by Darkseid on May 30, 2008 at 08:29:35 pm     #



http://www.uwgb.edu/dutchs/pseudosc/masstransit.htm

posted by Darkseid on May 30, 2008 at 08:31:55 pm     #



http://www.detnews.com/specialreports/2003/bus/

posted by Darkseid on May 30, 2008 at 08:33:45 pm     #



http://www.joesherlock.com/Mass-Transit.html

posted by Darkseid on May 30, 2008 at 08:46:09 pm     #





"Oil companies and automakers will still use gasoline engines until the uproar becomes overwhelming."

Yeah, someone tell Toledo Jeep to quit making gas-guzzling vehicles. Where's the outcry from area residents, demanding Jeep to shutdown unless it starts producing so-called "green" vehicles?

It's humorous to hear Toledo area residents and public officials tout this region's alleged alternative energy future while at the same time new Jeeps come off the assembly line getting 15 to 20 mpg.

September 2007 news about the new Jeeps :

Chrysler's celebrating production of the all-new 2008 Jeep Liberty. A big event is in the works at the Toledo north assembly plant today. Chrysler executives, along with Mayor Carty Finkbeiner and Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur will talk about the new vehicle.

Pricing starts at under Twenty-one thousand dollars for the Liberty Sport 4×2 version, and under twenty-three thousand for the 4×4. The Liberty Limited starts at just over $25,000, and just under $27,000 for the 4×4.

The EPA mileage numbers may discourage some buyers with the Liberty hitting 16 miles per gallon in the city and 22 mpg on the highway. There has been no decision to add a diesel engine to the Liberty, which the first generation offered to much fanfare. However, no one at Jeep would dismiss the idea either; it just won't put a time frame on it.

2008 Jeep Liberty Mileage :

  • 2WD (manual and automatic): 16 mpg city / 22 mpg highway
  • 4WD (manual): 16/22
  • 4WD (automatic) 15/21

It starts at home. Be a leader. Clean up our own backyard. Protest the hell out of Jeep, although personally, I don't give a damn what kind of fuel mileage the Jeeps get.

posted by jr on May 30, 2008 at 09:18:51 pm     #



Photobucket

posted by Darkseid on May 30, 2008 at 09:23:12 pm     #



If all the coal, oil, wood burned in the 1700's by England's industrial revolution (along with france and germany)and 1800's America's industrial (along with Canada) revolution didn't make for global warming back then. Think about how much CO2 had to be pumped out back in those days, along with all the homes burning coal, oil and wood, I dont think it can compare to today. Yet it was a time of global cooling. Oh and I think I forgot to mention the explosion of Krakatoa in there too, just a few billion tons of gas released. If anyone thinks we as man can really have that much impact on global weather conditions, Then i think they have a shallow grasp on how insignificant the human race really is. If we were wiped off the face of the earth tomorrow, life would go on without us.

posted by Linecrosser on May 30, 2008 at 10:20:44 pm     #



With the amount of CO2 from 1700-2000 that was released we should be on average about 100 degrees all summer and 35 degrees all winter.

posted by Linecrosser on May 30, 2008 at 10:22:26 pm     #



Linecrosser, CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere are much greater now than in the 1700's

If we were wiped off the face of the earth tomorrow, life would go on without us.

No one doubts this. The point is to not wipe ourselves out.

posted by pink_slip on May 30, 2008 at 11:03:44 pm     #



To me, the environment is secondary. I would pledge to use mass transit if I knew it would assist in drop-kicking the middle east back to the middle ages; perhaps taking that tinpot Venezuelan dictator as well.

But it's not merely inconvenient to utilize mass transit to get from one outlying area to another; it's basically impossible. NYC and other such cities have had a century or more of high-density populations on which to hone their mass transit skills and methods. Toledo and myriad other cities' growth patterns further complicate the situation.

I heard a self-righteous prig on NPR wishing for $8/gallon. As a denizen/worker of downtown Cinci, he said he had no use for a car. Did he really think through the implications of $8/gallon? This isn't Europe. It certainly doesn't result in any more money for state or federal coffers. In reality, the resulting drop in fuel consumption, would hammer the overall fuel tax proceeds. I also wondered if he considered the total of his grocery bill at his hip, little corner shop under such a scenario.

What amazes me is that I remember by dad's late 70's diesel Rabbit getting approx 50 mpg on the highway before it rusted away to nothing. What the hell happened to THAT technology ?

In the end, I think most people will continue to pay the higher cost, simply cutting away at other purchases (frivolous or not so frivolous). Stepping away from the car will be a last resort.

BC

posted by zeitgeist on May 31, 2008 at 12:18:12 am     #



There are good alternatives for fuel-efficient automobiles. Unfortunately, none are a part of the big three (Ford, GM, Chrysler). Although GM seems to be getting on the same page with some of their concepts. You brought up the VW diesel. The cars engine has been completely redesigned because of complaints of the smell and lack of performance. German engineering has fixed these problems and they are bringing the diesel back in the fall in the Jetta, Beetle, and Rabbit with MPG in the high 50’s. They hope to release a diesel hybrid that will accomplish close to 70 miles a gallon on the highway and low 60’s in the city. Gas prices will continue to rise no matter what. The idea displayed of mass transit work when people do not have a choice. Some people laugh that $8 gallon will never happen. But, no one probably ever expected $4 to be on the board yesterday.

If you would cut the burning of coal, CO2 emission would drop 35% in the United States. Automobiles attribute around 12%. The 1700’s cannot compare to what is being done around the world right now. China has passed the United States in emissions and India is not far behind them and us. Europe has been cutting emission across the continent for decades and their economy is at an all-time high. Ignorance is not an excuse anymore with everything we now know. Climate change is going to happen but we don’t need to help speed it up. Next time you go to the Toledo Zoo, ask the zookeeper why BP sponsors something that they are killing (polar bears).

posted by jssdecker on May 31, 2008 at 07:44:42 am     #



I'm a Jeep worker and I gotta tell you I don't understand why they can't make them get better mileage than they get.

My 2008 Wrangler Sahara Unlimited is getting around 13-14 in the city. It's only a 3.8ltre v-6 for Gods sake!
We can only build what the company and it's engineers give us to build.
I keep hearing the excuse that the Jeeps are heavy. Sure that will make some difference, and truthfully, I WANT a Jeep to be rugged and sturdy.

What I don't get is, back in 99 I bought a brand new Intrepid. It had the base 2.7 litre motor. It put out IIRC 205 hp, it ran very well, lots of pep. In 2000 I took my wife and 4 kids and all our luggage to Colorado in 90+ degree weather, AC going full blast driving 80mph. I still got around 29mpg. Sure it was somewhat lighter than the Jeeps today, but I can't believe it makes that big of a difference.

posted by JeepMaker on May 31, 2008 at 11:36:51 am     #



I had a 79 Chevette that got at least 30 miles to a gallon. I think JR said once he had an older Japanese car that got better milage than his newer one.

posted by Darkseid on May 31, 2008 at 05:39:47 pm     #



Let's come to a general agreement, shall we?

Let's first agree that if they made 45mpg+ cars by 1992, that they can well make them today in sufficient numbers. Since they don't, the only conclusion is that there is a conspiracy by the producers to not offer such vehicles. The weakness in the "supply and demand" (i.e. anti-conspiracy) argument is that no matter what the demand is, if the suppliers won't make the product, and only the suppliers can make such a product, then it doesn't matter what the demand is. People buy what's in front of their noses; that's an important reason why the producers and retailers put a great many SUVs in front of our noses and despite their horrible gas mileage we still bought them up.

45mpg+ cars now are a minor part of the market and they tend to be quite expensive. All the producers have to do is reform their previous assembly lines. If they won't do that on their own due to their selfish needs for SUV-levels of profit, then the force of government must be used to make them do so.

Let's next agree that hikes in the price of gasoline won't do any good if they are due to government taxation.

posted by GuestZero on May 31, 2008 at 06:45:52 pm     #



"I think JR said once he had an older Japanese car that got better milage than his newer one."

In the spring of 1992, I bought the highest rated gas mileage car in the U.S. It was a Honda Civic hatchback model VX. I think the vehicle's window sticker said 56 mpg on the highway and 40-something in the city. The speed limit was still 55 mph. Driving 60 miles per hour on Ohio's highways, I was getting 60 miles per gallon. That '92 Civic VX was an all-gas-powered car. I did not receive a tax credit or whatever for owning that kind of vehicle.

I drove my Civic VX for five years, and I put about 80,000 miles on it. I only had a two-mile drive to work. Most of my Civic VX miles came from the highway on the weekends when I visited family and friends and drove to running races and bicycle tours.

Obviously, I should have kept my Civic VX longer. The Civic VX hatchback disappeared from the Honda lineup by '95 or '96.

Here's a 2004 message board thread that I found a year or two ago where several people told their Civic VX stories.

1. "I get 45-60 miles per gallon, and it accelerates very strongly. There is no other car that mixes this much power with fuel efficiency. I wish Honda would revive this car and power train!"

2. "My 93 Civic VX has 163,000 trouble free miles. The car has been a dream. I drive it like a sports car, redlining at 5,000 rpm on a regular basis and it still gives me 42 mpg around town. On the road I get 50 mpg cruising at 75 mph. Back in the days of the 55 mph interstate I once got 69 mpg. My shade tree mechanic fixes anything that goes wrong which thus far has only been broken front axles resulting from living at the end of a washboard dirt road. For the $12,000 I spent in 1993, who needs a hybrid?"

3. "I have a 1994 Civic VX. It currently has 214,000 miles and drives the same as when I bought it in 1996 with 40,000 miles."

4. "My 1995 VX now has 204,000 miles. 60 MPG on a highway trip. Expensive hybrid? Why?"

5. "I have a 1993 Honda Civic VX purchased in early 2001 for $5500 with about 72,000 miles on it. As of April 2005, I have just over 147,000 miles logged. It is a very fuel efficient car that gets 48-53 MPG consistently in spring through fall, 45-47 MPG in the very cold weather."

6. "I bought a 1992 civic VX in 1994 with only 35,000 miles on it for just under $9,000. I do love my car very much. As of now I have just over 337,000 miles on it."

7. "295,000 miles on my '92 vx.. if only wisconsin didn't use so much salt! ... I just don't get it.. hybrid? why?"

8. "My 1994 Civix VX with 96000 miles gets 40 to 53 mpg and runs like a chicken with the Colonel after it!!! Why did Honda stop making it???"

9. "A couple posts up someone asked about how the Civic VX gets such great mileage. I have one (216,000-45 mpg) and did research prior to buying it. This is what I found: ..."

10. "I sold my VX last year with 302,000 miles on it. I bought it new in 1992."

I don't consider the 2008 hybrids that get 50 to 70 mpg to be much of an advancement. But then again, someone back in '92 could have said the Civic VX was not much of an advancement over the VW vehicle from the late 70's or early 80's. Mileage-wise.

If an all-gas-powered car in 1992 could 60 mpg on the highway, why don't today's hybrids get 80 to 100 mpg or more?

I'd say buying a Prius contributes to the problem. Buying a Prius or an Insight condones the token environmentalism concern expressed by Toyota and Honda. Those automakers are probably snickering and thinking to themselves:

"Those suckers. They don't know that we could make an all-gas-powered car that could get better mileage than our hybrid."

A 2008 all-gas-powered car getting 80 mpg would probably still be viewed as being Neanderthal. But if it's a hybrid that gets 50 to 60 mpg, then all is well. The word "hybrid" gives the impression of advanced technology and being progressive.

posted by jr on May 31, 2008 at 07:57:19 pm     #



100% dead on-PLUS-IT COSTS MORE for that fancy-sounding hybrid, where there's more to go wrong, and more money to be made in the repair aftermarket.

posted by Darkseid on Jun 01, 2008 at 07:33:22 am     #



As sort of a sidebar: I can fly to California; rent a car for two weeks, and a week’s worth of accommodations for what it would cost in gas to drive there.

Uhhh.........not even close. Here's the math:

Toledo to LA: 2248 miles (4496 miles roundtrip)
Assume 25 mpg on the highway (interstate the whole way there)
4496 miles/25mpg = 180 gallons of fuel
180gallons x $4/gallon = $720

Week's worth of accomodations: at least $500 (if you stay in the absolute cheapest hotels available.
Two week's worth of car rental: $30/day x 14 days = $420
Roundtrip airfare: ~$500
Total: $1420

$1420>>>$720

posted by HeyHey on Jun 01, 2008 at 04:09:58 pm     #



As mentioned before, the Smart Fortwo car was on display locally last summer.


From the Smart Web site:

The smart fortwo is the only model scheduled for production for the USA in 2008. The pure coupe, passion coupe and passion cabriolet all come equipped with the 3-cylinder, 1-liter gasoline powered engine. Other engine types and sizes (including BRABUS) may become available in the next few years though no specific timeline has been outlined. The manufacturer has cancelled production of the smart forfour and roadster worldwide.

What is the gas mileage of smart?

Engineering and testing continues to take place on the vehicle that will be produced for the United States. The vehicle is designed to achieve 40 city/45 highway mpg according to 2007 EPA standards and 33 city/41 highway mpg according to 2008 EPA standards. The mpg rating for all vehicles will decrease in 2008 due to new calculation methods that the EPA has adopted. These methods involve measuring mpg while taking into account real life driving conditions such as start/stop city traffic, air conditioning, heating, etc. The gas tank of the smart fortwo is 8.7 gallons.

Seems like an all-gas-powered car that small in 2008 should do better than 40 to 45 mpg on the highway.

posted by jr on Jun 01, 2008 at 06:30:15 pm     #



Didn't Nissan just announce they would have an electric car on the American market by 2010?

posted by pink_slip on Jun 01, 2008 at 07:24:49 pm     #



Yeah, Nissan just announced an all-electric vehicle:

from http://www.autoweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080310/FREE/833121356/1023/LATESTNEWS :
In New York, Nissan will unveil a battery-powered concept car that hints at the vehicle's future styling and technology. The production vehicle will have a daily range of 100 miles, with an estimated top speed of 75 mph. A complete recharge will take about eight hours.

I'm looking forward to GM's Volt which is due out in 2009. It's a new sort of hybrid (current models of hybrids aren't worth the excess cost IMO) that runs all electric from a wall charger at your house for ~60 miles. After the batteries run out of juice for the 60 miles a "backup" gasoline powered electric charge begins that can extend the range for at least a couple hundred more miles.

I like this idea for alternative energy vehicles because it gets away from some of the weaknesses of current hybrids. Hybrids in the US have notoriously gotten less gas mileage than advertised mainly because Americans drive so much on highways. At high speeds hybrids use their combustion engines which gets the same gas mileage as a normal car. Hybrids only save gas when using their batteries at speeds <45mph or so. From what I understand the Volt will run 100% electric all the time (and for the first 60 miles completely free of gasoline).

posted by HeyHey on Jun 01, 2008 at 09:28:23 pm     #



"As sort of a sidebar: I can fly to California; rent a car for two weeks, and a week’s worth of accommodations for what it would cost in gas to drive there.

Uhhh.........not even close. Here's the math:"

Yeah huh!
15.9 gallon tank x $4.00=63.3 per fill-up, roughly 300 mile range into roughly 5,000 miles to include local driving = $1050-$1100.
Air fare to Santa Ana (Orange County John Wayne) from Detroit Willow Run $379, Car two weeks $219, Motel 6 one week: $480 Pricline.com =$1078.

posted by Offshore on Jun 02, 2008 at 09:40:27 am     #



HeyHey, your assumptions are correct if you go only by what I said.

I did nearly the same trip last summer. I drove a 4-cylnder Honda but throw in a roof rack of toys, in-city driving, and some long mountain pulls and MPG decrease greatly.

Today, online gas prices are the highest on my route in Ohio and California with an average over a southern route of $3.67-$3.75ish.

If these price remain the same by the end of July, I’ll drive (I haven’t booked the flight yet) since it is not prohibitive over last summer and I get two mountain experiences of camping, hiking, mountain biking and fly-fishing en-route.

posted by Offshore on Jun 02, 2008 at 11:16:31 am     #



I want us to stop buying oil from people who don't like us! Then I want us to lead the world in finding a new way of harnessing energy. The rest of the world looks to us, I really believe that. Many immigrants came here because they love the U.S. We CANNOT live under the influence of enemies we have to kowtow to just to keep the price of gas low. It's not worth it. Lets begin living our lives with some integrity. Ditch the large vehicles as soon as we can. I have.

posted by KatyaK on Sep 06, 2008 at 12:57:21 am     #