Here Comes the 100-mpg Car
(Page 2 of 6)
August/September 2008
By Jack McCornack
The 100-mpg goal of the Auto X Prize is appealing for many reasons. For one thing — stop me if you’ve heard this already — consumption of fossil fuels is damaging our environment. And I don’t know about you, but I seem to be spending a lot on gas these days. I know I could spend that money more wisely on something else.
RELATED CONTENT
The president calls for higher fuel economy standards and pushes the EPA to revisit California's re...
As a fossil fuel, natural gas is susceptible to the same problems we see in oil, whereas electric c...
Special notice from L. John Fry May/June 1975 I have received letters from methane-from-manure enth...
Hardwood chips are now driving the first solid-fuel trucks to appear on American Highways....
MOTHER's Methane Maker Meets The Media November/December 1973 On November 2, 1973 a press conferenc...
So I’m gung-ho for the Auto X Prize, and I hope it stimulates the breakthroughs that 100 mpg will demand. But meanwhile I wonder ... how close can I get to 100 mpg a breakthrough? What if I focus on here-and-now technology instead of later-and-wow solutions? What if I make a car that others could make for themselves? Last and most daring, what if I give it a tight budget and make the car pay for itself with the money it saves on gas? Enter MAX — Mother Earth News’ Automotive X Prize challenger.
Do you think you will win?
I certainly doubt it. But just because I’m not expecting to win, doesn’t mean I’m not serious about the competition. My goal in doing this is to make a point. I’m seriously tired of Detroit telling us that a 35 mpg fleet average in 2020 is beyond its ability. I think we can get twice that with a car made from junkyard parts. I think any of the big automakers could win the Auto X Prize if they got serious about it. Seriously.
During the 12 years following the OPEC oil embargo of ’73, the average fuel economy of cars doubled. So don’t tell me the auto industry can’t step up to the plate.
However, following that, gas prices plummeted, the CAFE (corporate average fuel economy) standards leveled out in ’85 and our national mpg has actually declined since then. Automotive development has brought huge advances in many areas: amenities, emissions, horsepower and acceleration, but — when you look at the big picture — not in fuel economy.
Ah, the marvels of modern automotive engineering! We now get the same mileage in a high-performance 4,000 pound car as we used to get in a medium-performance 3,000 pound car and the same as our ancestors got in their low-performance 1,200 pound Model T. One can’t help but wonder, if the last 100 years of automotive engineering had been directed at improving efficiency, where would we be today?
Car companies do have one problem, but it’s a problem they brought on themselves: Economy cars aren’t sexy. The automakers have been encouraging us to buy bigger, fancier and more powerful cars for more than a century. Having convinced five generations of Americans that personal value and power are manifested by automotive value and power, it’s hard to sell us anything else. Even I have to confess: I’ve been a Mother Earth News reader most of my life, I embrace living wisely and I’m spearheading the MAX project ... but yet, I don’t want an uncool car either. If you’re like me, though, we’re in luck because our car culture has left us loopholes.
Page:
<< Previous 1 | 2 |
3 |
4 |
5 |
6 |
Next >>
