If you have a bajillion dollars or a well-equipped university, you can determine a car's aerodynamic drag in a wind tunnel. But you don't, and neither do I, so we'll have to do it on the cheap. Champagne science on a beer budget, that's my motto.

Automotive wind tunnels work by blowing air at a measured speed over a stationary vehicle (or model) and measuring the forces (drag, lift and stability ... doubtless the source of those tailfins that started appearing on American sedans in the '50s) acting on the car via a number of scales under the tunnel floor.

It's a fine way to do things, and is quite comfortable for the technicians, who sit in a room outside the tunnel, who can wander off for coffee, and who don't have to worry about their notes blowing out of their pockets during the test.

For the MAX project, however, we're using a moving car traveling through stationary air, which presents two obvious problems: How do we measure the speed and how do we measure the force?

PHOTO BY KATHERINE LOECK

A car speedometer isn't sufficient for speed measuring — too vague and too inaccurate — but modern technology has brought extremely precise speed-measuring equipment to the masses: the handheld hiker's GPS. Not only do they measure speed, they measure position and date and time of day, and best of all, they record it for you. This is important because one disadvantage of doing aerodynamic testing in cars (and trust me, this is also critical when testing aircraft) is that the technician has to pay attention to not crashing, along with attending to the test.

I quit trying to multitask during test flights (and drives) nearly 30 years ago, when I started using an Apple II for data acquisition. I mounted it on a plank (a literal “on-board” computer) along with a motorcycle battery to run it, and a 5¼-inch floppy drive. It was big and cumbersome and costly and fragile and only accurate within 3 percent to 5 percent, depending on what I was measuring.

Who would have guessed that future sporting goods stores would have speed-time-and-distance recording devices for under a hundred bucks, accurate to 1/10 mph, and small and handy enough to take in the shower with you?

That yellow thing on the dash in the photo is a Garmin eTrex GPS, and I leave it running any time MAX is running. It records my last 600 miles or so of driving, and every now and then I download it to my laptop and examine the data at my leisure.

So that covers speed, but how do we measure the force? I’ll tell you the answer to that riddle next week. But in the meantime, I'll give you a hint: See that yellow light on the driver's side of the dashboard? That's the oil pressure light.

PHOTO BY ALEX SLOBODKIN/ISTOCKPHOTO

Now that Obama has been elected, the question everyone's asking is — what’s next? There’s a lot of curiosity about what he’ll do as president to address the related issues of clean energy and climate change.

The good news is that Obama has already pledged serious action on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting the use of renewable energy. But there are a lot of questions still to be answered. Just as a starting point, here are three articles I ran across this week that are asking interesting questions about climate, energy and politics.

• First, I saw this article in Time which asks: Is Obama’s Energy Plan Enough? This is eye-opening. The question is — even though Obama is prepared to take big steps on energy and climate, is his agenda ambitious enough to address the scale of the problems?

• Here’s a related question from a recent article on Gristmill, What’s the Magic Number? Ouch, this one is scary. It concerns the ultimate safe level of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Many leading scientists argue that its 350 parts per million (ppm). Unfortunately, we’re already at 380 ppm. According to the author, Joseph Romm, it’s going to take a World War II level of effort to stabilize the climate. (More on that here. No surprise: it would involve a lot of renewable energy.) The big question here is — is the general public willing to make that kind of an effort?

• And there’s a good description of that problem on the Dot Earth blog, which wonders Is the World in Obama’s ‘Shock and Trance’ Mode? Apparently, in the recent 60 Minutes interview Obama suggested that with falling energy prices, the world was moving from “shock” mode to “trance,” or complacency. He said that while energy remains high on his agenda, already there’s not as much political support for the kind of changes that are necessary. (Here’s more from the interview.) The author of this article wonders if it’s going to take a Katrina-level climate event to wake us up from our energy trance. Eek.

But back to the good news. Not only is Obama pledging to act on climate change, he’s also leaving the door open to better solutions to our biggest problems. Obama’s new Web site asks Americans to submit their best ideas on different policy issues. So if you have something to say about climate or energy, check out the energy and environment page and let your voice be heard.

This week, Congress debated an auto industry bailout bill of $25 billion. The executives of the Big Three Automakers – Ford, Chrysler and General Motors – testified at congressional hearings (after spending tens-of-thousands of dollars to fly in on their luxury private jets, one of which cost $36 million) and asked for federal support.

Reactions to the Detroit automakers’ requests have been mixed, from support to flat-out opposition.

The Civil Society Institute (the organization behind 40MPG.org and CLEAN) sent out an action alert at the beginning of the lame-duck session, asking its supporters to contact members of Congress and President-elect Barack Obama’s transition team in support of a Green Auto Bailout. The goal being to have conditions on a bailout that would require the car manufactures to develop and produce more hybrids, clean diesels and fuel-efficient vehicles, as well as drop their lawsuits against states with higher global warming emissions standards, such as California, Vermont, Rhode Island and New Mexico.

“If taxpayers are going to be put at risk by guaranteeing new loans, then any such new help should be conditioned on the U.S. car companies ending their campaign to frustrate state-level efforts to clean up car and light-truck emissions that cause global warming,” said 40MPG.org founder Pam Solo. “Further, Congress should insist that every penny of the $25 billion in new loan guarantees that Detroit is seeking to building the cars of tomorrow, not the gas-guzzling dinosaurs of yesterday.”

Although Congress is leaving for Thanksgiving break, Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said they may call Congress back in session at the beginning of next month to continue work on the automaker bailout bill and other economic issues before the next holiday break.

40MPG and CLEAN are still encouraging people to sign and e-mail the action letters, since the issue is still on the table.

There is some support for environmental preconditions in Congress, but others argue clean energy restrictions might make the bill more difficult to pass. It is estimated that if even one American automaker goes under, more than 2 million jobs will be lost in 2009.

Here are some links to other articles on this topic:

MSNBC

CNN

The New York Times

Fox News

Last week, I wrote about measuring the electricity my computer was using by plugging it into an electrical meter called a Kill a Watt.

This week, I decided to try my hair dryer with the Kill a Watt, and holy cow. So my computer was drawing about 92 watts. My hair dryer on low used 402 watts. Switch it to high, and it goes to 1440 watts!

Why is that number so high? Well, the hair dryer is producing heat, and that can consume a lot of electricity. Here’s a great list from the Department of Energy with the typical wattages of many appliances. Some of the big electricity users are obvious: your water heater, your refrigerator, dishwashers. But some of the smaller appliances on the list that are unexpectedly high produce a lot of heat: irons, toasters and hair dryers, for instance.

On the other hand, just because an appliance uses a lot of electricity while it’s on doesn’t mean much, because it all depends on how long you leave it on. Remember, your electric bill is based on kilowatt-hours, and that’s electric use over time. And while I use my computer for many hours a day, I typically spend five minutes or less drying my hair. So where am I using the most electricity?

Hair Dryer vs. Computer: Here’s How It Breaks Down

So, I’ve left the Kill a Watt plugged into my computer for 10 days now, and the meter shows that during that time the computer has used 13.5 kilowatt-hours of electricity.

Have I used that much electricity over the last 10 days while drying my hair? Not even close. 1.5 kilowatt-hours is a better guess, because I've probably spent a total of an hour* drying my hair over the last 10 days.

So, yes, I’m using far more electricity with my computer than with my hair dryer.

Want to do some more math? You can find out how all that translates to greenhouse gas emissions here.

*Update 11/26/08

OK, it's true. An "hour" was just a lazy guesstimate on my part. I didn't really intend to measure how long I spent drying my hair over 10 days with the Kill a Watt. I mean, these numbers are close enough, right?

But now certain family members have challenged whether I really spend only five minutes a day drying my hair. Maybe I'm using a lot more electricity with the hair dryer than what's recorded here. All right, so now it's on. I'm measuring the exact electricity use of the hair dryer with the Kill a Watt for 10 days to prove that yes, the hair dryer still winds up using less electricity than the computer. When I have an update, I'll post it here. Stay tuned!

Update: 1/19/09

Well, I finally finished counting this up, and I'm happy to report that after 10 days of drying my hair, I had only spent a total of 32 minutes with the hair dryer on. The total on the Kill a watt was .68 kilowatt-hours. As expected, that's far less than the 13.5 kilowatt-hours my computer used over a 10 day period. So yes, I use far less electricity drying my hair than I do running my computer.

What's the point of this story? Just that if you're trying to understand how much electricity you're using, you need to know two things: the wattage of an appliance and how long you're leaving it switched on. Low wattage appliances or electronics can surprise you with how much electricity they consume over time.

Photos by Megan Phelps

Wow, I'll tell you, the only people crazier than camera people are stunt performers ... and that's not by much.

Last week, we had a crew from the Science Channel at the shop (which is why you're not getting the promised wind-tunnel-without-a-wind-tunnel update 'till next week), shooting a piece for Brink.

PHOTO BY DAVE LEVISON

What's Brink? Beats me, I've never seen it. I don't get cable and besides, the series isn't on yet. From what they tell me, it's about people and things on the brink of scientific achievement. MAX is just the sort of thing they're looking for, so they ended up on our doorstep.

It appears the show is rather personality-driven, and the ideal personality for Brink is a low-budget mad scientist. I'm good for two out of three (I'm still a little weak on the 'scientist' part), so I fit right in.

Plus, I'm game and cooperative. So when they told me to stand by the car and look “seriously cool,” I gave it my best and didn't laugh. I was a fully poseable action figure, and in exchange, they let me talk about MAX and why we’re building it.

And then we went off to show how much fun MAX is to drive, with the camera woman in the passenger's seat. We hit some back roads and went zipping around in fine sports car style, until she decided she could shoot better from on top of the car. I agreed, but refused to zip, which is why those particular shots are going to look a tad reserved.

Next, she wanted highway shots from the front, which she took by sitting on the trunk of Dave's Miata while I tailgated in MAX. She took it all in stride, but I was sweating, hoping Dave hadn't waxed his car recently and wondering how quickly I could hit the brakes if she started sliding my way. Apparently this is the norm in show biz, but if a police officer had wandered by we would all have been written up for Acting Stupid in or About a Motor Vehicle. Need I add, kids, don't try this at home?

The X Prize Foundation chose three videos out of 133 for their $25,000 “What’s Your Crazy Green Idea?” Contest. The competition encouraged people to create a two-minute YouTube video that explained their idea for the next X Prize in Energy and Environment.

Submissions ended on Oct. 31 — and now it’s up to you to decide which idea is best. The three ideas involve creating a more efficient battery, reducing home energy usage, and making it easier for homes to have complete energy independence. Which one is most important to you?

The public can vote here through November 30.

Dishwashers will soon be using less water now that the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) changed the water use criteria for any such product bearing the Energy Star label. This is the first dishwasher-related change that Energy Star has ever made, and it could save American citizens more than $25 million in energy and water bills in the first six months it takes effect.

The changes will be made in two separate phases; one by Aug. 11, 2009 and the other by July 1, 2011. The first change will require Energy Star dishwashers to be at least 48 percent more efficient than federal standards require, saving more than 500 million gallons of water per year. The second will require dishwashers to be at least 13.5 percent more efficient than the previous restrictions, saving another 330 million gallons of water per year.

Please comment below and discuss any other ways that you and your family save water when washing dishes.

How much electricity is your computer using right now? It’s surprisingly easy to find out using a simple electrical meter, such as a Kill a Watt. Right now, I have a Kill a Watt hooked up to my PC, and it shows that I’m using 92 watts of electricity.

 Actually, the figure fluctuates, depending on how hard I’m making the processor work at any given moment. But since I plugged this particular meter into my computer 39 hours ago, it’s used about one kilowatt-hour of electricity.  So what does that mean? What exactly is a kilowatt-hour anyway? Here’s a quick review:

• One kilowatt-hour is equal to one kilowatt consumed over one hour. And one kilowatt is equal to 1,000 watts. (For more energy measurements check out this handy chart from the Energy Information Administration.)

• On your electric bill, you’re charged based on the number of kilowatt-hours (kWh) you consume. For the United States, the average cost of one kWh is about 10 cents.

• For even more math fun, you can consider that this one kilowatt-hour is equal to roughly 2 pounds of greenhouse gases, because electricity in the area where I live comes primarily from coal.

So here’s another interesting question: How does my computer compare to other computers? Well, last week we hooked up a Kill a Watt to another editor’s computer, and his laptop was only drawing about 30 watts of electricity. Humph. Oh well, I suppose it’s not a competition.

But the possibilities for measuring and figuring out how to reduce your energy use are endless. For some great ideas, check out this article from Gary Reysa, with his Eight Great Energy Saving Projects. He measured the energy savings of eight different projects and calculated the dollar savings and reduced carbon emissions for each one. You can find even more of these projects on his Web site, BuilditSolar.com.

Photo by Megan Phelps

With the holidays right around the corner, and broadcast television stations changing to digital signals early in 2009, lots of people will be looking for a new TV set. So the timing couldn't be better for televisions that meet the new Energy Star criteria to arrive in stores.

According to the Energy Star site, "TVs that earn the Energy Star label under these requirements will be up to 30 percent more efficient than non-qualified models." When you're shopping, be sure to check for the label.

Lloyd Kahn frequently writes about green and natural building  in his blog. From a reconstructed medieval cottage to fiberglass yurt, each design is fascinating. You’ll be inspired to let the builder in you get to work creating your own unique living space.

Kahn also has written Builders of the Pacific Coast, which features amazing architecture built from a variety of natural and repurposed materials. We’ll feature photos in our February/March 2009 issue.

Wow, this is a handy page. Check out this helpful list of energy calculators from the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE).

It’s no secret that many home improvements can save a ton of energy while also saving you a lot of money. But — no surprise here either — sometimes these projects cost some money up front. If you’re trying to pencil out the actual costs and savings of buying a new appliance or making your home more air-tight then these online calculators are a great shortcut.

Will junking your old refrigerator save you money? Check out the Refrigerator Retirement Calculator.

What’s the most cost-effective level of insulation for your home? Find out with the ZIP Code Insulation Tool.

 Are you looking for a comprehensive tool that can tell you how to save energy at home? Try the Home Energy Saver.

If you’re trying to figure out how to save energy and money at home, I think this energy calculators page is a great place to start. For even more energy info, be sure to check out the EERE home page, too.

Photo by Nathan Winter/IstockPhoto

OK, fun's over, time to get back to work.

I am getting so spoiled. When MAX's gas mileage drops into the 50s, I get grumpy.

I wanted to put 5,000 miles on MAX before the weather got wet (next project — a convertible top), a somewhat arbitrary figure, but it's been my experience that 5,000 miles (or 100 hours) is enough to say, “Yeah, it looks like this is going to work.” So for me it's a benchmark. I made it, but it involved a lot of road trips, and those involved a lot of freeway flying.

The freeways are not my favorite environment — one reason is they tempt me to go too fast for fuel efficiency. At 70 mph, MAX is no more fuel efficient than a ... well, actually, there aren't any production cars that get better than 50 mpg at 70 mph.

MAX does (barely), so I guess I shouldn't kick myself too hard. But heck, MAX is supposed to be spectacular, not just good. With its upcoming streamlined body (currently in that gray area between the drawing board and the highway), it's going to be spectacular. But gosh, can't it be kinda spectacular and still have the look-and-feel of a classic sports car?

I sure hope so, because — I know, I know, I should be ashamed of myself — I'm greatly enjoying driving MAX around in its Vintage/Prisoner/Escape from Berkeley regalia. Everybody digs “Classic MAX”, and I love all the attention. Total strangers say, “Ooooh, that car is so cute, can I take a picture, can I get in it, can you take a picture with me in it?” and I know I'm going to lose some of that attention when MAX goes all streamlined and serious.

Sadly, the lovely, swoopy front fenders are part of MAX's visual charm, I say “sadly” because recent fuel consumption figures indicate that those fenders have increased MAX's drag at cruise by about 10 percent.

As you can see, those fenders make up a lot of MAX's frontal area, and that has to translate into lots of drag. I don't know how much drag, but there are ways of finding out. Tune in next week, and I'll show you how to do wind tunnel testing when you don't have a wind tunnel.

Photo by Jack McCornack

The Department of Energy released its net-zero energy initiative in commercial buildings this August. Not even three months later, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s Commercial Buildings team, under the direction of DOE’s Buildings Technology Program, released a study outlining ways for some commercial buildings and grocery stores to reduce their energy by 50 percent.

The study is split into two PDF files, each containing around 200 pages of design elements to achieve at least 50 percent reduction of energy for medium-sized (requiring 1.76 watts per square foot) business buildings and any grocery store.

The study supports the Net-Zero Energy Commercial Building Initiative – which calls for the production of market-ready, net-zero energy buildings by 2025. The building initiative is just one aspect of the department’s umbrella initiative, which is to attain net-zero energy sometime in the foreseeable future.