hopefully I will able to fulfill this dream soon when MDI will be offering their model in the USA market.
These cars will sell in Europe for about Euros 3,500 (about $5,000) and they will make 125 miles without recharge at a $1.5 cost, or in other words, with a conservative estimate for the cost of gas at $3/gallon, an equivalent fuel consumption of 250 miles/gallon. If we compare to the current 25 miles/gallon this is a tenfold increase in the efficiency.
So let's do a little math ... how many of these cars could have been introduced on the USA roads by using the $25 billions used in the car industry bailout money? Easy math
25,000,000,0000 / 5,000
or 5 million air compressed cars, i.e., 2.5% of all the cars currently running in the US (about 200 millions).
This figure is certainly very conservative as we did not include the gas saving costs that derive from the use of the car. At an average of 12,000 miles/annum and cost of gas at $3, a 25 miles/gallon car costs about $1,250 /annum in gas, whereas the equivalent gas cost for a compressed air car will around $50/annum.
Moreover, the bailout assumes that part of the efficiency increase of going from 25 to 35 miles/gallon (in year 2016!) will be transfer to the cost of the car, and the estimate has been given in $1,300 which I will have to pay anyways to run a car that is 10 times less efficient than what I can buy in 2009.
Moreover, given the relatively cheap cost of this air compressed car, it will be easier to introduce the already announced "guzzlers junk trade" incentive for buying new cars ... say I will be able to get $1,000 for my old BMW
So let's take these costs off
25,000,000,0000 / (5,000 - 1000 - 1300 -1250 + 50)
and we are at about 8.5% of the number of cars currently running in the US, which reduces directly in a 8.5% CO2 emission reduction from cars ... now, not in 2016!
Such a number of cars is no doubt more than sufficient to pass the psychological threshold of changing the use of the car from status symbol back to its original purpose, a mean of transportation. Obviously, the more people you see running these cars, the easier it will be for you to accept the change, not counting peer pressure.
So, what's wrong in Washington these days? Is the current Administration a little weak in math?
Odd, as President Obama hired a Noble Prize winner for Physics as the US Secretary of Energy, who is absolutely familiar with the math level used above. So, what's wrong President Obama?
Maybe your "no-lobbies" policy isn't working after all? Or maybe, you are not really serious about the climate change to consider negligible such a reduction in carbon emission? Or perhaps, it is not worth the reduction in oil import from hostile countries to the US?
Just a few open questions ...
June 1st, 2009, Addendum
With today's announcement of GM's bankruptcy, there it goes an additional $30B ... and uncontrolled rumors give the cash for clunkers incentive in the $4k range ... do you really want me to redo the math?
1 comment:
Those small but efficient cars should be promoted here ASAP. We are getting everyday sicker and our kids are growing up with already damage lungs because of too much air pollution
Let's put pressure to the government
Where are the green advocates in the democratic party?
Post a Comment