UASIT

You're not alone...Until then...I'll have to settle for a 335i...:-)

JamesNoBrakes

Then you probably haven't flown into SoCal or Bakersfield anytime recently. The pollution is simply out of control in those places. IFR on VFR days.

UASIT

54.7 mpg from the frugal BMW diesel engine. The newer 3 series are worth checking out. My current ride has just under 45K miles on it (2008).

I never understood the electric / hybrid car craze...

Flight Test

The problem with these high tech green cars is if it's all electric the range is awful and you need a second car for trips, or it has the same range (ie. hybrid) but with a whopper of a price tag plus a ridiculous payback term. $40k for Volt just isn't a very good deal. They need to make one that costs half as much with the same mileage, but they can't do it.

Winged Wheeler

globalexpress

I'm not sure I'd agree with that. I drive an electric car and a Prius. My Prius is the gas guzzler in our family. I don't do it to be green or to be pretentious. I do it for 2 main reasons.

One, the United States has a huge trade deficit with the rest of the world and it is unsustainable. 50% (mas o menos, depending on spot oil prices) is due to our dependence on imported crude oil. So literally a few hundred billion in dollars gets sent to other countries for their benefit every year. Those dollars, instead, could be used to make power plants and infrastructure, for example, in the US to power my electric car instead of being used to pay Saudi Arabian workers to pump oil out of the desert. Every time we pull up to the pump, we're exporting jobs and treasure that could be ours.

Two, and the more obvious reason, is that we import a lot of oil from OPEC, around 40% according to the US Energy Information Administration. So are these OPEC countries our friends? What do they do with the profits that THEY make when WE buy their oil? Do I have to answer that question or do you already know? I mean, roadside bombs, RPG's, and paying suicide bomber's families aren't cheap, you know.

So, we as a nation have indebted our children and probably our grandchildren to the tune of over a trillion dollars fighting wars in the Middle East, just in the past 10 years, to protect our "interests" (i.e. the free flow of crude oil) to the western world. We killed, what, 5,000 of our soldiers and sent home tens of thousands more permanently f'd up? Yet some argue that a Volt, for example, "costs too much," or, "doesn't make financial sense." Hmmmm......so spending over a trillion dollars over the past 10 years so we can drive our F150's (the car that we buy the most of in the US last year) and Silverado's (4th most popular) makes better financial sense?

Here's another statistic. We import around 5M barrels of oil from OPEC countries per day. We use 9M barrels gasoline of oil per day in the US. What would happen if US citizens, through incentives like tax credits or otherwise, replaced ONE of their cars with an electric car that was driven by US produced electricity? It would make certain countries on this planet pretty irrelevant, huh? What would happen to that nasty trade deficit?

And let me point out the above I am not trying to get on a soapbox or be preachy or green or whatever. I'm just stating the facts as I see them. Feel free to disagree. You every right to go out and buy that Ford F150 or Suburban if you want, just like you have every right to be a pack a day cigarette smoker even though others might disagree with that decision, too. It's your right to buy and do whatever you want.

Not directed at you N2264.....

According the Bureau of Transportation Statistics, 80% of Americans drive 40 miles or less per day. That is what drove Chevy's decision to develop an electric car that goes 40 miles per charge. And with the Volt, of course if you have to drive further the gasoline engine kicks in and you can drive as far as any other car. Here's a chart showing distance traveled (note km) vs. % of total trips for Japan, the US, and the EU.

So when people complain that electric cars "only" get XX amount of miles per range, it's kind of a poor argument because even a car with 40 miles range like the Volt would cover the VAST MAJORITY of a person's travel needs. And when it doesn't, the gas engine kicks in and away you go. A car like the Nissan Leaf with 70 "real world" miles (under poor conditions, cold, snowy, heat on) would cover 90%+ of people. And of course, most Americans own a second car anyway to cover that occasional longer trip.

FDXLAG

Too long to quote.

We get our oil from whomever has it to sell to us. Canada, Mexico, Saudia Arabia, or North Dakota. Too bad we arent interested in finding more of our own, that could reduce your trillion dollar debt right there.

Trillion dollar debt from fighting wars. Between direct subsidies and tax credits we have wasted that much on green energy projects over the last 10 years too. That doesnt evan count the indirect waste, I mean how much have we flushed down the ethanol toilet in higher corn prices alone?

What would happen if half the cars turned electric? Brown outs, black outs and surging electricity prices.

If your electric cars are so good, why do you have to bribe people to drive them and punish people who dont?

I am happy you are happy with your prius. Sure wish I had taken a picture of the white one broken down on I 20 just outside Ranger the other day as I drove past in my F-150 (just kidding I drive a ranger, but it gets the gas milage of an F-150).

BTW I am for an all of the above energy policy. Just dont make me pay for your bad decisions.

globalexpress

It's long because there's lots of data and it is not easily arrived at. I think energy consumption in the US, particularly crude oil consumption is sort of interesting and I have read a few books on the subject, as well as internet forums and such. That is where I get my data from.

The "drill baby drill" argument is a good one IMHO. And I am all for developing the natural resources that we have here in the US. Natural gas is of particular interest nowadays. Shale's great too, but very expensive to extract and process. If oil keeps going up, it will start to make economic sense to develop, but I'd be willing to pay more for US produced shale gas if given the option.

But as far as "traditional" crude oil goes (i.e. non-shale).....here's the problem. We just don't have enough in the US. The chances of finding a "super giant" (like the North Slope of AK) is close to nil, so as a country (and a world) we're finding smaller and smaller finds that are more and more costly to develop. To illustrate that point.......wait. Every once in a while, you'll see in the news that a country/oil developer has found a "huge oil deposit" of XXX barrels of oil. The next time you see that, divide their "estimated reserves" number by 80 million. That's how many days that find is good for at present crude oil world consumption rates. Notice I used the term "days." That's what it has come down to with the latest "big" finds.

Unfortunately the solution isn't just, "lets stick more straws in the ground" and we'll be able to increase US oil production by 4M barrels/day. If only it were that easy. But hey, I'm all for it. Let's use what we got.

We certainly haven't spent anywhere near a trillion dollars, that's for sure. If googled a little bit because it is a good question though. I found this article. Apparently in 2008 we only spent 15B on subsidies and credits over 10 years. So 1.5B per year I would say.

Just the war in Afghanistan costs 6B-8B a month (it's a political number- war hawks say less, doves say more) to put things in perspective. Subsidies to oil companies result in about 4B in uncollected taxes in the US, per year.

OK, so using that logic, the surging oil prices that we are experiencing RIGHT now are better? How about in July 2008? What would happen if there was another embargo or two like in the 70's? Remember that? They had us by the short and curlies, didn't they? They still do BTW. All Ahmadinejad has to do is utter "Straits of Hormuz" to the press and it costs you $5 bucks more to fill your Ranger up.

What would happen? Well, instead of sending our money abroad to places like Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran to spend on jobs and such to build up THEIR energy infractructure so that we can buy THEIR oil, I would imagine what would happen is that WE would have to spend money on OUR infrastructure, like on jobs and such, to make more electricity to meet demand. And bonus- we wouldn't be dependent on unfriendly nations who wish us ill will to put it mildly.

Which of the above is better for our nation?

Rolling blackouts? Hardly. Let me ask you a question. When would people typically charge their electric cars en masse? When people get home from work/sleeping or in the middle of the day? When is demand on our grid the least? When we are at home sleeping or in the middle of the day? Do you realize that in some parts of the country, at night, power plants pump electricity to ground because they can't shut down or "load follow" and the electricity isn't being used? Certainly we would have to increase the capacity of the grid. There is little doubt in my mind that we could do that. Don't you?

Because sometimes governments have to find ways to incentize people to do good things. I mean, why should someone get to deduct charitable contributions from their tax returns? Isn't giving to charity "so good" that it doesn't merit an incentive from the government? Why do we get to deduct home mortgage interest from our income? Isn't owning a home good enough? Well, the government wants everyone to have a "stake" in their country. Home ownership is one way of doing that, so it incentivizes that behavior.

Why do we have to tax the crap out of cigarettes? Why are cigarette smokes being punished for their right to smoke? Because we know that cigarette smokers are a drag on the economy and cost society a lot of money, especially in medical care. So we de-incentivize an undesirable behavior using taxes as well. That's how some tax policy works.

So to answer your question, our government realizes that our dependence on imported crude oil is a problem for our country and they are trying to provide incentives to provoke certain desirable behavior. In the electric car case, they realize that if we substitute electricity (or nat gas or whatever) for "Saudi Arabian crude" that is a GOOD thing for our nation so they provide incentives to move the nation toward that direction.

Not sure I get the point of this. You saw a broken down Prius on the side of the road so therefore the car is less reliable then a Ford Ranger? Ummmm.........OK?

I have the Consumer Reports 2011 buying guide on my bookshelf. They rate the Ranger with "average" predicted reliability and coincidentally rated it very poorly compared to its small pick-up competitors. The Prius is rated with above average reliability and is a "best buy" for its class.

Well, see, here's the rub. Couldn't the Prius/electric car owner say the same to you? You drive a Ford Ranger that gets an observed 16mpg per Consumer Reports. Your "bad decision" is leading this nation into more of the same, isn't it? I mean, if everyone went out and did what you did and bought a 16mpg Ford Ranger, we'd be in deeper trouble, no? We'd be MORE dependent on our friends on the Middle East. But if everyone did what I did and replaced their 12mpg and 16mpg cars (which is what I had) with a Prius and an electric vehicle, we could pretty much pull out of the Middle East and let them fight amongst themselves, saving me, my kids, and my grandchildren a trillion dollars (or two trillion+ after interest).

So in reality, isn't a household like mine going to end up paying for your decision? And by the numbers I post above, it looks like your decision is MUCH more expensive than mine, right?

But again, it's you're right to buy that Ranger and replace it with a F150. I'd be happy that you're happy with your F150. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz DEFINITELY are happy with the choices us Americans make and would be supporting your decision if they had an airlinepilotcentral.com account. I wonder what they would use as screen names? Probably F150Lover or something like that

Flight Test

The gist of the problem is these cars are not market viable as they are. We are proving it yet again with the Volt. I really do not oppose the idea of government fostering nascent technologies. Technology development requires protection for a while. The issue I have with these cars is they are not pushing technology very much, and they are not new. Electrics and hybrids have been around for a 100 years. Fossil fuels won out and still win in terms of sustainability in the marketplace. In my view, the only way around the imported oil condundrum for the long haul is to develop alternative fuels like synthetics and biofuels. And as others have pointed, there is no big hurry to do that as long as world oil reserves are adequate.

FDXLAG

Again too long to quote. But you greatly under estimate green energy subsidies. Take ethanol. You have the direct subsidy of a 6 billion per year. Now add the tax credits or the difference in taxes paid on a gallon of gas and a gallon of ethanol. Now add the mandate to include 10% ethanol.

Recheck your google the stimulus alone had about 40 billion in subsidies for 2009 alone.

My logic is not faulty you asked what would happen if we went to half electric vehicles, I stand by my answer the power grid would crash. Electricity is generated by the government, the government is slow to react and inefficent. The oil industry is driven by market forces. As demand increases or as supply decreases the price goes up and generally the supply increases. As we are talking logic; why do you exclude shale? Saudi arabia will sell its oil whether we buy it or not.

What is worse for our country is overpaying for energy because we have a zenophobic reaction to who is selling it to us. The best thing for our country is if we let all forms of energy compete freely without the goobermint trying to pick winners and losers. Again have you ever heard of ethanol?

There was no point to the prius, I just enjoyed seeing a brand new (dealer tags) prius on the side of the road. I smiled as I imagined how he overestimated his MPGs.

I have done plenty of work with my ranger that I could not do with your prius. I routinely carry 2500 lb loads of brick, cement or just plain dirt. Maybe I should take the city bus, the dirt would fit right in.