I agree Eric - don't buy an SUV unless you need one. I keep hoping they will go out of style. Since I use mine to get way back on bad roads (often to check up on the Forest Service and BLM), I'm not able to get a mini-van or wagon. An AWD wagon is a lot more fun to drive -- that's for sure.

Also, you can telecommute - maybe only some days a week, but that will help. And use a high mileage, low pollution car with an auto trans. if you do have to drive to work - gridlock is not fun with a manual box...

BTW - the newer Porsches are quite low in their emissions. My Boxster S had an EPA index of only 0.31.

And, you can support mass transit. Even if you don't or won't use it, there is value in getting the roads unclogged and putting the cell phone users, lipstick appliers, newspaper readers who do not WANT to drive in nice safe, lower-pollution environment on a bus or transit car.

If you don't have mass transit ask your politicians why...

No I still have carbs - but like I said, I don't drive the car that much - afew times a month - it is purely a fun car. I also mitigated the impacts pretty well: Besides devoting my entire professional life to env'l matters, I killed my lawn mower ( a huge polluter -- more on that later), and often bike to work as well as walking to the grocery store. Not every day tho - I guess I am getting old. Also the dog needs to ride in the car if she goes in to the office.

You can always be 'cleaner' or 'greener' - just get to a level you feel responsible for.

"If an electric car is being" plugged in" it consumes more energy and is worse on the environment then just a gas burner"

- Incorrect. It is far, far easier to control a large, stationary emissions source (power plant) than thousands of small, mobile sources (cars). Also, electric cars are a good pathway towards the use of photo-voltaic panels to produce electricity from sunlight. We are not there yet in terms of economics but are making progress. Finally, there is some value in shifting pollution to less polluted areas -- and power plants can do that. It is far from perfect -- people can breathe easier in LA, but the downside is that the air quality in our National Parks and Monuments in the 4 corners area is worse - not so bad you choke, but bad enough to create haze and damage our national treasures.

Yes, dams - the very large ones - are very tough on salmon. Most dams are much smaller and the salmon can easily climb the fish ladders. The real problem with the Snake and Columbia River main dams is the opposite migration direction -- it is when the young fish head downstream. The rivers used to flush them out to sea quickly and with little need to swim. Now the rivers are like huge lakes - the swim downstream is exhausting, exposes them to predators, and - the worst thing - the turbines turn millions of the young fish into pink soup.

Oh yeh - almost forgot this one and I don't know for sure, but I will bet that twin-plugging lowers emissions.

I agree. But when we start talking old Porsches, let's be honest, it is hard to claim any sort of clean or green. My 3.6 gets almost 30mpg on the highway but drive it hard and it hits somewhere below 10mpg. all with no cat or 02 sensor. That aint green or clean. Just thought the topic was pretty funny on a Porsche BBB.


I've ridden my bicycle many times the miles I have driven my 911 in the last year but I have never for a moment thought of any of the older cars as green or that I was helping the environment by not driving my gas sucking hot rod ;) While the new Porsche models are very clean for emissions...they still suck gas by the gallon.

I think we should plug our lawn mowers then....throw them away (lol) then get a goat...blow up the tv..move to the country....where is J.D. anyway ??

re - not allowing tinkering, etc.

A lot of the no-tinkering is built into the regulations for the same reason that speed limit signs don't change based on traffic density; and stop signs & lights don't vanish at 3 am. It is easier to set a "one size fits all" than to enact (and enforce) highly flexible regulatory schemes. An individual is very very unlikely to come up with a better emissions system than a new car will have.

The laws are designed to deal with the millions of Joe Averages out there -- if there are any exceptions, they are going to be aimed at poor people (or people with good lobbyists... oddly enough they are not poor).

BTW< Porsche has always prided itself on its excellence in engineering low pollution and high mileage cars. Think about cars with comparable performance -- which ones can match a Porsche for fuel economy or emissions. There is only one such company (hint - it ain't Italian or American). Well, ok two companies...


Because all threads are worthless without pics, here is a nice pic to look at while you think about the company of Mr. Light Weight himself and the other one...

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1164954922.jpg

Something good about keeping your old car...

One of the think tank env'l groups (I can't recall if it was EDF or NRDC) calculated the total pollution from a car over its lifetime. They discovered that the pollution to BUILD the car was 1/3 of the total. That is surprisingly high -- so it is useful to keep the car running (of course, I doubt if they calculated the pollution to rebuild an engine). Also, the build pollution is nearly certain to be in a different air shed and water shed than where the car is operated...

But still, that is a big chunk of the total.

That is an interesting take on the subject but you are commiting the part to whole falicy in your logic which makes the argument actually incorrect. I will give you an example that will show you how much better an electric car is.

Imagine if we all had diesel generators outside of our houses to make our power. Could you imagine the smell, noise, and associated problems?

Well that is exactly the problem with gas cars. It is inefficient on the whole to be MAKING power as we go, we should simply be consuming it and allowing it to be made in a central plant.

Your argument that you need energy to make them and so forth is also invalid as these vehicles may need more batteries but standard cars need tons of materials and fluids to make their engines work as well. Its a zero sum game realistically.

The electric car is the answer. It can be made efficient, powerful and long running on a charge. Making power under each and every hood is not the answer. Good for weekends and fun time but not necessary on the whole for simple transportation.

Randy- I didn't read the second page so I didn't know that you already mentioned how much smarter it is to make central power rather than little power sources everywhere.

Eat less. Lose weight. Better gas mileage. Less pollution.

Unfortunately it evens out in the long run. You will live a longer life polluting your environment.

I did say " as is " for the electric car.....

The autoparts store were I take oil told me it was OK to put brake fluid in it. I'd ask yours first though.

Another bad one is brake cleaner with trichlori.... We don't allow it in our machine shop. Unfortunately it works better than the stuff without and it's still available at the autoparts store.

Randy, interesting thread.

I don't think your suggestion of maintaining the original pollution controls is a viable one in the case of pre-1978 vehicles, however.

1968-- air injection pumps-- NLA
1969-1972 MFI support to produce less than 3% CO-- very hard to do
1975-1977 Thermal Reactors-- Great way to provoke riots

The beginning of improved emissions came with rudimentary lambda control so you could run a cat. One retrofit solution for reducing emissions that has peripheral benefits in terms of better performance through the power band and improved fuel economy is EFI. I can easily see more SC's being converted, particularly if a low cost ITB setup were brought to market.

I, unlike the majority of Pelicans, ride the NYC subway to work every day. Does that mean I should get some 906 cams? :)

Hmmm, I walk to work. I guess that means I can do the 2.8 S conversion that Grady's always tempting me with. :D


edit: Surprisingly, I was able to tune my MFI to run clean enough to pass DC emissions. Thankfully, it's a one-time thing with vintage plates. :)

Individuals are the ONLY way new innovation comes about. Even in large companies that come up with new inventions, the ideas come from "individuals" working in teams. More earth shattering and earth saving ideas have come from the efforts if individuals "tinkering. I do believe that even Dr. Porsche was "an individual".

I certainly do not disagree with making things more green, but to have the mindset that an individual is incapable of improving on the ideas of a committee - need I say more? Why even this thread was conjured up by an individual :rolleyes:

One of the major advantages of the electric car is that electricity can be produced by a wide variety of means, many of them renewable--not just coal-fired powerplants but nuclear, hydro, solar, wind and probably a few others I'm not aware of. Try producing hydrocarbon energy any way other than pumping it out of the ground.

Yes, I realize that each of these has its own set of problems, but I think the diversity of avenues to be explored makes electricity very appealing.

As for personal environmental impact, I've found that one of the major improvements that can be made is carefully combining trips. Go get the mail on your way to the gym, swing by the hardware store on your way home from the gym, pick up the kids and then make whatever other stops you need to make, rather than going out on three or four different trips over many of the same roads. Takes a little planning, but it's do-able.

I would love to have an electric engine in my 73E if it could be recharged from renewable sources, and had the torque, HP and throttle response of my 2.7RS-spec/MFI engine. Then, I'd have to find a way to have it generate sounds that mimic that flat-six MFI sound at various "engine speeds." :)

One of the problems with the electric/hybrid cars that not many people talk about is the polution that is created from the batteries. In order to produce and recycle the batteries it requires a great deal of processing due to the more exotic materials that are being used. The same difficulty is encountered when the batteries get replaced due to age. This leads to a larger total enviromental impact if an electric/hybrid vehicle than there is with a standard gas burner. Power plants are significantly more efficient at producing power than an internal combustion engine, but if electric vehicles become popular then there is the problem that the entire country would need to upgrade the electrical grid, consider how much power is consumed every day by all of the internal combustion engines in the country.

Remember this?

http://www.ztac.net/porsche.htm

Overpaid Slacker had the best comment:

"Looking at that just Hertz."