Mindmeld, I read somewhere that for every 1 mpg increase in average fuel efficiency in the U.S., we reduce the need for oil by 1 mbpd.
Fuzzy math. I suspect that someone saw that we consume 20M barrels/day, figured cars today get 20 MPG, and came up with that measure.
Take this for example:
To reduce consumption from 20 mbpd to 5 mbpd, we'd need to increase average mpg by 15, from 25 to 40. No math errors there.
Let's extend the fuzzy math further. You're telling me that if we increased average MPG to 45, consumption will go all the way down to zero? It doesn't make sense. If average MPG went up by a factor of 2X (say 25 to 50), what does that translate to? 50% less consumption, or 10 MBPD. A noble goal, but a very far cry from the 75% figure that you think is possible if we increase MPG from 25 to 40.
The Toyota Prius gets 50-60 mpg.
And it achieves that through a combination of hybrid technology, compact size (even though it's a 4-door vehicle), and lightweight materials. Even then, 50 MPG is only achievable in practice via cautious driving and having only the driver in the vehicle.
Look at the Honda Accord Hybrid as an example of what is truly practical with most cars today. Even Consumer Reports observed 25 MPG on the car, despite an EPA estimate of 29 MPG. That's certainly better than 22-23 MPG of regular Accords, but far short of what you think is possible with hybrid technology alone. (And it's hard to argue that Consumer Reports drove that car more aggressively than the average driver. This isn't Motor Trend, you know.)
Bottom line: I agree with your intentions, but not your calculations.
Tenchusatsu |
