# The Myth of the Efficient Car



## EVDL Archive (Jul 26, 2007)

English economist William Stanley Jevons discovered an efficiency paradox: the more efficient you make machines, the more energy they use.

More...


----------



## Qer (May 7, 2008)

Depressing read. Probably very accurate, but it still doesn't make if less depressing...


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

The writer commits several logical fallacies and self contradictions.

I pose this simple question to the writer... what if someone created a 1000 mile range 9kwh EV for 20,000USD?

It's certainly possible to do it. His claims that the government won't do enough in time isn't relevant... all the government has to do is get out of the way with regulations in new car builds (with ABS braking regulations, airbags, etc etc etc etc etc).


----------



## david85 (Nov 12, 2007)

Technologic said:


> It's certainly possible to do it. His claims that the government won't do enough in time isn't relevant... all the government has to do is get out of the way with regulations in new car builds (with ABS braking regulations, airbags, etc etc etc etc etc).


Agreed, but I largely reject the author's thesis. I have always felt that the best solution would be to exploit the living hell out of solar and wind power so energy efficiecy becomes less important because there would be no emissions from power production. If the car runs on zero emission "electric fuel" then what is the problem if I drive it everywhere?

As I mentioned a while ago on another thread, what I'm looking for in an EV, is the car free feeling of driving that came with cheap gas and a lack of regard for the environment, ignorance can really be bliss some times. (theres your soundbite of the week)

But joking aside, I think it is important to promote the idea that electric cars and decentralized renewable power production (solar power on your house roof) can bring back a certain freedom that we have lost in our era. Imagine having complete joy in going for a weekend drive without thinking about the high cost of fuel or the environmental impact anymore. 

I still think thats a powerful idea worth persuing even if some people think that anything on 4 tires should be banned and we should all live in gated communities. Sorry, but I put a high price on my personal freedom.


----------



## Technologic (Jul 20, 2008)

david85 said:


> Agreed, but I largely reject the author's thesis. I have always felt that the best solution would be to exploit the living hell out of solar and wind power so energy efficiecy becomes less important because there would be no emissions from power production. If the car runs on zero emission "electric fuel" then what is the problem if I drive it everywhere?


Unfortunatley the author missed the fact that he both contradicts himself as well. Namely that he firstly claims that feeding business growth/consumerism is bad economically and environmentally (a very false pretense, and unsupported one since that's how capitalism works). And claims that it's not even worth changing for the environment either, despite the lowered emissions.

He's very confusing and doesn't actually try to support his premises with facts.


----------



## AUH2O (Feb 2, 2009)

I can see his larger and somewhat amorphous point about efficiencies being translated into hyper use of a product.

In Los Angeles, before the collapse in real estate there was a phrase coined in regard to the purchase of a home – “Drive till you qualify.” Meaning, keep looking for a home further and further away from work till the price drops enough; then spend the rest of your time there dealing with the commute. How long of a commute is too long?

Admittedly, I’m from a different mindset in regards to daily driving; that is, I like to limit it as much as possible. When I started driving (mid ‘70s), cars were not nearly as easy or safe to drive as today. Bias-ply tires, mechanical drum brakes, manual steering, column shifters with a 16 lb clutch, sealed beam lights, AM only radio, manual windows and lap belts in the front seat only; are a short list of items from my first car. I’m not complaining, just highlighting some differences in 30 years of automotive evolution. I recall driving being much less comfortable, reliable and safe in the ‘70’s.

I would never consider weaving traffic or approaching a traffic light with the sole reliance upon power assisted, multi piston; four wheel drilled and slotted disc brakes with ABS to stop me in less than 20 feet. That may stem from too many close calls with drum brakes slowing bias-ply rubber. What was an advancement/luxury/efficiency has become a necessity at the extinction of what preceded it.

Most now view power windows, brakes and steering as an absolute necessity. Even though a hand crank, larger diameter steering wheel with rack and pinion combined with a longer lever arm on the brake pedal with larger diameter discs would replace all of the related pumps, belts, hoses, vacuum reservoir, electric motors, switches and wiring. 

Then you would have to work a little more at driving and might find that commute to be less tolerable. For as much as the dinosaurs with ICEs are maligned and may have tried to impede progress, they were at one point the ones with a better technology to improve life. There may come a time when the electric vehicle is viewed the same way.


----------



## Jason Lattimer (Dec 27, 2008)

This guy is a freaking pessimistic idiot. He fails to point out that most of us buy efficient products for the simple reason we can leave the light on, drive for the hell of it and run our heat at 80 degrees. I have the freedom to do that and if it is efficient I don't have to be made to feel guilty because I am "consuming". 

And I am saving money at the same time. Relatively speaking of course.


----------

