Interesting argument. This is actually the reason why I drive a 20 year old Land Rover. My argument is that because the chassis and about 90% of the body work is aluminium, the car, as a structure, not a machine, will probably go on forever.
The engine is a big dirty thing: 3.5 V8 petrol. But as Erik says, there is virtually no maintenance on it, as it so de tuned and so basic to fix. (A hammer normally does it.) Can one really say that if I am doing 6000 kms per year in this big dirty thing, (using about 1 litre of fuel for 6kms!) that I am causing less damage to the environment than buying a new car every five years? Makes me feel a lot better if it's true! I'd be really interested to see some actual statistics to shut my girlfirend up. She maintains I'm just a gas guzzler lover! Phil Rendel English Department Kingswood College, Burton Street, Grahamstown tel. 046 603 6600 fax. 046 622 3084 cell: 084 448 1052 -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Donald Allwright Sent: 20 September 2004 12:16 PM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Keeping older vehicles on the road - was Re: [Biofuel] good reading There is a point that's worth repeating here regarding older vehicles: Most cars use more energy in the manufacture than they do in fuel consumption over their entire lives - so as a rule the best way to reduce the energy balance of vehicles is to make them last as long as you can. If your concern is just the energy use, then try and keep the older vehicles working as long as possible. They are not quite as efficient, but the excess energy use is far less than that used to manufacture a new car you might replace it with. Also, keeping an older vehicle on the road is a great way of providing local employment - much better than just buying a new vehicle and using loads of primary resources. OK, the same may not be true for some of the exhaust pipe pollutants, as older cars are often a lot more polluting (due to lack of catalytic converters, a less optimised combustion process etc). So while in rural areas these pollutants may not be seen to be a major problem, in urban areas they certainly will be. Donald --- Erik Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > --- tommy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Here is a good reading piece if your wondering about > > why it's pretty much a waste to try to get those > > "Cheap" running junkers working and focus on new > > tech > > engines. > > Thank you for posting that link. I enjoyed reading it. > But I disagree with your conclusions. As nice as a new > diesel is I am still going to keep my 23 year old audi > diesel. Once you consider that I only have about $500 > into it not counting fuel or oil changes and that it > gets 50 mpg I don't see how the new ones are any > better. But of course they're much fancier, with all > the electronics and latest options. The new ones will > also blow mine off the road for speed and power. But > those don't concern me. I know that for a lot of > people they are very important, and those are the ones > that I would try to talk into getting a newer one. > > The old ones also use very simple technology, which > for me means that I can fix it all myself without > taking it in. Not including the injection pump, of > course. (Though I do have the computer scanners to be > able to do everything on the newer ones as well, but > that's cause it's what I do. Just saying that most > people can work on the older ones and the newer ones > become harder and more complicated.) > > I'm all for diesels. I love them. And the new ones > have a lot of nice advantages. I really wish that with > 20+ years of technology advancements it would have > that much better fuel mileage than mine, but they just > don't. I just don't see all that as a reason to > abandon the old ones. If I can at all I will drive > these old tech ones for many years more. The only > thing I see stopping me is them getting wrecked. > > Just my opinion, of course. > > Erik > > > > > > This tech is what the "Big fuel" petro industrial > > fuel > > suppliers will get the gov to back instead of > > bio-fuel, keeping themselves in the loop > > > > http://www.boschusa.com/dieselvoice.pdf > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Address AutoComplete - You start. We finish. > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > _______________________________________________ > Biofuel mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel > > Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): > http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ > ===== -- 43 - slightly more than the answer to life, the universe and everything. ___________________________________________________________ALL-NEW Yahoo! Messenger - all new features - even more fun! http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/ _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://wwia.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/biofuel Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel archives at Infoarchive.net (searchable): http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/
