Foreign oil and the Prius

You mean like the even larger number of lead batteries being dumped now, which are never ever recycled?

China has less than a third of the world's known reserves. They supply 97% of the market now because they undercut everyone else's prices, forcing competing mines to close. If higher demand pushes up prices to a more realistic level, this problem will cure itself.

We mustn't let China control all of the massive stocks we re-discovered (following the Soviets) in Afghanistan.

I'll let you have #1 and #2, but refuse to let coal escape its share of #3.

 

^^ You said

It does not. Wise up, and move along.

 

Facts say otherwise and that's where we are moving along to. 50mpg vs. 24 mpg reduces US gasoline use by 50%, 50% of 45% cuts US oil use 22%. Cuts US oil imports 44%. That's huge progress toward cutting foreign oil and greenhouse gases.

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]US Dept of Energy: [/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica] In the United States, in contrast to other regions of the world, about 2/3 of all oil use is for[/FONT] transportation[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]. [/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]Gasoline is the perfect example of a consumer product: available everywhere, purchased often and in easy transactions. Its consumption accounts for almost 45 percent of all oil use[/FONT] .

On the "you said" topic...ahem.

US Dept of Energy: Transportation responsible for 31% of greenhouse gas emissions.

Again facts against you it is 31% and 15% reduction in greenhouse gases. That's huge progress. Even your mistaken 12.5% is great progress.

Going to the 124 mpg Volvo Diesel Hybrid Plug in that's cutting US total green house gases by 25% JUST by cutting gasoline usage.

Cutting US oil use by 50%, eliminating oil imports frees up $1T per year for US economy to push US energy to 50% greater efficiency in 10 years (simply meeting CURRENT European policies and technology) and that cuts US green house gases by 50% by 2030. Well on the way to 80% reduction by 2050.

Keep moving forward.

 

Read the chart (by clicking on it), but keep in mind that transport is about 50% personal and 50% commercial.

 

The electricity is not GHG free.

You are jumping to the conclusion that the money kept in the country will be used for a green expansion. It *could*, but it is hardly a given.

Heck, at least 50% of the adult US populace has still not cottoned on to the fact that AGW is real, and a fair portion of the other 50% have other priorities for that money.

 

Yep, that is dead right, because in Australia we don't know how to make paper. Well that's how it seems to me.
I can't work out why farmers sell wheat when they could sell flour.

By the way, G'day all my Prius Chat friends.

 

Long time no hear. Welcome back!

 

I thought the issue was getting off oil regardless of where or by whom it is mined.
All the emissions go into the same atmosphere and regardless of where it comes from the price will go up as it becomes harder to extract.

Prius is just a step in the right direction, it isn't in any way the answer. Every journey starts with the first step, we all need to take that step and most here have done so.

 

(OT) Thanks fuzzy1, life just hasn't let me have time to sit at the computer like it once did.

 

Much electricity is greenhouse gas free, solar, wind, tidal, hydro, geo-thermal, hydrogen, fusion, fission.

Much more can be.

In addition to the base reduction in green house gases of much less oil use by the car.

 

True but for US, 50% less energy efficient than Oz, Europe, Japan et al and with the consequences of unnecessary imported oil so huge in terms of trade deficit of $500B per year and military cost of oil field occupation $500B per year, cutting imported oil use has added importance.

 

Have any links to those stats?

 

Let's try the arithmetic again:

Transport is ~ 30% of US GHG emissions
Half of transport is personal, half is commercial
Fleet mpg of personal transport is 24 mpg
mpg of a Prius is about 50 mpg (~double)

So,
15% of US GHG is from personal transport
If fuel economy is doubled by replacing the entire US personal car fleet with 50 mpg vehicles, then 7.5% of US GHG is from personal transport.

So how far will the Prius transition take the US in its goal towards 80% reduction in GHG ?
7.5/80 = 9.375% of the way.

 

EIA

9 million barrels a day,
about half from OPEC

If a barrel costs ~$100,
then annual total petrodollar bleed is 365*100*9,000,000 = $328 Billion.

Add on the cost of the military/wars to guard the oil resources, and pSuns estimate is within range of a price spike.

 

I thought it was big ag. Wait from legislation it appears to be big coal and trial lawyers. How about them der investment bankers that got bailed out, then gave themselves bonuses. No, big oil is the not a big part of our problems. They had much more power when the government regulated them more. Less regulation but clear regulation is needed. You know like fire MMS and actually make gulf drillers follow the rules, etc. Politicans claim big oil as the problem mainly to grab more power regulating, and then more bribes, um lobbying from the oil companies.

I think you are in the minority that wants to completely get off oil. That's like telling everyone to stop eating meat. Not very popular or necessary or productive.

The trick is to reduce, and for the US the North American stuff doesn't come with bad economic or foreign policy strings. Its something that many of all political persuasions would like to do.

Then if your big hot button is ghg, coal seems to be a bigger target, especially those pre-vietnam war power plants grandfathered in to pollution and inefficiency.
+1

 

Sure let us know when you are done. Three is the charm.

So which number are you going with? Your 12.5% or your 7.5% or your 9.375%?

OK.

Now while you're doing that, back to the thread topic of foreign oil and the Prius. This information from US Dept of Energy explains why increasing transportation fuel efficiency has a big effect on cutting US oil imports.

[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]US Dept of Energy: [/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica] In the United States, in contrast to other regions of the world, about 2/3 of all oil use is for[/FONT] transportation[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]. [/FONT][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]Gasoline is the perfect example of a consumer product: available everywhere, purchased often and in easy transactions. Its consumption accounts for almost 45 percent of all oil use[/FONT] .

Because US oil use is concentrated in transportation, getting US to European standards of 50% more energy efficient on a per capita and per GDP dollar basis and focusing this on transportation (current avg 24 mpg, Prius 50 mpg) US could cut its oil use by 50%, eliminating $500B per year in oil trade deficit tax and $500B per year in military spending due to threat to US national security and economy posed by Middle East oil disruption.

Now that's some arithmetic upon which to build an energy efficient, sustainable US economy.

And no matter which number you finally decide you like 15%, 12.5%, 9.375% or 7.5% it will be big progress. In regard to your focus on greenhouse gases, here's a report from a fairly conservative policy group who explore it in more detail.

The Role of Driving in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Oil Consumption Transportation represented 71 percent of oil consumption and 31 percent of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the United States in 2008. Therefore, federal transportation policy presents an opportunity to reduce both oil consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. This report explores whether technology improvements alone can achieve oil consumption and GHG emissions reduction targets consistent with recent draft legislation and international climate negotiations. The report finds that the United States must achieve significant improvements in vehicle technology and reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita (compared to business as usual projections for 2050, which anticipate a 40 percent increase in VMT per capita over 2010 levels) to meet these targets. With improvements to vehicle technology and reductions in per capita VMT, the United States would not need to import any oil by 2030.

 

While it would be significant progress, it is still far short of:

 

"Significant progress" is not "short" of any thing.

Fuel efficient vehicles like the Prius are key factor increasing US energy efficiency to European standards (twice as efficient as US) and eliminating US oil imports, the No. 1 threat to US national security, economy and environment. To study and link above, by 2030 by changing driving habits.

Garcon!! More "significant progress" for my friends!

 

You have some significantly incorrect statistics. About 60% transportation oil use is gasoline, the rest is diesel and aviation fuel for trains, planes, and diesel trucks and busses. Its a great idea to use half as much gas, but that would still leave us with 70% of transportation oil. Its a move in the right direction, but hardly gets us to 50%, to do that you need to cut miles and increase efficiency on these other vehicles. The US uses about 80% more oil per capita than countries like Germany or France. These countries also travel fewer miles, have better public transport including buses and trains, and use much less non-tarnsport oil.

 

Talk to the hand...aka US Dept of Energy. The stats and links are from their page except for the analysis of policies necessary to eliminate US oil imports by 2030.

The Role of Driving in Reducing Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Oil Consumption | World Resources Institute