From: vbreault@rinhp750.gmr.com (Val Breault)
Newsgroups: rec.autos,rec.autos.tech,misc.consumers,sci.environment,talk.environment
Subject: Re: Carburetors, gasoline, and why I don't recycle
Date: 2 Sep 92 14:43:54 GMT
Followup-To: rec.autos
Organization: General Motors Research Labs
In-reply-to: ejhupper@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu's message of 2 Sep 92 01:08:28 GMT

In article <1992Sep02.010828.24870@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu> ejhupper@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Eric Huppertz) writes:

<some provocative flame bait deleted>
   You see, carburetors have been the subject of much study for decades.
   And there have been several enterprising groups who have developed
   carburetors and engine systems which are hyper-efficient by 
   comparison to today's standards, but only par for the course where
   scientific development is concerned.  I once read an article which
   stated, as I recall, that one such fuel-injection system promised
   to double the effective power of its engine, while extending gas
   mileage to well over 130 (that's one hundred thirty) miles per
   gallon.  On a news program years ago, I saw a group of college
   students who had developed a carburetor that guaranteed at least
   100 miles per gallon of regular unleaded gasoline.
<more provocative flame bait deleted>

Okay, let's bring it up to date.  General Motors recently developed
a concept vehicle that had these constraints:  It was to be a street
legal 4 passenger vehicle, Achieve > 100 mpg,  Have all the normal 
accessories, Accelerate like a "normal" car (I forgot the 0:60 figure) 
and meet all current and proposed emissions figures.  It made the
rounds at the auto shows last year.  It had a large antimated display
with quite a number of people to answer your questions.

GM did it.  Unlike some "high mileage" cars, this one is a serious 
street legal car.   A lot of VERY bright people worked on it.  It is 
BRUTALLY expensive.  It will NEVER be produced.  The reason will be 
clear shortly.

While the engineers were careful to get the most out of every drop
of fuel, the enabling technology for this project was NOT fuel delivery.
Fuel delivery systems have been the subject of MUCH development over
the last couple of decades and further improvement will change things
only slightly.  The enabling technologies for this project were performance 
measurement, aerodynamics and materials.  The entire monocoque body, 
for example, is single piece carbon-fiber unit that weighs something 
like 400 pounds.  

I don't know whether or not the miracle carburetor urban legend will
EVER die, but I know that 100 mpg vehicles ARE possible.   It's REALLY
unlikely that they'll be anything like our current low cost offerings
though.  The MATERIALS for the concept vehicle (never mind the manpower)
cost more than several entire production line cars.  

Let's do some quick calculations:  Our Geo Metro gets almost 60 mpg. 
Let's say that the original owner of that car (our customer) keeps it 
for about 60,000 miles.  At $1.50 per gallon that Geo owner will spend 
about $1500 for gasoline.  The owner of a 100 mpg car of the future 
would spend about $900 for fuel for that same 60,000 miles; a difference 
of $600 or about a penny per mile less than something you can buy TODAY.  

In the end, I imagine that it all boils down to economics.  How much
would a person be willing to spend to buy a car that saves $600 in fuel
over the 60,000 miles that the original purchaser drives it?  I don't
think even the most environmentally concerned would be willing to 
spend as little as $20,000 more.  There are other things that are 
much more worthy of their money.

So why doesn't EVERYONE rush out and buy a Geo Metro?  Simple.  It 
doesn't fill everyones needs.  It's too spartain for some, too small 
for others, some people need to carry heavy loads.... those folks 
sacrifice some fuel economy to fill other needs.  That's why GM 
(and other car companies I may add) offer a broad selection of cars 
to fill a wide range of needs.

   So where are these miraculous systems?  Are they installed in our
   automobiles, reducing our fuel consumption and air pollution output?

Much of the stuff is already installed on the current crop of cars.
The rest is waiting for the ideas to become economical.  The share
holders like the corporation to show a profit after all.

(Rhetorical question)  How much ARE you willing to pay to get >100 mpg?

<I considered deleting this, but left it in because I think it's funny.>
   Of course not.  You know as well as I do where they are:  In the
   vaults of the world's major oil companies.  That's right, build a
   better carburetor and Exxon will beat a path to your door.  I can't
   imagine how rich the developers of these super-effient systems must
   be, now that the oil corporations bought their ideas and stapled
   their mouths shut with platinum stapleguns.
<but I did delete some here>

   So I, for one, will not make an effort to "protect the environment"
   by recycling my little aluminum cans, or buying brand X because it's
   packed in recycled cardboard.  Not until I am assured that the oil
   companies are doing their part: working for the planet rather than
   against it for the sake of some pretty serious bucks.

You're entitled to speak your opinion.  
I believe it's wrong, but that's MY opinion.

   The above is (c)1992 by Eric J. Huppertz.  

-val-


--

Val Breault - vbreault@gmr.com - N8OEF
General Motors Research and Environmental Staff.
The opinions expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect 
those of the GMRES or the General Motors Corporation.
 

Newsgroups: rec.autos