From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
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 18:43:03 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: /usr/lib/news/organization
Originator: daemon@sword.eng.pyramid.com

In article <1992Sep02.010828.24870@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu> ejhupper@rs6000.cmp.ilstu.edu (Eric Huppertz) writes:
>
>I refuse to recycle. 
>
>And I'll tell you exactly what I tell them:  Carburetors.  That's
>right, carburetors, the gas/air mixture devices that make internal
>combustion engines work.  
>
   Not that any modern car still USES one of these...but one
   wouldn't expect someone this out of touch with reality to know
   messy little details like this.

>mileage to well over 130 (that's one hundred thirty) miles per
>gallon. 
   Old hat.  But if you hadn't been reading the National Enquirer
   rather than a remedial physics text, you might be aware of how
   much energy is in a gallon of gasoline...and how much energy it
   takes to move a given mass at a given velocity a given distance
   with a given air and rolling resistance.

>students who had developed a carburetor that guaranteed at least
>100 miles per gallon of regular unleaded gasoline.
>
   More than that, but did you manage to look up from your couch and
   actually LOOK at the cars in use to get this?

>So where are these miraculous systems?
   They ain't miraculous Eric...nor are they mythical or secret.   
>Are they installed in our
>automobiles, reducing our fuel consumption and air pollution output?
>Of course not.  
   No, but that's because people wouldn't BUY cars designed to get
   this type of mileage.  But are you aware that there ARE cars that
   aren't that bad that do get in the 40-50 mpg range and can
   operate at reasonable highway speeds with decent performance?

>You know as well as I do where they are:  In the
>vaults of the world's major oil companies.  
   I'd have to suggest that they are in the glass of whatever you've
   been drinking...
>
>And speaking of gasoline, don't you think it's a little suspicious
>that there have been virtually no advancements in the quality and
>efficiency of this fuel in the past 25 years? 
   I'd say it is more accurate that there has been absolutely no
   advancement in your personal knowledge of the issue in the last
   25 years.   

>I'll wager that more
>research money goes into new formulas of Coca-Cola than new formulas of
>one of the world's most needed liquids.  
   Maybe because consumers might PAY more for a new Coke than a new
   gas?   Or did you also flunk out of Economics 101 along with your
   flight from reality?

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

   Its difficult to decide how to respond to such an inane
   posting...maybe if the date were April 1 it would be
   obvious...its really scarey to think that Eric J. Huppertz might
   be a real person this totally out to lunch mentally.

Xref: sparky rec.autos:20768 rec.autos.tech:11757