2 ms·

There's some truth to this - the race in the auto industry, as I understand it, has been to increase power and efficiency while decreasing emissions. Unfortuna

There's some truth to this - the race in the auto industry, as I understand it, has been to increase power and efficiency while decreasing emissions. Unfortunately, you start running headfirst into the laws of physics. Power, fuel economy, low emissions. Pick any two.

2sk21 11y ago
Currently, there is way too much emphasis on power. Who really needs 200 hp for a family car?
- VLM 11y ago
  Apparently the consumers do. Its a popular signalling thing to say, but not relevant to car purchasers decision making process. That's one problem to be worked on. Perhaps the overall net environmental situation would be in total better if X% of the testing budget were reassigned to propaganda to convince people that 100 hp cars are superior to 200 hp cars. Another option is in my grandpa's day MASSIVE cheating happened with horsepower specs; it was like how air compressors and vacuum cleaners are marketed today. Cutting back on regulation in that area would likely result in cheaper 100 HP engines being sold as 200 HP engines (at the price of 200 HP engines of course) yet the environmental impact would obviously be only 100 HP. A final option is nobody wants to acknowledge the management failure that naturally results from evaluating to a simple numerical metric for too long. All you eventually get is awesome numbers and everything else produced turns to garbage. One solution would be to dramatically change the metric faster than corruption can spread. In a distributed world, how about we wire up 1 in 1000 vehicles and track the unholy heck out of them and multiple the results by 1000 and grade on that criteria? Obviously in the long run we'll just corrupt the selection and manufacture process for those 1 in 1000 cars. But for awhile it'll work better. Once that system is powned, maybe switch the metrics back?
- Karunamon 11y ago
  It's not even HP, it's things like 0-60 time. Take something like the "Smart cars", tiny one or two seaters that are designed for efficiency above all else. Two problems: * They're too light and too tiny. Get into a wreck with any other car on the road, and you will fare poorly. * Performance is anemic, to the point where they can barely do 80PMH, which is standard cruising speed on the interstate, or do things like accelerate to pass.
skuhn 11y ago
There's also the ever-increasing safety requirements, which have resulted in (among other things) substantially heavier cars over the last few decades. Heavier cars require more power, which creates a bit of a catch-22 when it comes to reducing emissions and improving efficiency. These safety requirements aren't even necessarily a straight up win for overall safety: the increased height of car beltlines reduces visibility and the increased vehicle weight (and resulting impact force) can worsen accidents involving non-vehicular objects. An unregulated car industry is certainly not the solution (as proven by these diesel tests among many other examples), but overly strict regulation may only serve to improve regulatory avoidance by manufacturers. Sane, obtainable goals must be set, and both sides need to be involved in keeping things honest. It's absurd that these regulations were set without ensuring that they could reasonably be met and that they were actually being met. It reflects poorly not only on VW and the others, but also on the EPA and their counterparts.

2sk21 11y ago

Currently, there is way too much emphasis on power. Who really needs 200 hp for a family car?

VLM 11y ago
Apparently the consumers do. Its a popular signalling thing to say, but not relevant to car purchasers decision making process. That's one problem to be worked on. Perhaps the overall net environmental situation would be in total better if X% of the testing budget were reassigned to propaganda to convince people that 100 hp cars are superior to 200 hp cars. Another option is in my grandpa's day MASSIVE cheating happened with horsepower specs; it was like how air compressors and vacuum cleaners are marketed today. Cutting back on regulation in that area would likely result in cheaper 100 HP engines being sold as 200 HP engines (at the price of 200 HP engines of course) yet the environmental impact would obviously be only 100 HP. A final option is nobody wants to acknowledge the management failure that naturally results from evaluating to a simple numerical metric for too long. All you eventually get is awesome numbers and everything else produced turns to garbage. One solution would be to dramatically change the metric faster than corruption can spread. In a distributed world, how about we wire up 1 in 1000 vehicles and track the unholy heck out of them and multiple the results by 1000 and grade on that criteria? Obviously in the long run we'll just corrupt the selection and manufacture process for those 1 in 1000 cars. But for awhile it'll work better. Once that system is powned, maybe switch the metrics back?
Karunamon 11y ago
It's not even HP, it's things like 0-60 time. Take something like the "Smart cars", tiny one or two seaters that are designed for efficiency above all else. Two problems: * They're too light and too tiny. Get into a wreck with any other car on the road, and you will fare poorly. * Performance is anemic, to the point where they can barely do 80PMH, which is standard cruising speed on the interstate, or do things like accelerate to pass.

skuhn 11y ago

There's also the ever-increasing safety requirements, which have resulted in (among other things) substantially heavier cars over the last few decades. Heavier cars require more power, which creates a bit of a catch-22 when it comes to reducing emissions and improving efficiency. These safety requirements aren't even necessarily a straight up win for overall safety: the increased height of car beltlines reduces visibility and the increased vehicle weight (and resulting impact force) can worsen accidents involving non-vehicular objects. An unregulated car industry is certainly not the solution (as proven by these diesel tests among many other examples), but overly strict regulation may only serve to improve regulatory avoidance by manufacturers. Sane, obtainable goals must be set, and both sides need to be involved in keeping things honest. It's absurd that these regulations were set without ensuring that they could reasonably be met and that they were actually being met. It reflects poorly not only on VW and the others, but also on the EPA and their counterparts.