Smart Cars

[rwarn17588]

Smart Cars look kind of dumb to me.  I think I actually feel safer on my Harley, at least if I get hit, I'm not trapped in a rolling coffin.

You're actually safer in that so-called "rolling coffin" than being used as a human projectile during a motorcycle crash.

Please tell me you wear a helmet.

[Cats Cats Cats]

100% more rolling and 100% less coffin.

[TheArtist]

I think they are cute and thats what matters lol. I think my next car will be a scooter of some sort though. Something to zip around mid-town and downtown in.

I reeeeally like this deco/retro looking one. Just need to find out what it is and where I can get one. 

[Conan71]

You're actually safer in that so-called "rolling coffin" than being used as a human projectile during a motorcycle crash.

Please tell me you wear a helmet.

Motorcyclists generally are not an overly rational lot.  I usually wear my helmet.  I do have a lapse every now and then.

[Ed W]

I think they are cute and thats what matters lol. I think my next car will be a scooter of some sort though. Something to zip around mid-town and downtown in.

I reeeeally like this deco/retro looking one. Just need to find out what it is and where I can get one. 

That looks like a classic Vespa or Lambretta.  They're still in production, but they are the Cadillac of motor scooters and fetch high prices.

http://www.vespaok.com/new_vehicle_list.asp?sid=&Manufacturer=363&Category=12&CatDesc=Scooters

[Gaspar]

Yes that is a classic Vespa (1967 I believe).  You will spend alot for it.  There are several copies available that you can purchase very reasonably.  They feature robust reliable engines.  I don't think you would want this one. 


It looks nice but features a 2 stroke engine that burns oil and gasoline mix, and belches a lot of smoke.



I would consult the folks over at the scooter store.  They're a nice couple and have some great bikes that look just like the old ones but feature modern reliability.

If you have green concerns, Scooters are not very green. 

Keep in mind that a scooter engine, even a modern one, has no emissions controls, so even though you are burning far less fuel, you are expelling many times more pollution.  They are on about the same plane as a 4 cycle lawn mower engine.  They legally emit "5.7 times more CO than cars, nearly 24 times more unburned hydrocarbons, and infinitely more NOx [Nitrogen oxides]. 

[rwarn17588]

If you have green concerns, Scooters are not very green. 

Keep in mind that a scooter engine, even a modern one, has no emissions controls, so even though you are burning far less fuel, you are expelling many times more pollution.  They are on about the same plane as a 4 cycle lawn mower engine.  They legally emit "5.7 times more CO than cars, nearly 24 times more unburned hydrocarbons, and infinitely more NOx [Nitrogen oxides]. 

The Straight Dope science column dealt with this issue a few days ago in its typically comprehensive fashion. Direct quotes:

"So what's the takeaway here? Scooters emit more pollution, but they help the planet overall by adding less to greenhouse gas buildup. Or, to put the matter in more downbeat terms, your choice is between choking in the city or dying from mass climate change.

"But let's not be defeatist. Any way you slice it, scooters are less resource-intensive than cars. Less stuff goes into making them. They take less energy to operate. They're smaller and lighter than cars, so you can crowd a lot more of them onto the streets or into parking lots. They tear up the roads less. OK, maybe in a northern climate scooters aren't so practical for year-round use, and they can't haul much cargo, so they're not going to replace cars altogether. But with resources becoming scarcer, we're heading for a more densely urbanized future, and little vehicles make more sense than big ones. Once the infrastructure's in place, a scooter would make the perfect plug-in electric, which solves the pollution problem."

More here:

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2852/whats-better-for-the-environment-a-scooter-or-a-car

[TheArtist]

Well that sucks. Surely there are some that have a modicum of emissions controls on them... Especially in this day and age. Just seems odd that they dont. May take a look at the electric ones and see how those run. Though with a cursory glance,,, the 4 stroke engines are supposed to be "low emissions" and they are saying that they do put a lot less CO2 into the air. A couple full tanks in the average suv will put more pounds of CO2 into the atmosphere than many a scooter weighs lol. They may not be as clean per gallon as a car, but they burn a lot less gallons. Over all, its as one person put it... a low-emissions scooter will make as much difference as a party cracker in a nuclear war.

[Ed W]

You know, there's always the "meat powered motorcycle":



Given a choice between buying gasoline or buying, say, a fresh garden salad with a vinaigrette dressing, five cheese lasagna, home made bread still warm from the oven, and a nice pilsner to accompany it all, which is more fun?

Although here at the unstately Wagner ranchero, it's probably going to be home made chili and bread today (after I walk to the grocery for bread flour) with a Sam Adams Honey Porter as accompaniment. 

[Red Arrow]

Once the infrastructure’s in place, a scooter would make the perfect plug-in electric, which solves the pollution problem."

As long as our electricity mostly comes from fossil fuels, it doesn't solve the pollution problem. It merely transfers it to another location.  Due to the low energy use in general, it does help.

[nathanm]

As long as our electricity mostly comes from fossil fuels, it doesn't solve the pollution problem. It merely transfers it to another location.  Due to the low energy use in general, it does help.

It does in the sense that big power stations can be more easily retrofitted to produce cleaner energy than millions of cars, but here in Oklahoma, since most of our electricity is generated with coal and natural gas, it's not much better at this point.

[Red Arrow]

It does in the sense that big power stations can be more easily retrofitted to produce cleaner energy than millions of cars, but here in Oklahoma, since most of our electricity is generated with coal and natural gas, it's not much better at this point.

Agreed, large electric plants are more efficient. They produce less polution because they are more efficient and because the emissions can be better controlled. There are transmission losses but the overall efficiency is probably still better.

I just wanted to call attention to the fact that electric power does not generally solve the polution problem. Electricity does not come out of nowhere for free.  Pretty much anything will leave a footprint of some kind.  Hydro covers land with water.  Wind power can be unsightly and noisy as well as a hazard to birds.  The windmills need to be where the wind is. A costly power grid will need to be expanded.  Solar absorbs energy that would otherwise hit the ground.  Does that make the ground cooler?  Of course fossil fuels have their own problems.  The point is that nothing is really free, some just cost less than others.

The good thing about electric/hybrid cars for the city is that there is no fossil fuel motor running at stop lights.

[Conan71]

You know, there's always the "meat powered motorcycle":



Given a choice between buying gasoline or buying, say, a fresh garden salad with a vinaigrette dressing, five cheese lasagna, home made bread still warm from the oven, and a nice pilsner to accompany it all, which is more fun?

Although here at the unstately Wagner ranchero, it's probably going to be home made chili and bread today (after I walk to the grocery for bread flour) with a Sam Adams Honey Porter as accompaniment. 

Meat powered!!!  You got a karma for that one...

[nathanm]

The good thing about electric/hybrid cars for the city is that there is no fossil fuel motor running at stop lights.

They are at a great advantage in stop and go driving, but for highway use (say a person commuting from BA or Bixby to downtown), the only real savings comes from the smaller engine in a hybrid.

It seems like some big solar thermal plants could be very workable in the western part of Oklahoma. We're probably too wedded to the fossil fuel industry despite their largely abandoning us for Houston to do it, though. The nice thing is that it's pretty dry most of the year and it's much closer than the deserts of NM and Arizona to southeastern population centers. And adding more solar into the mix would do nicely for greening electric vehicles.

We also need to build at least a couple of nuclear power plants for base load generation, although a sufficiently large solar thermal plant can keep generating electricity for several hours after sunset using the residual heat in the working fluid, helping us through the peak evening demand.

Of course, all of this is predicated on major grid upgrades in this country. We need more HVDC transmission lines. They're much more efficient both in power loss and the required conductor size for a given amperage. Right now we waste somewhere around 40% of the electricity generated. If it takes the big stick of government to get the electric companies to spend the money to save the money, so be it.

On that note, distributed wind generation would be nice. Small scale turbines that only offset part of a building's electricity use would still be a big gain environmentally and economically in that it would reduce load on the transmission infrastructure.

[Red Arrow]

Of course, all of this is predicated on major grid upgrades in this country. We need more HVDC transmission lines. They're much more efficient both in power loss and the required conductor size for a given amperage. Right now we waste somewhere around 40% of the electricity generated. If it takes the big stick of government to get the electric companies to spend the money to save the money, so be it.

We're starting to get a bit off topic here but.. AC vs DC.  The great Westinghouse vs Edison debate.  I'd have to go back to my books on transmission losses to say anything quantitative beyond saying that low voltage losses are more significant than most people realize.  That's why we have the high voltage transmission lines. AC is easy to step up and down using transformers.  DC is not quite so easy.