estimate for the telecommuting infrastructure?
building all buildings to the extent possible to take advantage of passive solar and geothermal cooling.
As for transportation, if individual cars will remain as a part of the culture for the foreseeable future, then change the mindset towards fuel efficiency and away from "power" (I can't begin to add up all the times I've heard someone say "That vehicle with that small of an engine will be "underpowered"!.....).
Travis Johnson wrote:Observe drivers on the road and you will witness one thing; the vast majority of cars have one driver.
I don't know about where you live, but where I live we have posted speed limits... but they don't really seem to be limits at all. Everybody speeds; that's the norm. There is some weird thought pattern that says something about the speedometer not being guaranteed accurate, so a person is allowed to go 10% greater speed then he would otherwise, thus a posted speed limit of 100km/hour actually allows a person to go 110, or in a 70 zone, 77 is allowable. The speeds aren't just allowable, they are the norm. If you are not exceeding 100 in a 100 limit zone you are going to slow! To exacerbate this situation, the highway that I am on the most for my job is full of people from Alberta (as it's the fastest route between Edmonton Alberta and Vancouver, B.C.), who actually have some speed limits of 110 and 120, so they are used to driving faster and expect to do so regardless of 100 zones. I don't know how many times I have been in close accident situations because someone feels the need to exceed the speed limit as a matter of course. I am curious what the quantity of fuel that is burned extra, just because so many people routinely speed. So my idea: Slow down; it's not only safer by several orders of magnitude, but it is actually quite legal within reason, and will save a massive amount of fuel over time.
if individual cars will remain as a part of the culture for the foreseeable future, then change the mindset towards fuel efficiency and away from "power" (I can't begin to add up all the times I've heard someone say "That vehicle with that small of an engine will be "underpowered"!.....).
Roberto pokachinni wrote: I am curious what the quantity of fuel that is burned extra, just because so many people routinely speed.
From what I understand, engines are designed to perform at certain optimum RPM's in certain gears, and will burn considerably more fuel if those optimum RPMs are demanded in excess of it in a given gear. While newer engines seem to be able to either handle higher RPMs or are geared higher so that they maintain lower RPMs while delivering more power, they do not seem to do so with any great deal of actual fuel efficiency when compared to fuel efficient models not 'designed' for power and speed. While sustaining a given RPM level will save more fuel than continuously going between a slower speed and a faster one, as Kyrt described, if a person sustains the optimum RPMs throughout his/her driving, accelerating slowly and then maintaining the speed evenly, then they achieve better mileage; that part of this quote I can certainly understand and agree with. When people speed, and come up on someone who is not going quite as fast (but is going the speed limit), they expect to pass, and when they do, their engine is often pushed in excess of the optimum RPM's (especially on winding mountain roads with short passing zones where I live); one can hear the engine roaring, and that is burning fuel. The only reason that that fuel is being burned is that that person has some supposed need to drive with excess speed.
Not necessarily any. The basic formula for fuel consumption relates to mass and distance. The inbetween is a number of fuel efficiency factors, some of which sometimes results in superior mileage at higher speeds [assuming, of course, that these are sustained higher speeds and not repeated breaking followed by accelerations]
I completely agree. The bigger issues go well beyond combustion of various petroleum types. The overwhelming majority of the global stock markets are driven by petroleum based stocks, but those also include such things as chemicals, and pharmaceuticals which are mostly unnecessarily made from petro-chemicals. It also includes plastics, and synthetic poly based fabrics, which could easily be replaced by natural renewable resources. I could go on.
Is 'petroleum use' ony about cars? I don't think so. Many other machines use a fuel based on petroleum. And many other products are based on it (on oil from the earth or petroleum).
The first thought people have is to buy an electric car and powering it, mostly, with solar panels. Of course, there might be a thousand gallons put into building that car, or transporting thousands of little fiddly parts to the car manufacturing site.
To that effect, large scale protest on many levels aimed at stopping further globalized industrial petroleum development allows us as citizens to take make the larger front personal on a different level. Those two things (Paul's included), plus focusing on local appropriate energy projects will create a very different economy.
So many people have gone to protest oil use. There is a lot more to it, of course. And it is good that somebody protests. It is good to see a large crowd there.
As I said our pulp wood market at paper mills is gone, but instead of using wood to make paper for news print, we could heat barns.