273 comments on DrumBeat: October 18, 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
273 comments on DrumBeat: October 18, 2007
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“I'd put my money on solar energy… I hope we don't have to wait til oil and coal run out before we tackle that.”
—Thomas Edison, in conversation with Henry Ford and Harvey Firestone, March 1931
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
GAIA Host Collective
I think the big oil outfits,as well as local anti-oil activists would strangle that baby in its crib,SCT.The mini-car co.might have a market,though,depending on their product.I just spent 4 grand re-building a 1986 toy tercel wagon....completely new power train sans tranny,and am now getting 35-37 miles per.I expect 100k out of the engine.This little beast will do me for the foreseeable future{wife and I have bought 3}It won't work for every one but I suppose this is one way of dealing with the current problems.
Snuffy said:
Who is greener? The guy driving a 2007 Prius or Snuffy driving his 1986 Tercel? You might answer: "Neither! Snuffy should be riding a bicycle." However if Snuffy lives 20 miles from work or needs to cart his children to school and back then riding a bicycle isn't a real option. Fixing and using old cars is actually much more greener than driving around in a Prius provided the old car is fuel injected with electronic ignition. The sweet spot for Snuffy's strategy is to own and maintain a 1996 Saturn SL-1 with a 5 speed transmission or better yet a 1996 Toyota Corolla. Either car if well maintained can get over 30 mpg on the freeway. Due to their age, both cars have depreciated to zero value (the depreciation is what kills the economics of a 2007 Prius and not the fuel cost). Cars made on or after 1996 have OBD-II power train control modules with electronic ignition and fuel injection. These features make the car very fuel efficient, produce low air pollution and reliable even after 10 years of use. The Corolla has the additional advantage of being repairable with used imported Japanese parts. The Japanese have draconian registration laws that sometimes force a Japanese car owner to junk a car with less than 50,000 km on the odometer (the engine is barely broken-in). The engine from that car can be purchased very inexpensively and used to replace a worn-out engine in an American owned Corolla. I have used this strategy successfully with a 1976 Toyota Corolla and a 1988 Toyota Tercel. Also, it is my understanding that complete used Japanese cars can be purchased very inexpensively in New Zealand (they are not street legal in America).
I will humbly suggest there will be a renaissance in carburetor based cars with small displacements. The intellectual property to build and maintain a distributor based vehicle is within easy reach, while electronic fuel injection is not something one can deal with under the shade tree. It is a bit less efficient in terms of fuel utilization but much, much safer as things unwind. The 1949 International Super M in the shed out back is something I can pretty much handle in terms of repairs, the 2006 Nissan Versa parked next to the shed is just so much scrap to me if it needs anything more complex than new wiper blades.
SacredCowTipper said:
To some extent, you're preaching to the converted. My wife drives a fuel efficient 1996 Saturn SL-1 while my daily driver is a 1964 Rambler American. My Rambler has a 6-cylinder flathead engine, a one barrel carburetor and conventional vacuum advance distributor ignition system. My Rambler is trivial to maintain (it comes from an era when many Americans repaired their own cars). Repair tasks for the Rambler that can be done in 5 minutes might require an hour for the Saturn, e.g. changing the oil filter. Unfortunately for me, the Rambler has only half the fuel economy of the Saturn. This is due to the Saturn's sophisticated fuel injection and overhead cam versus the Rambler's primitive flathead engine and carburetor.
The issue of modern cars versus very old cars might actually be defined by external events. There isn't a single transistor in my Rambler but my wife's car is dependent upon a sophisticated Power Train Control module based upon the Motorolla HC6811 microprocessor. If the Iranians/Chinese/Russians/somebody decide to popoff a large nuke in space over North America, the electomagnetic pulse (EMP) would take out most integrated circuit based electronics in the US (our current economy would be turned off like a switch). Modern cars would cease to function but my old Rambler would still be rolling along. At that point (assuming I'm still alive), I'd have to build a still and convert biowaste into alcohol. The Rambler could burn pure alcohol or methane if I retuned the ignition and/or modified the fuel system.
Does your old Rambler have a DC generator? All newer alternators have diodes in them and I suspect that a strong
EMP (50,000 v/cm?) would kill the diodes. Any thoughts?
E. Swanson
Yes, I think you're right: The EMP will incinerate all nonlinear circuitry.
Big power diodes are pretty tough, they may survive, depending.
EMP produces stuff from DC to about 2.0 GHz and it does obey the inverse square law - double the distance, cut the power by 75%.
I have some knowledge of how radio works but I am no expert in the field, so I welcome correction, but I suspect the following is true: The higher the bomb, the more area it covers, but the greater the distance and attenuation due to distance as well as atmosphere. The longer waves will follow the ground and generate voltages only with things the right size to resonate while the shorter ones are lines of sight. The key to zapping electronics is having something somewhere in the vehicle that is resonant with the energy received.
EMP is not even a little bit funny, but I think the idea that one, high up, gets every bit of the country is not so believable. And no one triggers a nuke in space over the U.S. without getting a little one wrapped up in cobalt set off at a much lower altitude over their own capitol city.
This is really a back of the envelope remark, but still: an EMP will have an easier time frying things that are on the grid, since the grid has all these delicious copper loops, and anything that isn't shielded, which car engines generally are.
So it won't be 100% on things like cars.
True.
I believe 4 would be necessary.
http://webpal.org/
Hi SCT,
This is a good summary article. The NA grids could be shut down with a single high-altitude nuke, and it might take months or years to restart it:
http://www.todaysengineer.org/2007/Sep/HEMP.asp
There was an article in IEEE Spectrum a few years ago on the same subject but I can't find it. I believe it estimated the damage to silicon devices in North America at something around 45 trillion dollars from one HEMP.
re: cars, I'm more pessimistic than before, it appears any cable with less than 100% foil coverage or any bad grounds are, er, "grounds" for failure.
NR
I guess car survival doesn't matter much if gas stations are all dead :-) I read here every day and I'm still auto-centric :-(
Black_dog asked: "Does your old Rambler have a DC generator?"
Yes, it's an old fashioned DC generator without diodes. The voltage regulators are mechanical relay type. The whole setup is electrically very inefficient. However it's based upon heavy gauge copper wire so there's no way an EMP could knock it out.
I'm a member of an old car club and sometimes the other guys suggest that I replace the voltage regulator with a solid state device. However I LIKE driving a car that's uses neolithic technology. I prefer to keep it simple and easy to maintain.
Older VW Beetles should also be immune to EMP.
They have mechanical regulators and DC generators and AFAIK no electronics to speak of.
I have three of them in various stages of viability but all are capable with a little wrenching of running..just that I have let them sit idle for a long time.
I used to get mpg in the high 30..sometimes around 38 mpg if I recall correctly.
A very tough little car but you needed to keep the solid lifters set correctly.
Very easy to pull the engines.
airdale
Airdale said:
"A very tough little car but you needed to keep the solid lifters set correctly."
My other old car is a 1968 Karman Ghia. My Ghia started to run bad, so I did a compression test. The #3 cylinder has zero compression. The exhaust valve on the #3 had been tight and I adjusted it, thinking I had caught it in time. I thought wrong (the valve is burnt) and now have to replace the head.
I think I'll replace the head with the engine remaining in the car. Is that a dumb thing to do?
Yeah EP , you waited too long..however a new rebuilt head?
Not a biggie , or didn't use to be.
Ahhhh,,replace without pulling the engine? Yes I think that can be done. Don't see why not..In fact I think I have pulled them before that way.
1968? Mine are all early 70's with the dual port headers.
Keeping the right 'lash' on the lifters is important. If they start sinking in the head then you got problems. Heat is your big enemy so make sure you never blow a belt..I did once and it toasted my engine on the next big hill.
Be sure to use some oil on the cam and other bearing surfaces as you reinstall. While the head is off you can check wear on your cyclinders by checking the cyl ridge for an approximate idea.
BTW setting the valve clearance is tricky if the stems are snarly on the tips.
airdale
Airdale,
Thanks for the comments. This is my fouth Karmann Ghia. I've probably adjusted the valves on my Ghias over a hundred times. I bought this latest engine with the burnt valve from GEX and found out afterwards that GEX makes the worst VW engines in the world. GEX has an "F" rating with the Better Business Bureau and a long list of unhappy customers. GEX has these nice full page glossy ads in the VW magazines and supposably guarantees their engines. Unfortunately the guarantee is worthless and never honored. Supposably getting ripped off by GEX is the mark of being a clueless newbie (GEX is notorious within the air cooled VW community). I've owned Ghias for over 30 years so I can't claim being a newbie (my only excuse is simple stupidity).
The valve tightened and burned with incredible speed. The engine has probably less than 30,000 miles on it. Normally I check my valves every 2000 miles but was complacent and let 3-5 thousand miles go by without checking (it was a new engine). So I'll pay for my stupidity by spending the weekend replacing the head (it's a one port). Fortunately one port heads are cheap.