Upon viewing a very disturbing report on NOVA (public TV) on how the planet's ice is melting at an increasingly alarming rate, I became afflicted with one of my periodic guilt trips about how much CO2 my E30 is putting into the atmosphere relative to current models. Then I wondered, well, how much more CO2, particulates, and NOx do our cars actually produce? If someone knows this information, do tell, or perhaps point me in the direction where I can suss it out myself. I know I don't have to pass emissions tests in Massachusetts because of the age of the car. I have to admit I have thought more than once about selling my black beauty and buying the new Honda CR-Z hybrid sports car when it comes out for MY2011 because of a concern about my potentially excess contribution to global warming. Help!
I just had my car "Smogged" a couple of weeks ago as part of the California Registration renewal process (have to get checked every two years here). Here are current maximum allowed emissions for my 1987 325ic in California (presumably the strictest State): At 15 mph/1892 rpm HC: 114 ppm CO: 0.73% NO: 785 ppm At 25 mph/2943 rpm HC: 88 ppm CO: 0.61% NO: 724 ppm They also measure and report %CO2 and %O2, but there don't seem to be any thresholds. Regarding how much CO2 you're kickin' out to the atmosphere, see that long and protracted Letters discussion in Roundel last year. It is related to fuel efficiency since each pound of gasoline burns to produce a fixed number of pounds of CO2.
Honestly, it doesn't really matter how much our cars put out. Even if everyone in the world switched to an efficient and "eco-friendly" car, there would still be a significant amount of emissions. Sure, "less than before" but only a marginal amount. So as a result, I am not, and will never be concerned with my emissions, because I know for a fact that there is nothing we can do to get everyone on the planet to be eco friendly. Whatever happens, happens, and there's nothing I can do to change that.
So Botond, are you saying that the effort to develop more efficient engines is pointless in terms of helping to improve global warming? That's not what I've been reading for quite a while now.
What I'm saying is that not everyone will switch to these vehicles for a very long time, so until EVERYONE can have say a hydrogen engine that produces a million hp with zero emissions, it's not really going to matter. Take cars like the Honda FCX Clarity for example. Can't have one; they're very rare and those who actually get to drive it can only lease it, nothing more. By the time everyone is driving a hydrogen or alternative fuel car, we'll probably be dead (or perhaps you will... and I'll be very old). Don't get me wrong, I sure hope hydrogen cars come out very very soon, but even when they become attainable they still won't be used by enough people in the world to make a significant difference. So, I will leave it at that, because this is obviously a heated subject for me and I really don't wish to discuss this. I can provide you with my emissions test results if you wish but that is as far as I'm willing to delve into this subject.
My test Here is my test in North Georgia: 15 MPH HC ppm: Allowed 157 My Car: 12 CO%: Allowed 1.00 My Car: 0.16 NO%: Allowed 1121 My Car: 684 25 MPH HC ppm: Allowed 162 My Car: 8 CO%: Allowed 0.91 My Car: 0.14 NO%: Allowed 1227 My Car: 767 I don't know exactly what all those numbers mean, but the 22 year old car isn't near the limits, so I'm happy.
Are we part of the problem? Maybe. Can we really do anything about it other than to extinct ourselves? Probably not. Does increasing the efficiency of automobiles or moving to alternative energy sources improve the planet? Most deifinitely, but maybe not for the most obvious reasons. Is the Prius or other battery hybrids the answer? No. Definitely not. Improve efficiency where possible, reduce use where possible, and innovate whenever possible and you will be doing all that you can.
If you sell the car, send it this way. Since I have many vehicles and drive very little, the CO2 output per year will remain very low.
I'll assume that was directed at me since I was post #8. The point of my post was that mother nature produces FAR MORE "greenhouse gases" than man over the period of one year. More and more scientists on a monthly basis disagree with the Man Made Global Warming myth. But since I put this thread into the toilet, I'll revive it. How do you know what you're emissions are? Go get your car tested. It's that simple.
I agree with Paul. The biggest problem this planet has is WAY TOO many people!!!!!! Plain and Simple. But back to the original post. Think of it this way. When considering this question/decision you can't just think of the emissions the two cars make. The new car might emit less emissions when driving, BUT your new car needs to be made. So you have to think of all the emissions producing and shipping that new car around the world (in the case of a Prius) will cause. You E30 was manufactured about 20years ago. So by "reusing" your old e30 you are doing more than just recycling or reducing. Think of it this way, by using your old e30 it is one less car manufactured! Also if you want to think of it on a financial basis, think of this. I assume the E30 is paid for. So to buy a Prius will cost about $24K. What is the difference in mpg? For arguments sake, lets say the E30 gets 25 mpg and the Prius 45 mpg, give the Toyota an edge here. Lets say you will have to pay $8k in maintenance towards the E30 over this theoretical period of time. So the price difference is $16K, 20mpg difference, and gas at $3.00 a gallon (we all know it is going back up). So assuming you drive 15,000 miles a year there is a fuel cost difference of $800, $1,800 for the E30 and $1,000 for the toyota in a given year. You will have to drive the Toyota for for 20 years to recoup the cost of purchasing it! This doesn't even figure in any maintenance for the toyota either, including big expense items like batteries should they go and in that time period. This is hard to explain, so I hope I am making sense here. Just my 02 cents. Keep the E30! Do you really want to be just another boring Prius driver? Anyone can drive a new car, but it takes someone special to drive an old one!
Excellent point grant. You could also swap in a 24v motor for better MPG less emissions. Many 24v E30 guys report 30+ on the highway.
Ah geez, what's the big deal - the fate of humankind is tied to the planet (which is doomed almost regardless of what we try to do), unless we figure out a way to move _off_ earth and beyond our solar system and galaxy (and that ain't no guarantee either). Eventually, our galaxy is going to collide with the adjacent one - the gravitational havoc will be devastating. Before that happens, the sun will burn out and go nova, and that will cause a little problem for the integrity of our solar system. Before that happens, the core of the earth will expend all it's available energy, cool, earth will lose it's protective gravitational field (and gravity) and atmosphere, making things inhabitable for life as we know it. Before that, it's probable that we might well suffer an asteroid hit that could destroy 90% or more of life on the planet, and before that, we might well experience some other catastrophic climate event like an ice age or warming beyond what _we_ might survive, that the planet itself survives just fine. But! I wouldn't argue that implies there's anything particularly wrong with trying to do anything in the meantime until it's no longer possible to do so.
Thanks for thinking of a bigger picture Grant (post #13). These points really do make sense to me. One big mistake though: I'm kind of insulted that you'd think that I'd ever buy a thing like the Prius. Have you ever driven one? Uggh. I was actually uneasy hitting 75mph in the thing--it didn't feel safe with those skinny tires and all. The car's definitely not built for speed. (I was talking about the 2011 Honda CR-Z, presumably a very different kettle of fish.) Also, folks' emissions test results are comforting. But I wonder why the states don't test for CO2? Not that I will do it, but how would that level get tested for?
Because the amount of CO2 output per mile is very simply related to the fuel economy. The CO is important because if it is too high, the car is running too rich, which is bad for the environment (more so than simple CO2 output.) The HC is completely unburned hydrocarbons, which shows along with CO how wasteful. High NOx can be caused by a bad cat and also running too lean, which can also be bad for the environment. The brits tax on CO2, but that is just the same as taxing fuel economy only labeled for output, not input.
Well my fuel economy sucks (~18) because of the 4.10 and the way I drive so I must be dumping tons of CO2 into the air every time I open the throttle. Damn! Paul, you had to go and make me feel bad all over again after Grant had rationalized away my guilt for me. I'll just have to keep my RPMs below 4K from now on I guess.
