Even less Petroleum used than a PriusscousineauFebruary 2 2006, 17:43:05 UTC
I commute 11 miles one way from Tigard, Oregon to Portland, Oregon in a Dodge Ram 2500 (with a Cummins TurboDiesel). Assuming 18-20 MPG I am using less petroleum than a Prius (or nearly any other vehicle save a bicycle). I buy Bio-Diesel produced locally in Oregon from SeQuential Biofuels (website: http://www.sqbiofuels.com/). The fuel is B95 which is 95% biodiesel and 5% conventional diesel. Costs about 60 cents more a gallon than regular diesel right now, but the price gap has closed from a high of $1.25 when I first started burning the fuel.
Anyway, that works out to what 6/100ths of a gallon of Petroleum for a 22 mile round trip. No HOV lanes available on my commute and I work 05:00 to 14:30 most days so it is irrelevant.
Assuming a used Ram 2500 with a Cummins can be found for $10,000 and still have 100,000 miles of trouble free service left. Marginal Cost per nearly petroleum free mile using the $3.25 SQ quotes today for B95 works out to: Depreciation: ($10,000 / 100,000 miles=) $0.10/mile, Fuel $0.18 (=$3.25/18mpg), maintenance (oil changes $0.015 mile, tires $0.015/mile, insurance $0.03/mile) for a total of $0.34 per mile.
Emissions for Biodiesel are assumed to be substantially lower, but I have yet to find the definitive study. Best summary is at: http://www.biodiesel.org/resources/faqs/
However, the biggest benefit is the dollars stay here in USA.
Re: Even less Petroleum used than a PriustkilFebruary 7 2006, 09:09:33 UTC
Fancy meeting you here...
Agreed with most of your analysis. If I have to continue the long commute, I would love for something like a biodiesel hybrid to be available in passenger car size.
Overall you use about as much fuel on your commute as I do, 1 gal/day. You can claim a more closed loop on your CO2 emissions with the biodiesel. On the flip side, you're still wasting a lot of energy: no regen braking, and you're moving 2x the mass (maybe 1.5x). And you're substantially more dangerous to others in your 2500 than I am in any passenger car (think kenetic energy, center of gravity, braking distance, and frame+chassis vs. unibody construction).
I haven't worked out the entire costs of my Prius yet. I know that my fuel costs are just under 6 c/mi. It uses standard tires, has specified 5k mi oil change interval, and insurance is a bit high because I'm carrying full comprehensive. Off the cuff:
tires: 400$/40000mi or 1 c/mi insurance: 500$/yr * 1yr/20000mi = 2.5 c/mi oil and maint, call it 300$/year, that's 1.5 c/mi.
So my total before depreciation is 0.11 c/mi. Compares favorably to yours at 0.24 c/mi.
Cost of car: 30k$, expect at least 100k mi out of it, that's 0.30c/mi (And mine's loaded, while base is 22k$; also not taking into account inflation, but neither did you, so fair's fair.)
So my total is 0.41 c/mi vs. your 0.34 c/mi. And I get a new car, that is easy to park, safe for me and everyone around me, and cute. :) Using a brand new base Prius for comparison drops it to 0.33 c/mi, which beats yours. Could shave a few more cents off by going with a new Civic Hybrid (which are about 19k$?).
Also, that used truck you're using for comparison got used by someone else for a while before you got it -- which means that lifecycle depreciation isn't fully accounted for. Hondas and Toyotas are the most nearly linear I know of for resale value.
Emissions are indeed murky. My understanding is that usign biodiesel substantially drops or removes the SOx emissions; not so sure about NOx, and COx is unchanged (although, as above, you can claim closed cycle).
Ever sat down and did the math on how well you'd do in a VW TDi?
Actual flow of money, I like the fact that you keep more dollars here in the US, especially at the rate your truck uses fuel. If you're talking about the difference in where the money goes for buying the vehicle in the first place, then I'll freely say that as soon as Detroit can match the Prius on all fronts (build quality, design quality, comfort, toys, and efficiency), I'll seriously consider it. They haven't been anywhere close.
Re: Even less Petroleum used than a PriusscousineauFebruary 7 2006, 20:11:27 UTC
> Fancy meeting you here...
Even old dogs learn new tricks. But, I'm not qualified to touch the cute car idea.
There are designs using diesel/hybrid technology. Principal problem with them at this time is the diesel engine itself has an initial cost premium of at least 50% over a gasser and the same weight increase. Reasons for this include heavier connecting rods and pistons for the necessary 22 to 1 compression, heavier block for the same reason, and higher pressure fuel delivery systems. When you add that weight and cost to the hybrid technology premium there is a bigger gulp on initial purchase. Initial capital cost premium has always been the biggest hurdle to overcome when investing in energy efficient technologies. Given the number of diesel electric trains out there, it is a technology to watch however.
Ford, Dodge, & GM all charge between $3500 and $7000 extra depending upon the incentive of the day for their diesel engined pickups. That is 10 to 20% of purchase price. As we have already seen, depreciation is a significant component of cost per mile.
The reason I personally have a used Ram 2500 diesel is that it was my parent's tow vehicle for the Fifth Wheel trailer they lived in for years. The truck out lasted the trailer and when they were looking to get a Motorhome to travel about in, the Ram was looking for a home. The Cummins engines are good for 3-400,000 miles before needing an overhaul--and that may only be top end if the oil has been changed regularly so there is plenty of life left in the truck. Notice above I picked a market value to depreciate from not my capital cost which may be unrepresentative.
Now, on to the Volkswagen TDIs--I love the technology! A real 45 mpg car. Biggest problem for me is seating. We have four children and they all can fit in the crew cab on the Ram. There are only five seatbelts in any of the Volkswagens with the TDI engines so it is really hard to justify payments on anything that I cannot put the entire family into.
Finally Safety: I can only make decisions for my own personal safety on the road. Having been hit by a tractor trailer rig once--it is really hard to share the road with them in something small like a Neon--we sold ours. All observers, including the cops, ambulances, and firemen who responded to the scene figured we lived through the accident as we were in a 3/4 ton Dodge Pickup. A small car would have been pulled under the trailer and that would have been incredibly ugly. As it was we were about a half hour late to dinner with my mother in law--Green Chile Enchiladas, YUM!
Excerpted from: All Occupant deaths per million registered passenger vehicles 1-3 years old, 1978-2004
For 2004: Cars-76 SUVs-64 & Pickups-106
Occupant's deaths per registered vehicle is what I use to justify that my wife's Expedition is the safest place for her and the kids. SUVs fare the best. Pickups are the worst there. Owning an example of each this is suspicious so lets look at it another way.
Deaths per mile is the real concern as few non-moving vehicles are responsible for deaths. This is much harder to find as it is in two places in a big document. From the NHTSA 2004 Accident report: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSFAnn/TSF2004.pdf
excerpted for 2004 from Tables 7: Passenger Car Occupants Killed per mile traveled, & Table 8 same for Light Trucks.
2004: Fatality Rate per 100 Million Miles Traveled: Light Trucks: 1.15 Passenger Cars: 1.18 Slight edge to Pickups and supported by experience.
So in the end I'll justify the Ram 2500 with the best quote I've ever heard on the subject. We were training with the local crash recovery team--the guys with the sawzalls, jaws of life, backboards and other vehicle extraction equipment. The question asked was what they drive after considering all their experience removing people from bent and banged vehicles: "F-250s as we follow the lug nut rule--he who has the most lug nuts in an accident fares the best." Thus from the people who look at more accidents than the rest of us, 3/4 ton pickups get the nod.
Re: Import v. Domestic reliabilityscousineauFebruary 7 2006, 20:15:36 UTC
I have owned a wide variety of cars in my life and worked on many more.
On Build Quality, Reliability, and Safety: My Wife's 2003 FORD Expedition has been trouble free for 50,000 miles. It has needed 2 tires, 1 set of brakes, and oil changes in almost four years. Been to the shop once when a fuse blew. Not bad in our book, and it holds four kids worth of toys (and the kids to make noise with them)--something a Prius cannot.
If Ford would make a six passenger Escape Hybrid I'd consider getting one! But, I am biased Ford Stockholder.
Anyway, that works out to what 6/100ths of a gallon of Petroleum for a 22 mile round trip. No HOV lanes available on my commute and I work 05:00 to 14:30 most days so it is irrelevant.
Assuming a used Ram 2500 with a Cummins can be found for $10,000 and still have 100,000 miles of trouble free service left. Marginal Cost per nearly petroleum free mile using the $3.25 SQ quotes today for B95 works out to: Depreciation: ($10,000 / 100,000 miles=) $0.10/mile, Fuel $0.18 (=$3.25/18mpg), maintenance (oil changes $0.015 mile, tires $0.015/mile, insurance $0.03/mile) for a total of $0.34 per mile.
Emissions for Biodiesel are assumed to be substantially lower, but I have yet to find the definitive study. Best summary is at: http://www.biodiesel.org/resources/faqs/
However, the biggest benefit is the dollars stay here in USA.
Reply
Agreed with most of your analysis. If I have to continue the long commute, I would love for something like a biodiesel hybrid to be available in passenger car size.
Overall you use about as much fuel on your commute as I do, 1 gal/day. You can claim a more closed loop on your CO2 emissions with the biodiesel. On the flip side, you're still wasting a lot of energy: no regen braking, and you're moving 2x the mass (maybe 1.5x). And you're substantially more dangerous to others in your 2500 than I am in any passenger car (think kenetic energy, center of gravity, braking distance, and frame+chassis vs. unibody construction).
I haven't worked out the entire costs of my Prius yet. I know that my fuel costs are just under 6 c/mi. It uses standard tires, has specified 5k mi oil change interval, and insurance is a bit high because I'm carrying full comprehensive. Off the cuff:
tires: 400$/40000mi or 1 c/mi
insurance: 500$/yr * 1yr/20000mi = 2.5 c/mi
oil and maint, call it 300$/year, that's 1.5 c/mi.
So my total before depreciation is 0.11 c/mi. Compares favorably to yours at 0.24 c/mi.
Cost of car: 30k$, expect at least 100k mi out of it, that's 0.30c/mi (And mine's loaded, while base is 22k$; also not taking into account inflation, but neither did you, so fair's fair.)
So my total is 0.41 c/mi vs. your 0.34 c/mi. And I get a new car, that is easy to park, safe for me and everyone around me, and cute. :) Using a brand new base Prius for comparison drops it to 0.33 c/mi, which beats yours. Could shave a few more cents off by going with a new Civic Hybrid (which are about 19k$?).
Also, that used truck you're using for comparison got used by someone else for a while before you got it -- which means that lifecycle depreciation isn't fully accounted for. Hondas and Toyotas are the most nearly linear I know of for resale value.
Emissions are indeed murky. My understanding is that usign biodiesel substantially drops or removes the SOx emissions; not so sure about NOx, and COx is unchanged (although, as above, you can claim closed cycle).
Ever sat down and did the math on how well you'd do in a VW TDi?
Actual flow of money, I like the fact that you keep more dollars here in the US, especially at the rate your truck uses fuel. If you're talking about the difference in where the money goes for buying the vehicle in the first place, then I'll freely say that as soon as Detroit can match the Prius on all fronts (build quality, design quality, comfort, toys, and efficiency), I'll seriously consider it. They haven't been anywhere close.
Reply
Even old dogs learn new tricks. But, I'm not qualified to touch the cute car idea.
There are designs using diesel/hybrid technology. Principal problem with them at this time is the diesel engine itself has an initial cost premium of at least 50% over a gasser and the same weight increase. Reasons for this include heavier connecting rods and pistons for the necessary 22 to 1 compression, heavier block for the same reason, and higher pressure fuel delivery systems. When you add that weight and cost to the hybrid technology premium there is a bigger gulp on initial purchase. Initial capital cost premium has always been the biggest hurdle to overcome when investing in energy efficient technologies. Given the number of diesel electric trains out there, it is a technology to watch however.
Ford, Dodge, & GM all charge between $3500 and $7000 extra depending upon the incentive of the day for their diesel engined pickups. That is 10 to 20% of purchase price. As we have already seen, depreciation is a significant component of cost per mile.
The reason I personally have a used Ram 2500 diesel is that it was my parent's tow vehicle for the Fifth Wheel trailer they lived in for years. The truck out lasted the trailer and when they were looking to get a Motorhome to travel about in, the Ram was looking for a home. The Cummins engines are good for 3-400,000 miles before needing an overhaul--and that may only be top end if the oil has been changed regularly so there is plenty of life left in the truck. Notice above I picked a market value to depreciate from not my capital cost which may be unrepresentative.
Now, on to the Volkswagen TDIs--I love the technology! A real 45 mpg car. Biggest problem for me is seating. We have four children and they all can fit in the crew cab on the Ram. There are only five seatbelts in any of the Volkswagens with the TDI engines so it is really hard to justify payments on anything that I cannot put the entire family into.
Finally Safety: I can only make decisions for my own personal safety on the road. Having been hit by a tractor trailer rig once--it is really hard to share the road with them in something small like a Neon--we sold ours. All observers, including the cops, ambulances, and firemen who responded to the scene figured we lived through the accident as we were in a 3/4 ton Dodge Pickup. A small car would have been pulled under the trailer and that would have been incredibly ugly. As it was we were about a half hour late to dinner with my mother in law--Green Chile Enchiladas, YUM!
One can say nearly anything with statistics as the current IIHS page shows:
http://www.iihs.org/research/fatality_facts/occupants.html
Excerpted from: All Occupant deaths per million registered passenger vehicles 1-3 years old, 1978-2004
For 2004: Cars-76 SUVs-64 & Pickups-106
Occupant's deaths per registered vehicle is what I use to justify that my wife's Expedition is the safest place for her and the kids. SUVs fare the best. Pickups are the worst there. Owning an example of each this is suspicious so lets look at it another way.
Deaths per mile is the real concern as few non-moving vehicles are responsible for deaths. This is much harder to find as it is in two places in a big document. From the NHTSA 2004 Accident report: http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSFAnn/TSF2004.pdf
excerpted for 2004 from Tables 7: Passenger Car Occupants Killed per mile traveled, & Table 8 same for Light Trucks.
2004: Fatality Rate per 100 Million Miles Traveled:
Light Trucks: 1.15 Passenger Cars: 1.18
Slight edge to Pickups and supported by experience.
So in the end I'll justify the Ram 2500 with the best quote I've ever heard on the subject. We were training with the local crash recovery team--the guys with the sawzalls, jaws of life, backboards and other vehicle extraction equipment. The question asked was what they drive after considering all their experience removing people from bent and banged vehicles: "F-250s as we follow the lug nut rule--he who has the most lug nuts in an accident fares the best." Thus from the people who look at more accidents than the rest of us, 3/4 ton pickups get the nod.
Reply
http://tkil.livejournal.com/44546.html?thread=216578#t216578
Reply
On Build Quality, Reliability, and Safety: My Wife's 2003 FORD Expedition
has been trouble free for 50,000 miles. It has needed 2 tires, 1 set of
brakes, and oil changes in almost four years. Been to the shop once
when a fuse blew. Not bad in our book, and it holds four kids worth of
toys (and the kids to make noise with them)--something a Prius cannot.
If Ford would make a six passenger Escape Hybrid I'd consider getting one!
But, I am biased Ford Stockholder.
Reply
Too bad the level of innovation isn't.
I voted with my wallet, and so did you.
Reply
Leave a comment