Do you really think that people think about efficiency when they are racing? This is the last thing on anyone's mind. Cars with solar power have been around for a while but again they aren't a viable solution. They have been building them for a while for racing purposes as engineering projects but if it was efficient enough to be something everyone can use big car companies would be developing it. I don't even know how wind powered cars would work. I don't think that cars that you charge overnight and drive the next day will ever work because they simply don't have the range of a gasoline car. This is where you can really see the big advantage of the hydrogen fuel cell. Just like gasoline its something that you can fill up and drive. Its also does not pollute the atmosphere, its only byproduct is H2O.

 

The crappy AOL dial-up connection here at my mom's farm keeps kicking me off in the middle of replying. This may take a few edits, so please bear with me.

Most racers likely aren't thinking about efficiency, but many good racers probably are. They may want to conserve fuel and/or tires for various reasons.

Yet. Internal-combustion vehicles weren't thought "viable" just over 100yrs ago.

Big Auto and Big Oil would likely do everything possible tobury technology to maximize their profits. Solar and other electric cars are already being raced over distances and environs like the Australian outback.

When the car is parked, a windmill is deployed to charge the batteries. An electric car could also be charged at home, which might be powered by solar or wind...off the grid.

Yet. Gas cars of today have MUCH better range and longevity, at higher speeds, than cars from 50-100years ago. Imagine electric cars with over 200 miles of range, that can be charged in minutes. Imagine electric cars with removable quick-charge battery packs like the ones we currently use in cordless tools. Imagine covering one of these cars with solar panels too.

 

The hydrogen fuel cell has been around for less time that gas powered cars and it is already a much better alternative than a solar/wind/battery powered car. I think this is the technology that should be invested in. There are already a couple major companies that are developing/releasing hydrogen fuel cell cars. I think there are a couple cities in Europe that use hydrogen powered busses. The only racers that care about efficiency are professional racers who don't take thier cars and drive them on the street. The type of engine you have shouldn't affect the tires.

 

Without taking a side, that original article was very poorly written and very misleading. First of all, the author implies that the average of the automaker's lineup mustbe 35mpg - "So, for every Mustang that only gets 20-25 mpg or F-150 that gets 15-20 mpg, there have to be a crap-load of cars on the 40-45mpg range to offset the difference."

That's not true. It's the total amount of cars produced. So if Ford sells 100 economy cars with 40 mpg and 30 Mustangs with 20 mpg, it'll meet the regulations as the average will be above 35 mpg. There will always be room for high-performance models to appeal to different market segments. The high-performance models never sell as well as the regular models because they aren't for everybody - they're for a smaller segment that will pay a premium (in both sticker and insurance) for performance.

Also, the article is filled with fear-mongering - comparing raising MPG standards to "visions of a dark and bleak future after a nuclear war" and "left-wing nuclear bomb aimed at the auto industry" and implying that lives will be sacrificed since "Lives were lost as consumers were forced into smaller cars that did not protect them as well in accidents. All of this in the name of efficiency."

Seriously, this article is a joke. Multiple references to nuclear holocausts when talking about raising MPG standards? Puhleaze. I'm just surprised that the author didn't hit on other hyperbole cliches like Hitler orStalin.

 

My main issue with hydrogen is wondering if it's truly a sustainable fuel for mass usage. The same could be said about the materials for batteries though.

 

The only real problem with hydrogen is that it is very explosive but a Jr High science teacher told me that scientists have developed a sack that cannot be ruptured for this purpose, and that was about 6 years ago. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, the only problem is there is no efficient way to refine it. THe thing about batteries is that they pollute the enviroment. I've heard several times that the batteries that a Prius uses pollutes the enviroment more than a normal car (like a civic/corolla).

 

I just found this article. Interesting.

 

What about companies like Ferrari, Lamborghini, Aston Martin, etc. These companies don't make any cars that have 40MPG, nor will they. Will this new law put them out of buisness in the U.S.?

 

Someone can probably correct me, but I believe they need to sell a certain number of cars to have to meet the CAFE standards. Speciality automakers like Ferrari, Lambo, Aston Martin, etc. would be exempt as they don't produce enough cars.