« December 26, 2006 | Main | December 28, 2006 »

Advertisement

recent entries Breaking: Osama bin Laden to Make 9/11 Video Address to U.S. Major Report on Status of Iraqi Security Forces Presented in Congress Today Looking Past Petraeus Huckabee vs. Paul: Video from Yesterday's Republican Debate With World Not Tense Enough, Israel and Russia Decide to Provoke Their Neighbors Fred Thompson Flubs the Facts on Tonight Show African Pentecostal Christians Destroying Ancient African Culture In Nigeria Congressional Battle Over GAO's Iraq Report Continues Saddest Picture of the Day Alert Since Nothing Else Important Going on in World, Congress Takes on Hip-Hop

December 27, 2006

YMMV: Hypermiling for Fun and Profit

The New York Times automotive section has a fascinating account from its regular contributor Bob Knoll about driving for the Chrysler team in the 1964 Mobil Economy Run. Last run in 1968, this was an annual coast-to-coast driving competition that determined the actual miles per gallon of new car models. All the leading automakers competed, and the race was such a big deal that spectators would line the streets of small towns to watch the cars go by. In Phoenix, Knoll writes, it "seemed like a holiday parade: flags were flying, bands were playing and crowds of people were waving."

Four decades later, when the country is in the midst of debates about "oil security," "blood for oil," and "energy independence," it is hard to believe that cars are not getting better miles per gallon than the mid-20s of that 1964 fuel efficiency competition. And despite the recent changes to the way the EPA calculates mpg, the issue of fuel efficiency is hardly getting Americans out on the streets waving flags.

So that's why we love Wayne Gerdes, the world's most fuel efficient driver, and the subject of this fun story in the January/February 2007 Mother Jones. Wayne gets 59 mpg in a non-hybrid Honda Civic and off-the-chart triple-digit mpgs in hybrids. He's also ballsier than your average turn-off-the-engine-at-a-red-light type: Have you tried drafting an 18-wheeler downhill with the engine turned off? Read it and then send us your best hypermiling tips.

Posted by Alastair Paulin on 12/27/06 at 5:55 PM | | Comments (4) | E-mail | Print | Digg | Del.icio.us | Reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | StumbleUpon | Newsvine | Netscape | Google |

Will Polar Bears Catch a Break?

Earlier this month, the outgoing chair of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, Senator James Inhofe (R-Okla), published "A Skeptic's Guide to Dubunking Global Warming Alarmism," in which he lambasted the media's depiction of imperiled polar bears as nothing more than "unfounded hype." Inhofe, who after reading one newspaper article presumes that polar bears are as happy and healthy as they appear in Coke commercials, will likely be displeased by the Department of the Interior's proposal to list polar bears as a "threatened species" under the Endangered Species Act. Today's announcement comes a year after conservation groups sued the Bush administration for ignoring petitions demanding protection for the bear.

"We are concerned the polar bears' habitat may virtually be melting." Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne said, commenting on the most recent analysis done by the Fish and Wildlife Service. According to the FWS, summer arctic ice cover, which polar bears depend on for reaching their prey, has diminished steadily over the past 30 years. No final decision, however, will be made on whether to list the polar bear for at least a year as the Department of the Interior allows time for further study and public comment. Nonetheless, today's proposal marks the first time that the Bush administration has acknowledged climate change's responsibility for a species' potential extinction.

Even if polar bears catch a break and are granted "threatened status," don't count on huge practical implications given the administration's history of obstructing any government action aimed at addressing climate change. For example, the administration squashed state-led efforts to limit car emissions, arguing that the Clean Air Act does not grant it the authority to regulate greenhouse gases (a decision currently under review by the Supreme Court). If pressed, the administration will likely argue that the Endangered Species Act is similarly deficient as a basis for capping carbon. Yet, at the very least, listing the polar bear would obligate the Fish and Wildlife Service to develop a recovery plan. Whether such a strategy will involve getting serious about reducing the country's carbon emissions is anyone's guess. Don't be surprised if James Inhofe and company instead suggest sending the Coast Guard out every August to float fatigued bears plastic faux-ice rafts.

-by Koshlan Mayer-Blackwell

Posted by Mother Jones on 12/27/06 at 4:49 PM | | Comments (2) | E-mail | Print | Digg | Del.icio.us | Reddit | Yahoo MyWeb | StumbleUpon | Newsvine | Netscape | Google |