
Excellent "mileage" with a three-wheeled, two-passenger, electric, covered trike:
In a perfect example of why Cliff’s Notes don’t substitute for reading the whole book, the method by which Paul McCartney’s new luxury hybrid was delivered to him has ruined any environmental gains that might have been made by driving a hybrid in the first place. Indeed… his brand new Lexus LS 600h hybrid was flown to him by cargo plane. Questions of whether or not a 5.0-liter, V-8, 19 mile per gallon luxury behemoth really exemplifies the spirit of a “hybrid” aside, the judgment involved in shipping cars by airplane is enough to cringe at.
Doing some of my own napkin calculations (below) I came up with a fuel efficiency for the 5,966 mile trip from Tokyo to London of 4 mpg. That’s assuming the cargo plane burned 5 gallons of fuel per mile and there were 19 other cars in the plane. I’m not so sure there were 20 cars on that cargo plane, but we’ll give him the benefit of the doubt. What this means is that the former Beatle’s new Lexus hybrid got 4 mpg for the first 5,966 miles of it’s life without ever starting up or even getting the chance to enjoy it’s V-8 glory on the open road. What a shame.
To be fair, we’ve all been guilty of this kind of inefficient transportation at some level (think bananas from South America), and Paul McCartney is simply an easy target. In fact, most new cars being bought off the lot will have a large “carbon debt” due to the simple act of manufacturing. This debt, even in the case of a Prius, will take tens of thousands of miles of driving to pay off versus something like a fuel efficient used car. In the end, the lack of wisdom here points out that we can deliver all the great new technology we want, yet without the conscious decision to change our habits we won’t make much headway in improving energy efficiency.
*Editorial Note: Nick Chambers is the newest writer on Gas 2.0: welcome Nick
| Over-fishing and demand for their fins as a delicacy have hit shark numbers |
In addition to the 17 million barrels of oil (equivalent to just under the GDP of the Cayman Islands at today’s prices) used in production, bottled water consumes gallons and gallons of water.
Three gallons of the wet stuff is required to produce one gallon of what you will happily pay a dollar for, largely because of the length and complexity of the various “purification” processes and the evaporation loss that takes place while the water is in the plant. This is quite an ugly statistic, when juxtaposed to the fact that less than one percent of the water on our planet is both accessible and potable.
Besides the extravagant amount of oil used to make the bottles and large volumes of water used in the bottling process, there are of course, several other considerations. Firstly, there are the transport costs - by the time you transport every bottle by rail or truck and keep it cool, you may as well have filled it one-fourth of the way with oil. Let’s also not forget the operating costs of the factories themselves and the profit the bottled water companies have to make for their shareholders.Therefore, purely from an economic standpoint, if you only drink bottled water, you’re a mug.
Beyond that, there is also an environmental impact from production. This in fact, is quite simple to calculate: every ton of PET plastic for the bottles produces 3 tons of carbon–adding 2.5 Million tons of carbon dioxide emissions to the 17 million barrels of oil.
Info from the Pacific Institute
Written by Ben · Filed Under Green living