Please excuse the long post as I’m getting a lot of comments on this so I hope to break down all the arguments in one section. (Also it’s my birthday and I want to start billing so I’m not in so deep of a hole for this month!)

I’ve been saying this in the other posts, but the proposed regulations apply to medium and heavy duty vehicles only. It’s very clear in the title, which says “Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Fuel Efficiency Standards for Medium- and Heavy-Duty Engines and Vehicles— Phase 2.” Unless you’re tracking a F-450, you’re…

Done dirt cheap?

Traveling 70mph vs 55mph in a car that feels solid at higher speeds, for example

If people feel safer in their cars, they take more risks.

It’s exceedingly difficult to design an aircraft with a competitive roll rate that won’t do this. If there’s any real polar moment to a component that’s off the fore-aft CG axis then fast rolling will end up pulling that component away from the axis, and if there’s nothing balancing that on the other side of the point…

This tops your billion dollar bike path! I guess I’m done with jalopnik if they continue to preach politics at me. I repeat “there’s not enough acid in the universe to make this a reasonable idea. "

Thanks. I guess the muse has been strong this week. Just trying to have fun.

Two in one week? That’s got to be some kind of record! Congratulations, PotbellyJoe!

The Hellcat is many things, but a great track day car is not one of them.

If it’s one thing San Francisco needs, it’s more cyclists getting into the city who mostly have no concept of the red light or the stop sign.

That wouldn’t surprise me.

Which they want to close down without an adequate and approved replacement, putting workers out of jobs and raising energy costs for residents. It’s like these people don’t understand things have to actually be replaced.

This was my first thought too. I just cannot take that article seriously. The amount of energy actually consumed, as has been said over and over above, is so much less than that used to overcome bad roads, light conditions, and everything else.

Don’t worry - there are many other things for him to crash into.

King of the Hill has a great satirical episode about carbon offsets.

To be fair, a lot of drivers are doing their part in energy conservation and possible population reduction by not using their turn signals at all.

I know the energy isn’t free... but is there any way to quantify the resistance that the alternator is putting on the engine to a degree of accuracy necessary to actually measure this?

Also, what about the target audience for this article? Don’t they know that the turn signal they leave on for 10 miles at a time is worth .016 cell phone charges each?