Fuel consumption: US Vs the World

More appropriately this should be called.

A chart on how screwed we would be if oil ran out tomorrow!

More appropriately this should be called.

A chart on how screwed we would be if oil ran out tomorrow!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Tideland Prius @ Jul 13 2007, 10:44 AM) [snapback]478132[/snapback]</div>

Actually I have distant family down there, but we keep in touch. They own a 2004 Honda Civic and have had no problems that i know of.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alric @ Jul 13 2007, 11:40 AM) [snapback]478129[/snapback]</div>

To me it looks beautiful. What is your point?

Perhaps you should also put up a similar graph on GDP?

 

I'm going to comment specifically on this graph, simply because I really dislike future predictions on something like this.

Japan & the EU are fine, the rest look like junk.

China has that good of economy? Does this take into account all those little mopeds/scooters they drive? I'm guessing it may.

Australia & Canada, they have one data point, then one predicted data point? Is this simply assuming they're going to have more fuel efficient cars? Do they have laws to the effect?

California... as much as I'd like to think we're the innovator, the leader, the state that really steps up to the plate. I simply can not believe all those predicted data points will hold true. I've seen too many bills/laws that were simply pushed back and extended "indefinitely" simply because the expectations are unrealistic.. blah blah blah

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MikeSF @ Jul 18 2007, 11:43 PM) [snapback]480876[/snapback]</div>

Each country or geography has different fuel economy testing standard.
The Japanese 10-15 mode test results of 2004-2007 Prius is 35.5 km/liter, 83.5 mpg.

Ken@Japan

 

What I find interesting is that even with that much fuel consumption the U.S. is still behind China (and even India now, I think) in CO2 pollution!?!

That must mean that we have incredibly efficinet and clean burning vehicles here, or that the vehicles in China and India are designed to do nothing nbut spew CO2.

Granted, the total CO2 numbers just released (heard on the radio, am 1150 KTALK in LA, so those of you can know that info is reliable;-) are total numbers, you would think with that much fuel consumption we would never be surpassed. Hummmm, I wonder why we never signed Kyototo, oh yeah because China and India were exempt from any penalties and now they are the largest polluters.

 

Yep the US taxpayers fund both sides of the war on terrorism.

 

Actually the CO2 pollution in China doesn't come from the cars so much as all the industries they have there. As far as I know they don't have emission standards like we do on pollution coming from factories.

You can't compare Japan's FE to the USes, they are simply too different. Japan is a much smaller country so they don't need cars that can go huge distances, hence smaller design. Smaller design = more FE, in general.

Even the EU isn't a good comparison. China is actually the one we are closest to in terms of vehicle needs. The thing is that more Asians only get what they need, not what they want or what they think looks great. If they can get by with a scooter they aren't going to buy a car for the hell of it.

I bet if you looked at just what the cars get for FE, then the numbers would be more similar to the USes than what is on the charts right now.


Also, on the petrol consumption. Does that include all uses of oil, or only what is used to power vehicles? Because I'm sure that we use a ton of oil on other products while those in other countries do not use as much as we do.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Alexstarfire @ Jul 18 2007, 03:42 PM) [snapback]481180[/snapback]</div>

Keep in mind that these other countries are producing consumer good for the U. S. So our consumerism is contributing through them. We've simply relocated our "use" to another country.

Then again, if we were to reduce our consumption of energy and our contributions to global warming to 5% to match our population, to what extent would that effect the economies of other countries?

 

Exactly.

If we reduced it bye making things more efficient, then none, if we just eliminated it by 5%, then it depends on where we eliminate it from.

In actuality the US probably contributes more pollutants to the environment than every other country in the world combined. That's if you take into account all the US owned factories and such in other countries. We have them in other countries because of the cheaper labor and, in most cases, more lax pollution laws. If all the entire world had the same standards on pollution as the US does, excluding the countries that have better standards of course, then the world pollution would probably drop by more than 10%.


Anyways, all this stuff is statistics, so it's biased to begin with. It's hard to know the truth without knowing EVERYTHING.

 

Well this is a real grey area here.

First: I would hardly call them "US owned" factories, but more along the lines as corporations who happen to also have interests in the US.

Second: Those goods made over there contribute to pollution yes, but how much more than if they were made in the US with stricter air quality standards (although... <insert current political admin quips here>). So it becomes a matter of yeah we're pigs who consume everything, but we don't usually have a choice in the matter to where they're made.

Third: If this was the US pollution, why don't we have any say it how to regulate it? Quick answer is it's not our pollution, it's Chinas, and Taiwan's and India's, etc. They're benifiting from our mass consumption as well, so they need to hold the responsibility of the pollution associated with it since it is in their back yards

 

Well when you outsource all your factories to other countries, yes it's US owned. I'm not talking about tiny companies that just happen to export stuff to the US, I'm talking about Sony, Sharp, and all the other major companies. I know that some, if not most, aren't actually based in the US, but even taking the proportionate amount of pollution from what they sell to the US, it would still be a pretty startling amount of pollution.

Yes, they do need standards in place, since it is their country after all. Like I said, it's hard to get the facts without knowing ALL the information.

If we looked at the pollution compared to how much causes it, like how many cars and factories, I guarantee that we couldn't even be close to the top. For carsollution ratio we would be pretty high (if not the top), but for factoryollution we would be near the bottom.

 

It's not just the pollution that these foreign companies are producing for United States consumers...it's also the energy they're using. That makes the energy use of the United States higher than the 25% statistic that's stated. So the U.S. may have 5% of the world's population but our energy use is higher if you count our consumption of goods produced on our behalf in other countries. Our contribution to pollution is higher for the same reason.

But if we cut our pollution production and energy use to 5% to match our population (like we could) how many economies (including ours) would collapse?

 

Alex, you missed my point. My point wasn't about where the companies HQ is setup or where they got started, it's that the United States of America does not own companies that are being outsourced (well except military work to Iraq *snicker*)... "We" are not outsourcing, it's a decision of the companies (which are independent entities) that have the outsourcing occurring.

In the same way if someone from the US goes to say China.. murders someone, China doesn't call it an act of aggression to lead to war with the US. The same way companies are not country owned.

Although I guess one could argue that the US "helped" them outsource by having higher standards for human workers and pollution than the countries they moved to.

 

I agree with Mike. We're not exporting the pollution. China is excepting the pollution as a consequence of their growing economy. They're willing to forgo higher standards to keep their economy growing. That's their decision not ours. Frankly, I'd be willing to pay higher prices for things to be made via more sustainable biz practices. China and India aren't willing to risk their competitive labour cost advantage to clean up their acts. They'll suffer the most from it.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jul 18 2007, 05:56 AM) [snapback]480824[/snapback]</div>

I'm certain that Edward Tufte would have plenty to say about those graphs. The comparison of the US with other countries seems too simplistic to me. Other variables should be factored in, like GDP as was suggested.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(MikeSF @ Jul 20 2007, 10:19 PM) [snapback]482603[/snapback]</div>

Ok, I understand that he US doesn't physically own the companies, but that's not what I meant to begin with. I guess I can't really explain what I want to say, cause any way I put it it doesn't sound correct.

You could say that since the US the primary market for most companies that it is a "US" company. That seems to be the best I can say, though not entirely what I mean.

Doesn't matter regardless. The fact is, if they didn't outsource there would be less pollution.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(dbermanmd @ Jul 18 2007, 05:56 AM) [snapback]480824[/snapback]</div>

You can't possibly think this, can you? It is "beautiful" that we use so much more oil than most other countries combined? You find disease and death by our own had "beautiful?" I unerstand your need to be contrary, but even this went just a wee bit too far.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Devil's Advocate @ Jul 18 2007, 10:49 AM) [snapback]481021[/snapback]</div>

Much (most?) of China's C02 is from burning coal for almost all fo their electricity needs. The ail pollution is so far beyond what we call "bad" that "bad" would be a huge step up from what they've got. And it was this way when just about everybody was driving bicycles and there were very few automobiles.

Though this is true, I still don't see it as a good enough REASON for us to not cap our releases. Because everybody else is polluting, we should as well? I won't jump off a bridge just because everybody else is doing it!