Quantcast

sunringlerider

Turbo Monkey
Oct 30, 2006
4,234
7,794
Corn Fields of Indiana
“Pickup trucks are a rare sight in Europe or China, but in the United States, they have a long history and an important place in the Passenger Cars Market. They were originally developed as modifications to the Ford Model T and the Ford Model TT by third-party manufacturers, but shortly after, companies like Dodge and Chevrolet followed. The production in the U.S. boomed after the introduction of the so-called “chicken tax” in 1963 banning the import of foreign pickups into the domestic market. Nevertheless, the real game changer was the introduction of the Corporate Average Fuel Economy policy in 1973. While many models from other classes of large passenger vehicles suffered from strict regulations concerning fuel economy, pickup trucks were subject to less stern emission standards. This led to pickups becoming a new favorite performance vehicle class for Americans, only to be challenged relatively recently by the rise of SUVs.”

So shitty regulation combined with a culture of toxic masculine ‘rugged’ individualism has led to a pretty stupid situation.
I don’t think that pick ups and suvs really went nuts until the 90s.
I remember growing up in the late 80s-early90s and all of my friends parents that lived in suburbia drove sedans and station wagons. In the last 25 years suburban American is all suv or truck.
To me, who drives a car that get 30+ mpg to sell seed corn and insurance to agribusiness, it makes my head hurt of the folks that feel it is necessary for their ego or something to drive a pick up that will never haul anything other than the divers fat ass and a can of monster.
 

iRider

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2008
5,686
3,143
Maybe I'm missing something but I fail to see how that van is any more efficient than my truck. :rofl:
For starters, you could put your dirt bikes in there and close the rear door. :D

I'm talking about loading the van, not a trailer. If than van was a truck, you could load twice as much with the same front loader.
If you really need to do this regularly, VW has you covered as well.
Volkswagen-Nutzfahrzeuge-Transporter-Werkspritsche-mit-Schoon-Spriegelgestell-Schiebegardine-W...jpg


 
Last edited:

iRider

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2008
5,686
3,143
Woooooooooosh

I don't think he meant that people literally are driving overloaded trucks at 100mph over mountain passes.


Or maybe he did.
Which again rises the question of necessity. It is not like people in other countries don't haul their boats, dirt bikes, camper trailers and such around. They hardly use trucks because of bad fuel economy.
Now that we finally get more realistic energy prices, people hopefully think about their car purchases more. SUVs and trucks with 25 mpg will not sell well in the future.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,640
2,678
Pōneke
Slightly better than terrible news:

American car website said:
EV registrations surged 60 per cent to 158,689 total vehicles in the first three months of the year. Overall, this means that 4.6 per cent of light vehicle registrations in the United States were EVs.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,640
2,678
Pōneke
Terrible news to go with, because, you know, 2022.
Amazing that despite everything we still managed to actually accelerate methane emissions! Great work team!

DED8694A-DB7E-47B8-928C-D1C90E8590FA.jpeg
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,640
2,678
Pōneke
One more to go with:
Year to date, battery electric vehicles make up 18% of all personal vehicle sales in China.
The US will/is being left behind. Despite most of the western world (and to a lesser extent everyone) exporting nearly their entire heavy manufacturing (and therefore emissions) to China, they are pivoting faster than America. Good things are starting to happen in the US but it is a lot slower and you have fucks like Manchin and the GOP literally trying to kill us all. As I’ve pointed out, transport is the US’s biggest source of emissions so the ongoing popularity of ridiculously oversized gas guzzlers is just gross. I really hope that as a group of people whose major leisure activities rely on a healthy natural environment, we all might care about this a bit more than most, and help set a good example with our actions and purchases.
 

iRider

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2008
5,686
3,143
I really hope that as a group of people whose major leisure activities rely on a healthy natural environment, we all might care about this a bit more than most, and help set a good example with our actions and purchases.
I am all with you on placing a battery and electric motor into something that had an IC engine before. But how exactly does replacing a human powered vehicle with one that also uses energy for your major leisure activity helps with this "setting a good example"? ;)
 

Toshi

butthole powerwashing evangelist
Oct 23, 2001
39,645
8,687
I am all with you on placing a battery and electric motor into something that had an IC engine before. But how exactly does replacing a human powered vehicle with one that also uses energy for your major leisure activity helps with this "setting a good example"? ;)
E-bike usage probably a lower carbon cost than our own food oxidation:

 

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
42,974
15,051
Portland, OR
For starters, you could put your dirt bikes in there and close the rear door. :D



If you really need to do this regularly, VW has you covered as well.
View attachment 176273

I would totally be down for something like this if awd or 4wd. The few advantages of my existing truck are it's a Chevy so parts are literally everywhere and it's an LS motor so I know 300k miles is in reason.

My dream rig is a VW double cab. Like a '66. I would even convert it using a dual motor Model Y as a donor. That would be bad ass.
 

iRider

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2008
5,686
3,143
I would totally be down for something like this if awd or 4wd. The few advantages of my existing truck are it's a Chevy so parts are literally everywhere and it's an LS motor so I know 300k miles is in reason.

My dream rig is a VW double cab. Like a '66. I would even convert it using a dual motor Model Y as a donor. That would be bad ass.
We have one 4WD Transporter (besides a bunch of 2WD and VW Caddies) for field work (sampling trips). Funnily enough, it only gives a real advantage when it is pretty muddy or when you need to put a boat into the water of some of the fairly inaccessible lakes we take samples from. If the 2WD would have a locking differential I propbably would be fine with using it.

FWIW: in Europe you can get all types of the Transporter with 4Motion.
 

stevew

resident influencer
Sep 21, 2001
41,125
10,078
vw ev Scout for US



give it a 500 mile range and offer a extra cab with 8 foot bed...

i could give zero fucks how fast it goes...
 
Last edited:

HardtailHack

used an iron once
Jan 20, 2009
7,675
7,033
For starters, you could put your dirt bikes in there and close the rear door. :D



If you really need to do this regularly, VW has you covered as well.
View attachment 176273

Have they got DSG transmissions in them and if so are they no longer shit for commercial vehicles? They were pretty damn rough at low speeds a few years ago.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,640
2,678
Pōneke
Maybe not. Most methane is produced when the temperatures are above 8-10 °C. Below that, methanogenic archaea are not very active. However, it can be that there is a geothermal methane seep underneath.
Sorry to tell you this but there are gigatonnes of historic organic methane frozen throughout the northern latitude permafrost. This includes we recon about 60 gigatonnes under the arctic ocean alone and possibly hundreds of gigatonnes across the northern boreal forests and steppes combined.

For scale we release about 34 GT of CO2 annually aand Methane is 23x as potent a greenhouse gas. Only 1.4GT of methane is the same as our current massively too high annual CO2 output.

When this permafrost seriously starts to melt, unless we do some crazy hard out geo engineering like literally partially blocking the sun or something similarly ridiculous we are fucked.
Ef you cee kay fucked. This is starting to happen, about 5 megatonnes annually now. This isn’t a joke. This isn’t hyperbole. This is one of the thirteen oft-cited super serious tipping points that have been left out of climate models so far and that could well end society pretty much on its own. It’s honestly hard to think about.

It’s really important we stop burning stuff. I can’t even tell you. Governments and industry have to change massively and the people of the world have to make them and change ourselves.
 
Last edited:

iRider

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2008
5,686
3,143
Sorry to tell you this but there are gigatonnes of historic organic methane frozen throughout the northern latitude permafrost. This includes we recon about 60 gigatonnes under the arctic ocean alone and possibly hundreds of gigatonnes across the northern boreal forests and steppes combined.

For scale we release about 34 GT of CO2 annually aand Methane is 23x as potent a greenhouse gas. Only 1.4GT of methane is the same as our current massively too high annual CO2 output.

When this permafrost seriously starts to melt, unless we do some crazy hard out geo engineering like literally partially blocking the sun or something similarly ridiculous we are fucked.
Ef you cee kay fucked. This is starting to happen, about 5 megatonnes annually now. This isn’t a joke. This isn’t hyperbole. This is one of the thirteen oft-cited super serious tipping points that have been left out of climate models so far and that could well end society pretty much on its own. It’s honestly hard to think about.

It’s really important we stop burning stuff. I can’t even tell you. Governments and industry have to change massively and the people of the world have to make them and change ourselves.
I am fully aware of this. And you fogot the methane hydrates in the ocean.
But the pic shows gas bubbles under ice, which makes it rather unlikely that they come from a historic source. That is either a methane seep or novel production, with the latter not so likely in these temperatures.
One thing you forget though is methan oxidation by methanotrophs or ANME. I would assume that part of the released methane will fuel a massive growth of these species.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
20,067
10,632
AK
Maybe not. Most methane is produced when the temperatures are above 8-10 °C. Below that, methanogenic archaea are not very active. However, it can be that there is a geothermal methane seep underneath.
Yeah, it’s getting to 8-10 above easy, more like up to at least 15C in the day and down to freezing at “night” where its shade, it won’t last long, but I was surprised to find a few pockets of ice like this. More related to ground cooling than air temp. You can smell the “swamp gas” in many of these bogs. Even in the dead if winter when it’s well below freezing you can smell it strong, so I’m not sure what would explain that. I know seeing it trapped in ice is a fairly common thing.
 
Last edited:

iRider

Turbo Monkey
Apr 5, 2008
5,686
3,143
Yeah, it’s getting to 8-10 above easy, more like up to at least 15C in the day and down to freezing at “night” where its shade, it won’t last long, but I was surprised to find a few pockets of ice like this. More related to ground cooling than air temp. You can smell the “swamp gas” in many of these bogs. Even in the dead if winter when it’s well below freezing you can smell it strong, so I’m not sure what would explain that. I know seeing it trapped in ice is a fairly common thing.
Maybe ebullition of already produced and initially trapped methane? That is often screwing up our measurements as there is no even flux across the water/air interface.
 

Jm_

sled dog's bollocks
Jan 14, 2002
20,067
10,632
AK
Maybe ebullition of already produced and initially trapped methane? That is often screwing up our measurements as there is no even flux across the water/air interface.
I think that’s what it all is, trapped methane that releases when it warms (rather than being produced).
 

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
42,974
15,051
Portland, OR

sundaydoug

Monkey
Jun 8, 2009
666
346
It’s really important we stop burning stuff. I can’t even tell you. Governments and industry have to change massively and the people of the world have to make them and change ourselves.
I'm with you 100%. However I can't help but consider the inevitability of our planet becoming uninhabitable, no matter what actions are taken by humankind.

Being as how in 5-ish billion years the earth will have lost it's atmosphere completely, and, depending on how large the sun actually gets later in its life, the earth may itself become consumed by the sun, even if we, as a species, were to complete a total reversal of our energy policies and switch to 100% renewable energy immediately, how much time would that buy us?

Serious (albeit hypothetical) question.
 
Last edited:

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
42,974
15,051
Portland, OR
I'm with you 100%. However I can't help but consider the inevitability of our planet becoming uninhabitable, no matter what actions are taken by humankind.

Being as how in 5-ish billion years the earth will have lost it's atmosphere completely, and, depending on how large the sun actually gets later in its life, the earth may itself become consumed by the sun, even if we, as a species, were to complete a total reversal of our energy policies and switch to 100% renewable energy immediately, how much time would that buy us?

Serious (albeit hypothetical) question.
About 6 months.
 

Changleen

Paranoid Member
Jan 9, 2004
14,640
2,678
Pōneke
I'm with you 100%. However I can't help but consider the inevitability of our planet becoming uninhabitable, no matter what actions are taken by humankind.

Being as how in 5-ish billion years the earth will have lost it's atmosphere completely, and, depending on how large the sun actually gets later in its life, the earth may itself become consumed by the sun, even if we, as a species, were to complete a total reversal of our energy policies and switch to 100% renewable energy immediately, how much time would that buy us?

Serious (albeit hypothetical) question.
Literally a couple of billion years, in which time we will obviously face many other challenges but hopefully also get to figure out how we can continue to exist, or maybe more usefully how ‘mind’ can continue to exist in the universe. I increasingly see climate change, AI, the vast acceleration if our knowledge as one of our first species level bottlenecks. There’s a strong non-zero chance we don’t make it, and this is why the universe is quiet.
 

jimmydean

The Official Meat of Ridemonkey
Sep 10, 2001
42,974
15,051
Portland, OR
Literally a couple of billion years, in which time we will obviously face many other challenges but hopefully also get to figure out how we can continue to exist, or maybe more usefully how ‘mind’ can continue to exist in the universe. I increasingly see climate change, AI, the vast acceleration if our knowledge as one of our first species level bottlenecks. There’s a strong non-zero chance we don’t make it, and this is why the universe is quiet.
035ndp49d2o51.jpg