Thanks to Jerry from JetCityOrange for that photo of the Luna Park Cafe-branded Smart car he just spotted yesterday. They get about 40 mpg, according to this page on the Smart website. One more note about driving with a bit more environmental sensibility – biodiesel users will want to check out some local-availability updates in this topic on the WSB Forums.
The NW Biodiesel Network (www.nwbiodiesel.org) meets the last Tuesday of each month at the Phinney School, 7 PM. They will be sponsoring the 6th Annual NW Biodiesel Forum on Sunday, May 4th, 10AM – 5PM, at Seattle Center’s Fisher Pavilion.
Is 40MPG all they get? That’s a surprise. I once owned a bigger car that got better mileage than that.
Seemed a little low to me too but the language on the linked page says they’re “designed to get” 40-45 mpg.
I know, 40mpg isn’t that good. It’s very cute little sexy car’let. But a Toyota Corolla from the mid 80s’ got about 36mpg…I had one. Cars have barely gotten any more efficient in decades. The tiny incremental changes have been to make the engines fractionally more efficient, the cars a little lighter, but the end result isn’t that much better.
I would like to see more ‘electric only’ option cars (like a Prius with a plug-in/electric only option switch). Since our power out here is clean hydro power, electric cars really DO make sense. In some other areas, where the electric power is from dirty coal plants, it’s less clear that an electric car would be a net plus, but still.
I heard something a while back that the way of measuring mpg was going through some re-evaluation…maybe they are using the new standards? I’d love to get one if I didn’t feel like I was going to get flattened by an SUV!
NR-
Our hydro power is clean in terms of pollution, but ecologically there are huge negative consequences to putting dams in the rivers.
We have a Smart, the dark green one you probably see driving all around West Seattle, and we average 40-45 MPG. We take it all over the metro area, and have never felt like we are going to be squished in an accident. Actually we don’t even drive our other car any more. Its a great car!
Thanks for the nudge, Paul :) It won’t be right away, but I look forward to buying one soon!
AR, WSB, and NR,
MPG is not the only measure of efficiency… todays engines burn a great deal cleaner than those older engine from even just a few years ago. They are able to put out substantially more power per CC than they used to, while at the same time reducing the amount of emissions. The powerplant in that ForTwo is a tiny little 3-cylinder that is putting out about the same amount of power that the early 80’s Toyota 4-cyl 1.6 liter motors used to. But if you make comparisons in performance as well as mileage, you’d see that today’s cars have made great gains, while growing in weight at the same time.
TL – the smart’s are built in a way that actually makes them incredibly safe – you check out the literature on the website, and alsosearch YouTube for videos. FifthGear (a UK Auto TV show) ran one into a concrete barrier at 70MPH, and it actually did a fair job of not crumpling. Not to say anyone would survive running into a concrete barrier at 70, of course…
I wouldn’t waste my money or compramise my safety driving around in traffic in one of these.
Back in the mid 80’s I had a cute little Honda CRX HF that got great mileage, around 50 mpg. It was a 2 seater hatch back with tons of storage/ hauling room in the back. It was a great little car!
Um, you folks do realize that scientists have found biofuels to be, well, not-so environmentally friendly after all, right? From the recent Time magazine article:
According to researchers at Princeton University and the Nature Conservancy, almost all the biofuels used today cause more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional fuels, if the full environmental cost of producing them is factored in.
Oops.
Here’s the article in full: http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1713431,00.html
Smart Cars are all over Paris. If people would get over the idea that bigger is safer, then those of us that drive small cars wouldn’t have to worry as much about being hit. I was driving south on I-5 yesterday near Georgetown in my Civic coupe and was almost run into twice by two different cars in a one minute time frame. The culprits were driving a minivan and a truck. Go figure. At least a Smart Car can see everything around it AND it’s fuel-efficient to boot.
liws,
Don’t worry you won’t have to “compramise” nor even compromise as they call it a smart car for a reason:)
OP, when farm machinery and tanker trucks are all running on Biodiesel 100, the net effect will almost be carbon neutral. You cannot say the same petroleum.
My college beater was a 1987 Chevy Sprint which had a 1-liter, 90cc, 3-cylinder engine that often did better than 45mpg on the highway. Stephen makes a great point about the measures of efficiency with more modern engines. But methinks that with 20 years of innovation we could do better. I drove my beater for 90,000 miles without ever having plowed into a highway barrier. So I can’t speak to its safety versus the Smart.
OP: I’m of the school of thought that solar activity has more to do with global warming than vehicle emissions. But with the environment aside biofuels have a huge appeal to me when they are domestically sourced and keep my money out of the pockets of hostile governments.
Stephen makes a good point that is also explained on the Smart-vehicle website we linked to – the vehicle is certified as “ultra low emission.”
And I forgot to add, twice in the last few years I was first on site to head on accidents, with the most recent at 26th and barton. A VW Golf hit a Suburban (the big guzzlers) head on. Guess which driver walked away and which one could not move and was taken away on a gurney… the driver of the suburban. The driver of the golf walked away with no problem.
“When farm machinery”. Key word “when”, meaning not now, if maybe ever, all farm machines run on biofuels. And farm machinery alone is not going to be enough offset the deforestation (as the article points out) that has to occur in places like Brazil in order to meet market demand. Not to mention what widespread biofuels (like corn) would do to crop prices. That’s important when you consider the nearly countless products that contain/use corn as an ingredient, well, you’re looking at the cost of living going up, way up, not just here but around the globe.
And let’s not forget the price of farm machiney. It is incredibly expensive for farmers to buy combines, threshers, etc. Unless gov’t subsidies (aka: more tax money and more taxes are needed….ugh) are set aside to help farmers purchase or convert their combines, etc., or financial incentives are put in place to purchase those machines, then that conversion is going to go at the market pace—and that’s likely to be very slow (think: “hybrid” cars sales…while going at a good clip, it’ll be decades before they even catch up in sales to conventional auto sales, if they ever do at all.)
I’d highly recommend reading the article (link provided above); it indirectly addresses these points.
I’m not saying there aren’t benefits to using biofuels, there certainly are—like less pollution, less dependence on M.E. oil (though we get a majoirty of ours from Canada), etc. But biofuels are not the great fuel and environmental elixir some people have made them out to be, either.
“When farm machinery”. Key word “when”, meaning not now, if maybe ever, all farm machines run on biofuels. And farm machinery alone is not going to be enough offset the deforestation (as the article points out) that has to occur in places like Brazil in order to meet market demand. Not to mention what widespread biofuels (like corn) would do to crop prices. That’s important when you consider the nearly countless products that contain/use corn as an ingredient, well, you’re looking at the cost of living going up, way up, not just here but around the globe.
And let’s not forget the price of farm machiney. It is incredibly expensive for farmers to buy combines, threshers, etc. Unless gov’t subsidies (aka: more tax money and more taxes are needed….ugh) are set aside to help farmers purchase or convert their combines, etc., or financial incentives are put in place to purchase those machines, then that conversion is going to go at the market pace—and that’s likely to be very slow (think: “hybrid” cars sales…while going at a good clip, it’ll be decades before they even catch up in sales to conventional auto sales, if they ever do at all.)
I’d highly recommend reading the article (link provided above); it indirectly addresses these points.
I’m not saying there aren’t benefits to using biofuels, there certainly are—like less pollution, less dependence on M.E. oil (though we get a majoirty of ours from Canada), etc. But biofuels are not the great fuel and environmental elixir some people have made them out to be, either.
Super cute car. Too bad about only 40mpg. Our ancient Toyota (which never breaks down btw) gets almost that and is long since paid off.
I like the idea of a small vehicle like a smart car to get around the city, But they are expensive. My motorcycle gets between 40-50mpg and cost half that of a smart car :/, and it is an expensive brand.
I must admit sometimes i dream of everyone driving around Seattle with smart cars, scooters and motorcycles. The traffic would be so much better.
OP, you are talking about ethanol. I am talking about biodiesel. Lumping the two together as “biofuels” is the same as throwing in petroleum and calling them all “fuels.” Farm machinery runs on diesel. Biodiesel can be substituted today; there is presently not enough it to supply that kind of demand. Biodiesel can be created from all kinds of food oils produced in the US.
You may already know this, but the first Diesel engine was ran on peanut oil. The design had to be tweaked to run well on petrochemical.
OP, you are talking about ethanol. I am talking about biodiesel. Lumping the two together as “biofuels†is the same as throwing in petroleum and calling them all “fuels.†Farm machinery runs on diesel. Biodiesel can be substituted today; there is presently not enough it to supply that kind of demand. Biodiesel can be created from all kinds of food oils produced in the US.
OK, my mistake on mixing the two. Even still with the mistake, you sort back up and run over your claim of “when farm machinery and tanker trucks are all running on Biodiesel 100, the net effect will almost be carbon neutral” by acknowledging that supply can’t meet currently demand. Inevitably what has to happen in order for supply to meet demand is that more land is required to make enough food from which to glean enough plant oil. You’re still having to clear more land, potentially forests, to meet demand. See where I’m going here?
The US pays farmers not to plant so as not to glut the market and decrease prices. As soon as the Japanese and Germans send over their diesel compacts (2009+), you will see supply increase across the country (because of increased demand). Biodiesel is not the entire answer but it is going to help much more than ethanol.
That’s assuming Americans will want/demand diesel compact cars. A portion of the “early adopters” market may demand/want them, but that’s a pretty small portion of the overall market; probably not enough to spur any kind of great or overwhelming demabd for biodiesel. But, of course, we’ll have to wait and see how things mete out. Traditionally, however, Americans like cars that are aesthetically pleasing and functional enough to meet their needs. (If you pics/links of the cars, I’d love to see them!)
I drive a 4 cyl AWD for ski reasons. The car is OK, but with AWD you sacrifice efficiency. That is my trade-off for now. Years ago I quit smoking, besides the obvious reasons, one of my main motivators was no longer having to give money to an industry I view with complete disdain. Today it is the same with the oil companies/producer-nations.
I am driving my last gas-powered car.
I have one link for a 72 mpg VW available in Europe:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml=/motoring/2007/05/12/nosplit/mfpolo12.xml
Although I cannot recommend VW based on past experiences, they are pioneers with consumer diesel availability in the US. Take a look at any automaker’s UK website (since they are in English). This will give you an idea of what will be available to us in the next two to five years.
I’m rather surprised at the mileage–I would have expected quite a lot higher. My 2 year old Prius has a lifetime average so far of 45 mpg, and this car seems much smaller and lighter.
PrayingMan-tis –What’s the problem with Luna Park? Haven’t been there for awhile myself.
I find the theme a little odd is all. Just a bit creepy. It’s just my personal taste. The people are nice, but I’d sum it up by saying I feel very out of place there.
Yeah, what’s up with Luna Park cafe? What do you mean by the theme creeps you out? That’s a far more interesting discussion than biofuels, but that’s just because I talk about environmental issues all day long at work and I’m more interested in the juicy gossip here at WSB.
WOW… I am among the many who would have thought the MPG on Smart cars to be higher. We have a Honda Pilot that averages almost 30mpg and is also a ULEV (Ultra Low Emission Vehicle) we both think its HUGE (and a bit of a mistake). I have heard many times that the major in-efficiency in autos is all the friction and energy lost to heat created by it. I guess that proves true, you can only reduce weight by so much, I suspect the total “friction energy” of a Smart car isn’t much lower than other compacts. Most of the weight lost is simply sheet metal that covered open spaces. Shouldn’t we be in flying cars by now? Geez
Sorry, comment time is over.
| 37 COMMENTS