The results:
1. My sister traveled the 300 kilometres in 2 hours and 45 minutes; she needed $30 of regular unleaded gasoline (at around $1 per litre), which translates into a fuel consumption of 10 L/100 km. The greenhouse gas emissions her car released was 72 kg of CO2.
2. My uncle reached those same 300 kilometres in 2 hours and 35 minutes; he burned up $40 worth of regular unleaded gasoline (at the same price), which represents a fuel consumption of 13.33 L/100 km. The greenhouse gas emissions released by his car was 96 kg of CO2.
3. My cousin completed the trip in 2 hours and 20 minutes; he burned up $60 of regular unleaded gasoline, which represents a fuel consumption of 20 L/100 km. His greenhouse gas emissions were 144 kg of CO2.
4. Yours truly took 3 hours and 20 minutes to get to St-Michel; he used $8.50 of regular unleaded gasoline, which represents a fuel consumption of 2.8 L/100 km. His greenhouse gas emissions were 20.4 kg of CO2.
5.The ghost driver completed the route in 2 hours and 45 minutes, consumed $100 of regular unleaded gasoline, which translates to 30 L/100 km and greenhouse gas emissions of 240 kg of CO2.
To add on to this calculation, imagine another driver who possesses economical car X that would've done the route in 3 hours flat, while consuming $18 of gas, which would represent 6 L/100 km. He would've spit out 43.2 kg of CO2. This result could've been achieved by certain contemporary subcompacts.
As you can see, the differences are pretty obvious and, aside from the car, speed has its role to play in this. Know that we know the difference in fuel economy of various vehicles on our personal economy and for the planet in general over a distance of 300 kilometres, let's do the same exercise over the life of the vehicle.
Economy and greenhouse gas emissions calculated over the lifespan of a vehicle
As a friend judiciously reminded me, we generally don't want to think about the expenses that the purchase and maintenance of a car requires. That can be discouraging, because such an exercise would reveal that our vehicles have a financial appetite that we just don't want to face. Don't worry; I won't confront you to all those expenses, except the ones associated with gasoline and greenhouse gas emissions.
Let's be conservative
We'll be conservative and consider that the useful lifespan of a vehicle is about 200,000 kilometres. I know very well that it is possible to travel over 200,000 kilometres with the same vehicle, but the purpose of this exercise is to demonstrate what the economical impact of fuel consumption represents from one vehicle to another. And so I don't get tagged as radical and to calculate from realistic numbers, I'll stick to this number: 200,000 km.
Also in conservative fashion, let's suppose the price of gasoline is and will stay at $1 a litre (which I seriously doubt) for the coming years. Today on Friday, August 5th 2005, it costs $1,064. (Small note: I invite you to buy, one of these days, a litre of gasoline to see the cashier get all mixed up with the fractions of cents...)
1. My sister traveled the 300 kilometres in 2 hours and 45 minutes; she needed $30 of regular unleaded gasoline (at around $1 per litre), which translates into a fuel consumption of 10 L/100 km. The greenhouse gas emissions her car released was 72 kg of CO2.
2. My uncle reached those same 300 kilometres in 2 hours and 35 minutes; he burned up $40 worth of regular unleaded gasoline (at the same price), which represents a fuel consumption of 13.33 L/100 km. The greenhouse gas emissions released by his car was 96 kg of CO2.
3. My cousin completed the trip in 2 hours and 20 minutes; he burned up $60 of regular unleaded gasoline, which represents a fuel consumption of 20 L/100 km. His greenhouse gas emissions were 144 kg of CO2.
4. Yours truly took 3 hours and 20 minutes to get to St-Michel; he used $8.50 of regular unleaded gasoline, which represents a fuel consumption of 2.8 L/100 km. His greenhouse gas emissions were 20.4 kg of CO2.
5.The ghost driver completed the route in 2 hours and 45 minutes, consumed $100 of regular unleaded gasoline, which translates to 30 L/100 km and greenhouse gas emissions of 240 kg of CO2.
To add on to this calculation, imagine another driver who possesses economical car X that would've done the route in 3 hours flat, while consuming $18 of gas, which would represent 6 L/100 km. He would've spit out 43.2 kg of CO2. This result could've been achieved by certain contemporary subcompacts.
As you can see, the differences are pretty obvious and, aside from the car, speed has its role to play in this. Know that we know the difference in fuel economy of various vehicles on our personal economy and for the planet in general over a distance of 300 kilometres, let's do the same exercise over the life of the vehicle.
Economy and greenhouse gas emissions calculated over the lifespan of a vehicle
As a friend judiciously reminded me, we generally don't want to think about the expenses that the purchase and maintenance of a car requires. That can be discouraging, because such an exercise would reveal that our vehicles have a financial appetite that we just don't want to face. Don't worry; I won't confront you to all those expenses, except the ones associated with gasoline and greenhouse gas emissions.
Let's be conservative
We'll be conservative and consider that the useful lifespan of a vehicle is about 200,000 kilometres. I know very well that it is possible to travel over 200,000 kilometres with the same vehicle, but the purpose of this exercise is to demonstrate what the economical impact of fuel consumption represents from one vehicle to another. And so I don't get tagged as radical and to calculate from realistic numbers, I'll stick to this number: 200,000 km.
Also in conservative fashion, let's suppose the price of gasoline is and will stay at $1 a litre (which I seriously doubt) for the coming years. Today on Friday, August 5th 2005, it costs $1,064. (Small note: I invite you to buy, one of these days, a litre of gasoline to see the cashier get all mixed up with the fractions of cents...)