Joe Bauman wrote:
One suggestion that was pressed by environmentalists in the past was to increase gas taxes so we would drive less and therefore emitted less tailpipe pollution.
Another, even easier, plan would be do just drive slower. Makes for better fuel economy and less emissions so I've done most of my driving below the speed limit for years. I always wondered just how much the savings might be so for the trip to Wendover to see Stardust come home I conducted an experiment. As I was leaving Stansbury I topped off the fuel tank at the Stansbury Maverik and then drove to Wendover doing 55 to 60. Then topped off the tank in Wendover. After Stardust's spectacular return (it really was great!) I drove home doing 75 (ok, maybe occasionally 80) and topped the tank back at the Stansbury Maverik. As most of you know the route is pretty flat so it's not like I was going up hill one way and down hill the other. There was some wind but it was out of the south which made it perpendicular to my direction of travel. The results surprised me. For the trip over I burned 3.7 gallons but while lead footing it back I burned 4.9. If I'm doing the math right, that's about a 32% penalty for going faster. So I'm doing my part by continuing to keep my speeds down but it sure bugs me when I'm passed by some gas guzzling SUV (whose owner is probably complaining about how much it costs to drive the thing). Patrick the Tree Hugger