Posted on 12/04/2005 4:18:42 PM PST by wjersey
$44 million ($47 million - $3 million maintenance) buys a heck of a lot more....
You have to divide the cost difference by the life in years of the buses, in order to compare it to the annual savings in maintenance. (I do this for a living.)
Figure ten years for the life of a bus, that's an annualized increase in ownership cost of $4.4 million. Call it six million with interest.
Subtract the three million in savings, and you're still out three million per year- a losing proposition.
Reduce the cost of the buses, improve their fuel economy, and then they make economic sense.
Mercedes diesels now have maintenance-free particulate filters on over 40 models.
I use B100 year-round, except Dec-Jan, when I go to 10-20% kerosene.
-A8
Thanks! Will bounce that one off the folks at work- we're about to get hit with the new emissions standards for our medium and heavy duty trucks as well as the off-road stuff.
This could be what we're looking for.
-A8
If I am not mistaken, all modern railroad "diesel" locomotives are "hybrid" as are such ocean liners as the QE2. Why shouldn't they be used in automobiles or other passenger vehicles?
my understanding is, the current Prius has battery
storage of about one kilowatt-hour.
However, the 'brain' of the car only uses 30 percent of that.... the 'state of charge' is always between
50% and 80%, the best for battery life.
I am not saying that the battery life is infinite,
but batt life is way more that could be used,
I mean, how many battery-assisted 0 to 60 MPH
acceleration cycles will the car do in its life,
well , the batt can handle that many,
in part because the electrical assist is
not all that much.
I suspected that you might be. You can blame the biggies...Cargill et. al. for that. They simply cannot stand the idea that they may have to pay actual MONEY to buy corn. FWIW, farmers barely break even with the market price of corn...ethanol has given us a small shred of hope. I'm sure the government will allow them to head south, break all kinds of environmental regulations, and cheat us yet again.
Farmers have been the driving force behind ethanol production. Many of the plants are co-ops, or otherwise farmer-funded. Now, when it appears to be profitable (and after letting the farmers take the risk) the big guys will sweep in...with the FedGov by their side to dominate the market; by moving it offshore. And, HAVE NO DOUBT, they will destroy the environment, use slave labor...they simply cannot abide a farmer making money. They are also planning on using sugar for ethanol production.
Here's some additional info for you to add to your collection:
http://www.iowacorn.org/ethanol/ethanol_5a.html
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.