Fuel saver website
Transport Safety and Associate Environment Minister Harry Duynhoven has launched a new website aimed at helping motorists to be more fuel efficient. Online at www.fuelsaver.govt.nz, it allows you to calculate your car’s fuel efficiency and to see how your weekly/monthly/yearly petrol cost can be reduced by making particular changes, like not using air conditioning or limiting the types of trips you take in your car.
It’s a good idea - the same idea, in fact, of attaching economic incentive to encourage behaviour changes, as you can directly see how much your changes will save you - but the site as it currently exists is fairly rudimentary, and a major problem is that it only lists newly manufactured cars and Japanese imports since 2000, so my retro 80s model doesn’t make the cut. I also don’t think it puts enough emphasis on the negative environmental impacts or the alternatives to driving, despite the Minister’s comment that “In a climate of high fuel prices, this information can help people save money on vehicle running costs, while benefiting the environment.” The assumption is still that cars are a necessity, rather than the overused luxury that they are.
Check it out and see what you think.
May 11th, 2006 at 8:59 pm
When you leave your Wellington flat near a bus route or the Johnsonville line and see the rest of the country, you’ll see that most people have to have access to a car to get to work, whether they are on a farm or in a provincial town, or live in Waitakere and work in Wiri (where it would take nearly 2 hours to go by public transport), or live in Porirua and do shiftwork in Seaview.
For most NZers who don’t work in the central business district of the main centres, a car is essential. It is so patronising that you think that most New Zealanders are so stupid owning this “luxury” when anyone without a car in rural/provincial NZ is essentially without access to employment 9 out of 10 cases. You may be right that some car use is a luxury (driving to the corner shop), but much of it is not.
May 12th, 2006 at 2:08 pm
That’s why more people should live in Wellington flats near a bus route or the Johnsonville line.
May 12th, 2006 at 3:12 pm
At a tangent (but on the subject of saving fuel): Does anyone know if there’s been any work done on aftermarket chips for fuel-injected vehicle to *reduce* power + reduce fuel consumption?
Since many vehicles can be ‘rechipped’ to increase power, it seems reasonable to assume it could work the other way also.
Most 2 litre+ vehicle manufacturers are going to optimise for a balance of power/consumption, or in recent times go all testosteroney towards the power end of the equation to avoid appearing underpowered compared with competitors. And I doubt most family users ever use the full power of the vehicle anyway.
It’d be a cheap ‘quick win’ if it worked..
May 12th, 2006 at 4:53 pm
> For most NZers who don’t work in the central business
> district of the main centres, a car is essential.
Funny, I’ve lived in over a dozen places while working in 4 countries and I’ve never actually *needed* a car. It’s sometimes a great time-saver, but I’ve always been able to find alternatives.
That said, there appear to be plenty of people who have backed themselves into a lifestyle that involves driving everywhere. Apparently the fact that they then need to buy 100 litres a week of a running-out fuel imported from politically volatile countries didn’t cross their minds when they made their lifestyle and vehicle choices.
All the more reason to tax petrol heavily now to fund public transport, before the price really goes through the roof.
Fortunately I don’t think NZ is in quite as bad a state as the US…
http://www.theregister.com/2006/04/13/cisco_commute
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/04/14/cisco_commute_letters
May 12th, 2006 at 9:55 pm
That’s nice Baz, densely populated cities were they? Or was it Taihape? I think you’ll find most of these people I refer to were born or grew up where they are, and they have local jobs they need cars to go to because that is all there is. Go on, tax people in Wanganui, Taihape, Hokitika and Gore to fund public transport in Wellington and Auckland, and you wonder why the provinces vote National? Public transport in provincial/rural New Zealand faded away in the 1920s and 1930s because it can never be frequent/flexible enough for low population low density townships. These towns are uncongested and the people typically own quite old vehicles, and they are on relatively low incomes. They have little else.
May 13th, 2006 at 11:39 am
There are two answers here, both with some justification, and neither should be rejected out of hand. Yes, we need to live closer to the transit lines and we need to adjust our expectations to more closely match our available resources, but the other side which LibertyScott is at least partially inferring, is that we also need to maintain some facilities for personal vehicles.
200 years ago, a personal vehicle was a horse. 200 years from now that may be the case again… or we may have wood pellet fired steam cars… or biodiesel powered trucks. I won’t bet on or against any of them, but they will still need roads and they will still need bridges and things we choose NOW will have impacts that go forward for centuries. I mentioned before the problem of building infrastructure within 15 metres of mean high water. Some stuff won’t matter, but when you build a road, it becomes a route… and people build stuff next to it, and it stays established for a long, long, long, long time. That caused me to support TG in almost ANY form. SH 1 will be underwater someday, and the goat track that is optimistically named SH2 is not going to support Wellington’s transit needs.
I digress….. my point here is that the knee jerk response of some of us is as mistaken as a libertarian’s knee jerk response to some of us. We will need both answers as a society.
respectfully
BJ
May 13th, 2006 at 11:47 am
Huskynut
The 2 litre engine in a Tino or Primera is rated at 140 Bhp when it is in “performance” trim. I know damned well that I have a derated engine here, and I am glad of it because with the loads I am carrying these days, torque is more important to me.
There’s no problem to changing the chips except getting the time to test the results. It’d be appropriate to approach the manufacturers for a little help here… they can probably do it better and do a better job, and it’d be a cheap differentiator for them and their products. I could do it myself if I had the time, but I’d prefer access to the original design considerations and implementation, rather than hacking the damned things.
You’re right though, it would be a “cheap win” and it falls into the category of good benefits, low risks that manufacturers like to put effort into. Heck, you could even have a switch on the dash to adjust the “tune” you were using.
respectfully
BJ
May 13th, 2006 at 7:12 pm
> That’s nice Baz, densely populated cities were they? Or was it Taihape?
Wellington is the second city I’ve lived in. My former haunts include such bustling centres as Abingdon, Newbury, and St Genis. And a farm once. The bicycle is a wonderful invention.
> Go on, tax people in Wanganui, Taihape, Hokitika and Gore to fund
> public transport in Wellington and Auckland
…and anywhere else that it’s feasible. And if you think that taxing petrol now is punitive, wait and see what happens to the price of the stuff over the next decade or two.
> the people typically own quite old vehicles and they are on relatively low incomes. They have little else.
Then I’m sure you couldn’t object to the government educating the public on how to save fuel…
May 14th, 2006 at 3:57 pm
don’t look good for the future of the v8 429 ford really,does it,
sad .. I love to hear that rumble shut them bird up in the morning,
May 17th, 2006 at 11:38 am
The reference to your “retro 80s model” not being on the site is a bit of a worry given that you are a Green! The average 80s retro model consumes a considerable amount of fuel and emits a considerable amount of pollutants - almost certainly more than my near-new 3.8L V6 (I only drive a vehicle with an engine this large because I regularly need to tow a horse float). Even so, I’m betting that your retro 80s model uses more fuel and creates more pollution than my vehicle does. When was the last time you had it tuned and serviced?
A fuel efficiency website is a good idea, but this one seems a bit short on detail and accuracy. For example the site claims that Holden Commodores use 15L per 100km - only the V8 Commodores do, and most Commodores are V6s.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:05 pm
What can I say - I may be a frog but I’m only human. The car is a family heirloom which is rarely driven. I keep it tuned and serviced and only use it about once a week - I rarely need it as I’m lucky enough to live in a suburb where public transport gets me where I need to go 90% of the time.
On a societal level, I can understand why lots of people rely on old, fuel guzzling cars. We can’t really begrude them this, but we can introduce efficiency standards for new and newly imported cars and incentivise their purchase with a fee-bate system so as to phase inefficient vehicles out.
May 17th, 2006 at 1:28 pm
I didn’t mean to sound too harsh - we’ve all been impoverished at some point and know how it is being forced to drive old dungers!
April 20th, 2007 at 11:13 am
Hi I just tried the fuel vaporizer 5000 at http://www.agsint.com/atoms-fs.htm and went from 19 mpg to 29 mpg. If ya’ get the chance to try one, ya’ gotta try it.