Let me first state I think Phil Luciano is a great columnist, and I am always entertained by his writing style, and “get it” when it comes to Phil’s sense of humor. He’s damn good at what he does in the paper. But I take, shall we say, significant umbrage at yesterday’s baloney-filled column about speeding v. fuel economy.
Phil bought too far into the claims of his unnamed veteran cop “source” for this story.
This officer claims he’s surprised…I’m sorry, he said “flabbergasted”…that people are “still driving like maniacs” with fuel nearing $4.00 per gallon.
Excuse me, buddy, but I do NOT “drive like a maniac”, and just because one speeds he/she is not a “maniac”. So let’s cut the hyperbole here. To me, the “maniacs” are the a-holes who run stop signs, don’t use signals, change lanes without warning, accelerate through left-turn lane yellow- and red-lights, and follow other cars too damn close. THOSE are the “maniacs”, and those people don’t have to “speed” to be an idiot.
Beyond that, though, let’s examine the claims in the story and the math around them:
According to AAA Motor Club, Phil says, decreasing speed from 75 to 65 MPH increases fuel economy by 10%, and decreasing speed from 70 to 55 MPH increases fuel economy by 17%. First, simple math tells us that even if these claims are true (they’re not), they don’t make a lot of sense. A decrease from 75 to 65 MPH is a decrease of 14% (and an increase in time needed to arrive at the destination by that same 14%). Ever heard the phrase “time is money”? Well, in sales, it’s true. So to effectively increase my mileage by 10%, I’ve got to slow down 14% and waste more time driving. Not a good deal.
And the other example given is just as bad…to get a 17% claimed (again, not true) increase in mileage, I’ve got to slow down by 22%! In other words, my 100-minute drives back and forth to Canton everyday become 122 minutes, and I spend another one hour and forty minutes in just one week (that’s a LOT of time I could be working at my desk or making sales calls) driving my car back and forth, only to see my mileage (supposedly) increase.
But alas, it doesn’t work that way in all vehicles. Hell, it doesn’t work that way in any vehicles that I know of. Cars, like golf clubs, baseball bats, and numerous other man-made items, have a “sweet spot”. Each one is different. Some vehicles (mine, for instance) achieve peak gas mileage at higher speeds, because of the gearing and how it matches to the “sweet spot” for engine RPM.
After reading it yesterday, I did a little test this morning. I topped off my tank and headed up to I-80, where I zeroed out my trip computer and set the cruise at 70. My drive from Annawan to Ottawa netted 24.8 MPG according to GM’s uncannily accurate dashboard trip-computer that I’m happy my Grand Prix came with. On the way back, I topped off, zeroed out the CPU and set the cruise at 55. Yes, on I-80. No rush to get back. Same trip, same miles. According to Phil and the AAA Motor Club, I should have seen my mileage increase to 27.3 MPG. Um, no. Try 24.2 MPG. Yep, my car gets worse mileage at 55 than it does at 70 in the same conditions. (Okay, it was four degrees warmer, for you engineer types).
The other thing in the column that needs addressing is this:
And they’re blowing it not only on gas: They’re picking up more traffic tickets. In 1997 – when gas prices were as low as $1.09 a gallon – Illinois State Police wrote 158,000 speeding tickets. In 2006, the latest year for which data is available, troopers wrote 173,000 speeding tickets.
Show me where this increase in tickets has anything to do with more people speeding. There is no evidence there whatsoever. Could it be that the police are setting more speed traps and catching more speeders? Could it be their quotas have been increased to help the state with our “budget woes”? Any of these things could indeed be true. I have no proof of my suspicions being true. But there has been ZERO evidence presented here to justify the statement made in the column.
Bottom line: The motor club stats are suspect-at-best, the “veteran cop” needs to redefine his idea of who is or is not a “maniac”, and the number of tickets issued could – or could NOT – be a sign of more people driving faster than the posted limit.
21 responses so far ↓
1
Billy Dennis
// May 8, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Good post.
2
Michael
// May 9, 2008 at 4:00 am
Sooner or later (and I’m afraid it’s going to be TOO much later) we are all going to have to quit goofing around and fix the problem. We have to get off the petroleum addiction. Carter started us down the right path 30 years ago and we lost our way in short order. Had we continued energy research started then we would likely be off petrochemicals by now, but no, we had to let business make our national decisions and here we are … 2008 with oil seeking $200 a barrel. We never seem to learn.
3
BJ Stone
// May 9, 2008 at 6:09 am
I agree, Michael, and the way I see it, asking the common man to change his life completely, or asking the government to demand the automakers get 35 MPG CAFE (they must by 2012, according to recent legislation), but not asking the OIL COMPANIES to make ANY changes in the way they rip off the public is a big problem.
People are willing (must, for their own pocketbooks) to change their driving habits and the cars they drive. As my post says, I am looking for maximum mileage, as I drive a lot of miles. I have a Pontiad Grand Prix with a V6. It’s not like I’m driving an Expedition here. Also, car makers are willing (being forced) to come up with new ways to achieve high mileage.
But the third, and most important part, of the equation…oil companies…get to sit back and do nothing except rape us financially while the CEO’s collect their truly obscene salaries and bonuses packages. Disgusting. Sickening. Unamerican.
4
postsimian
// May 9, 2008 at 12:10 pm
“But BJ, it’s just the market!”
I could punch someone for every time I’ve heard that. If it’s “just the market,” these companies ought to be turning ZERO profit, not record ones! If that isn’t proof of gouging, I don’t know what is.
5
vonster
// May 12, 2008 at 10:20 am
Zero profit? WTF? Why? When do you volunteer to go on a subsistence income? I have heard that the oil company’s profits percentage wise are just slightly higher than industry as a whole. If that’s true, then where’s the windfall?
Y’all are blaming the wrong people, I think.
6
gl hoffman
// May 12, 2008 at 10:59 am
Nah, Mr. Vonster, it will be ok, let’s set a reasonable profit amount for the oil companies, I am sure we can all agree. Seems like a lot of people are clamoring for it, so let’s do it. Next time, I might get to go after the ‘excess’ profits of some company or industry I don’t like.
7
Cory
// May 12, 2008 at 11:53 am
It’s the distributors that are committing the real crime. And there’s not a damn thing that’s going to get done about it until people actually stop driving so much.
By the way, premium is $4.09 at the Shell and BP stations near Northpoint.
8
postsimian
// May 12, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Yes, they like reminding us when we call that times are just darn hard for everybody. But… if that’s true… shouldn’t these companies be showing less of a profit, not more of one? The fact that they’re showing more of a profit means that expenses are being passed off to the consumer.
Gas prices go up, oil company profits go up. Stupidly high gas prices = stupidly high oil company profits. Doesn’t taken a rocket scientist to figure this one out. 1 + 1 = 2, do the math.
Moreover, these scumbag companies aren’t going to make a serious attempt at helping to fix the problem. There’s too much money to be made in prolonging it.
9
vonster
// May 12, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Oh the hyperbole! Let me tell you how much profit your household can make, eh?
I’m NOT defending oil companies – just calling BS where I see it. Maybe we should reign in the speculators.
10
mortonmalaise
// May 12, 2008 at 3:27 pm
By its very nature, the light sweet crude market is one of speculators. The prices we see in the paper every day aren’t the current cost of crude. It’s the cost crude is expected to be at in the future, based on expected production shutdowns, terrorist threats, instability in oil-producing areas, etc. It’s a bit like the odds of a horse race, continually shifting right up until post as more bets come in. The speculators have us all by the short and curlies.
11
postsimian
// May 13, 2008 at 7:32 am
Pretty bad when I’m paying 4 bucks a pump for what someone THINKS the price ought to be.
12
vonster
// May 13, 2008 at 9:07 am
And we DO need to build some more refineries.
13
vonster
// May 13, 2008 at 9:07 am
And nuke plants.
14
vonster
// May 14, 2008 at 7:00 am
“The Senate has rejected a Republican energy plan that calls for opening an Alaska wildlife refuge and some offshore waters to oil development. Supporters of the measure couldn’t get the needed 60 votes to overcome a Democratic-led filibuster threat.” – AP
15
postsimian
// May 15, 2008 at 9:47 pm
Yes, a move by which economists have suggested would lower the price per gallon… I believe it was one cent over the next twenty years? Yeah, the Republicans TOTALLY aren’t in Big Oil’s pocket.
Fail.
16
vonster
// May 16, 2008 at 8:02 am
You crack me up.
17
postsimian
// May 16, 2008 at 12:56 pm
See for yourself: http://uk.reuters.com/article/oilRpt/idUKN2934033020080429?pageNumber=2&virtualBrandChannel=0&sp=true
“GOP” and “Republican Party” ought to be trademarks of Exxon.
18
vonster
// May 19, 2008 at 7:44 am
LOL
Get help.
19
postsimian
// May 19, 2008 at 9:11 am
I am: I’m voting against McCain.
20
Brad Carter
// May 19, 2008 at 9:10 pm
What I find funny about Luciano’s column is that Markley and Luciano had a top engineer from Ford talking about fuel mileage. He said every automobile has a unique optimum speed/mileage ratio. He also explained the stated fuel mileage on any vehicle is at 45 mph. He explained that 71 mph may actually be the optimal speed for the best efficeiency for a given car, while 53 mph may be best for another car. Federal regulations mandate/prohibit what information auto manufacturers can advertise. Luciano ought to remember this (phone) interview!
21
vonster
// May 20, 2008 at 2:12 pm
Geez. Sorry there’s no one on the Demo ticket to vote FOR.
Leave a Comment