The day your car is obsolete.

I'm obviously guessing here, but I think there will always be a boutique market for gasoline combustion engines as hobby cars. You'll pay $10/gallon for gasoline and drive it on a sunny Saturday. Maybe it'll be synthetic gasoline - who knows. There will be oil/gasoline available long after it becomes economically prohibitive. I.e., automakers will finally see the need to develop something else when the average driver can't afford his monthly gas bill.

I'm sure Ferrari will make the switch when whatever comes next can produce the kind of horsepower expected of an exotic sports car. There was a thread about traditional manual gearboxes going away, because technology is nudging them out the door similar to what happened to carbs: fuel injection is better from a technical perspective, but we lost something with the great sounds. F-1 gearboxes seem destined to replace manual ones, because no one can shift as quickly as a computer. It's too bad, because you really get to know a car by shifting it yourself.

I think a gasoline-powered, manual transmission sports car is going to be a nostalgia trip someday. But I'd guess we're a couple of decades away. Unless you're 4 years old now you'll have time. Just don't wait till you're 60!

 

The question is...will this day ever come?

http://www.changingworldtech.com/

I got to talk with a kid from MIT doing an internship in AZ that was growing bacteria and refining the fat in the cell walls into a fuel. Certainly not a positive energy balance but maybe something will come of it.

ken

 

Your whole premise is completely flawed -- electric cars are not more fuel efficient than Otto-cycle cars. They only exist because we burn even more of the existing fossil fuels to raise enough money to then subsidize the electric (and hybrid) car industry.

I can forgive you because it's just laughable the scientific falsehoods that are allowed to be used to indoctrinate the young today. A recent article in my local paper was (again) telling the kids just how "great" wind power is -- funny how they never seem to mention that it actually takes more fossil fuel using wind power to produce electricity than just burning the fossil fuel directly -- but why let reality get in the way (especially when you're part of the "green" industry making a nice paycheck off promoting kooky ideas that are paid for by having other people convert fossil fuels into money )

 

Would you care to elaborate?

 

That's a bit heavy handed. The premise is not flawed at all. Current technology favors internal combustion gas engines because they by far are the most efficient. But the question assumes we will continue to advance beyond that so give the man a fair answer.

I agree with Bullfighter. When hydrogen fuel cells run our cars, you will still be able to putter about in your gasoline powered Ferrari. Did you see the movie I Robot? They had that covered.

I expect Ferrari will still find ways to make cool cars even when we are no longer burning fossil fuels. I have no idea how, but I have faith.

ken

 

Certainly!

The wind-driven generator doesn't use fossil fuel to operate, but to make the wind-driven generator does, and a great many wind-driven generators are needed (a fossil fuel burning turbine/generator set is a very compact and more powerful unit in comparison needing many fewer workers and much less maintenance).

Since the wind-driven generators are spread out in large arrays they require a large workforce, all driving trucks -- so making the trucks takes fossil fuels and operating the trucks takes fossil fuels.

Since there are many employees, other people must burn even more fossil fuels in their activities to raise enough money to pay the salaries of these extra workers.

Bottom line is that, whenever something cost more $-wise than something else, it "uses" more fossil fuel (even if it doesn't use fossil fuel directly). The day it makes sense to generate electricity by wind power is the day that it can be done more cheaply than just burning the fossil fuel directly -- and that day, IMO, will be the day after we've burned the last lump of coal (and electricity generated by wind power will be so expensive that our civilization, as we know it, will not exist).

If you want to see this "denial" in action, come to Boulder -- mostly a bunch of people getting nice salaries and working at jobs that only exist because other people elsewhere are burning massive amounts of fossil fuel and then sending private (tuition) and public (tax) monies here. Kind of like Bono telling us we need to save the world as he gets on his personal 737 .

 

Sorry Ken -- that's just more "green" BS. The fact is that there is no free hydrogen fuel on this planet, and making H2 fuel from fossil fuel is, again, and overall energy losing proposition compared to just burning the fossil fuel directly.

I wish I could have your "Star Trek" optimism for the future, but I don't.

 

WHOOO HOOO!!! TACO BELL FOR LUNCH !!!

 

The whole idea that we are going to run out of fossil fuel anytime soon is bogus. What we are running out of is cheap to get fossil fuel. There is enough oil in Canada's tar sands and US's oil shale to last 100's of years, not to mention converting coal into oil, although that is another energy equation loser at the moment. Electricity is not "green fuel". It is generated by fossil fuel fired plants along with a little wind, hydro and nuclear. The demise of the IC powerplant has been predicted since I was in high school (60's). It's no closer to being obsolete now than it was then.

Dave

 

The whole idea that we are running out of resources is retarded. We are low on visionary leaders & wise courageous politicians & educated people.

We will never run out of resources if we use our heads. We live in a solar system so rich in resources it will easily outlast the human species

There is a Moon on Saturn for instance that has an ocean of natural gas big enough to power the Earth for thousands of years.

The asteroid belt has more than enough mineral resources to outlast our species

Also NASA has discovered water on comets, a Moon of Jupiter, and there is probably water on the moon & Mars

 

WILLIAM H for President!

 

Don't say retarded, although I agree with you. We need more visionaries, and we wil have them. No fear, Ferrari running as a boutique industry is great. Fine autos ruling the highways while the masses shuffle around in busses would look better than the glut of cars we have now. Burn it up!
BT

 

Bingo

 

I'll accept only if I can hire a harem of non typing interns & daily boxes of cigars

 

That's one way to produce methane.

 

Actually my '08 vote goes to Bill...

(Excuse me a second, I need to start up both cars and let them idle while I'm online tonight.)

 

Many cars will become obsolete once we find a better mode of transportation. Like old sailing ships, steam locomotives and antique biplanes, the most interesting examples will be preserved and hopefully driven whenever possible. Hopefully, but possibly not all Ferraris will make the cut.

If Ferrari comes up with an engine that will perform better on dog doo, they will drop gasoline engines. Sure, the sound of a V-12 is part of the fun, but so is shifting gears. Many have embraced what amounts to an automatic transmission, because it does the job better than humanly possible. It's just a matter of taste at that point. An electric Ferrari that goes 0-60 in 2 secs with a top speed of 250 mph would make me forget about an Enzo.

 

I just would 'nt worry about it . This has been going on for years. We are just short on refineries. The "greenies" hold us back in court every time we try to get one up. It goes the same for dams.

 

The move to hybrids and stuff like that are just steps. Whether or not the global warming thing is true, there are still huge benefits to US National and Energy Security to moving away from fossil fuels. The problem is that with our current technologies, we are still relying on fossil fuels while making the transition to more "eco-friendly" technologies.

Solar and wind power and what have you in their current states are not yet efficient enough (both cost-wise and energy creation-wise) to be able to displace a significant portion of our reliance on fossil fuels. The problem is that we do not spend enough money researching these kinds of technologies.

There are projects and ideas in the works that would allow us to get rid of our reliance on foreign energy sources, but they are still 20 or 30 years down the road (aren't they always?). There are things like new, more efficient forms of solar energy including putting a huge solar panel in space, using new generation nuclear fission power to create hydrogen to power cars, and nuclear fusion power.

Hopefully these ideas will come to fruition so we can shut up the people talking about carbon emissions (whether they are right or wrong), and also so we can end our reliance on foreign energy sources.

 

The day when gasoline is all out will not come for another 100 years... Let our grand children children worry about that, they will be a lot smarter than us.

 

We will NEVER run out of gasoline as supply/demand will push the price up so high that alternative fuels will be developed and put into effect before we ever "run" out.
Erik

 

A fellow Germantownian!

I dont think its too big of a concern either. The "invisible hand" will punch the eco-friendly whale lovers in the nards and we'll be drilling in Shamu's pool if we have to.

We've got time in our lifetime to enjoy highperformance cars. Dont worry about it.