Leftie wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> Philippe wrote:
>>> Leftie a �crit:
>>>
>>>> I just averaged 50mpg on a quarter tank of gas with my '95 Civic
>>>> EX sedan.
>>>
>>> the lower with an european toyota corolla diesel (1l4 engine 1NDTV)
>>> was 65mpg on a hot day, a 80km trip maximum speed 90km/h on high way.
>>>
>>> the usual is 55mpg
>>
>> wow, that's pretty sippy.
>
>
> I've seen mention of European diesel *Volvos* getting about 40.

english gallon or american gallon?

 

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <Sr4Jl.166632$4m1.77999@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote:
>
>
>>"The sky is falling" zealots have move far beyond environmentalism on to
>>promoting the same as a religion.
>
>
> Follow the money....always follow the money.
>
> Sure, there are plenty of kookbiscuits to beat the shrubs, but the guy
> handing out the bats has a financial interest and nothing BUT a
> financial interest.


'nuff said! Zee nail az bin hit onna haid!!

<G>

JT

 

honda.lioness@gmail.com wrote:

> On Apr 26, 3:37 pm, Grumpy AuContraire <Gru...@ExtraGrumpyville.com>
> wrote:
>
>>honda.lion...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Apr 26, 2:52 pm, Tegger <inva...@invalid.inv> wrote:
>
>
>>>>"Environmental costs" are invented and quantified by the capricious whim of
>>>>activists and politicians. They are not true costs.
>>
>>>You need to google on this. Chevron, Exxon and the like pay a lot of
>>>money in several ways to cover environmental costs.
>>
>>I think that is what he's saying... The associated "environmental"
>>costs are unneeded add ons encouraged by government etc.
>>
>>JT
>
>
>
> This is not what I am saying. Oil spills and damage done by drilling
> are very expensive. U.S. companies pay a lot by way of better
> equipment and better planning to minimize both. Reason: Paying up
> front is less than what it would cost otherwise.


Well, I cain't argue with that either.

But in the end, it's the customer who ultimately pays. And that
customer will soon be saddled with all kinds of add ons like carbon
credits, fees and the like.

JT

 

Tegger wrote:

> Grumpy AuContraire <Grumpy@ExtraGrumpyville.com> wrote in
> news:Sr4Jl.166632$4m1.77999@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net:
>
>
>>
>>Tegger wrote:
>
>
>>>"Environmental costs" are invented and quantified by the capricious
>>>whim of activists and politicians. They are not true costs.
>>>
>>>Now if you want to remove the SUBSIDIES from petroleum so the TRUE
>>>costs are reflected in the pump price, I would wholeheartedly agree
>>>with that.
>>
>>
>>Thank You for an ounce of sanity here.
>>
>>"The sky is falling" zealots have move far beyond environmentalism on
>>to promoting the same as a religion.
>
>
>
>
> What's currently accepted as "environmentalism" IS a religion. Like any
> other religion, it's based on emotion and fear, and not much else.
>
>
>
>
>>Just to balance things out, I think I'll go for a forty mile drive in
>>my '55 President sedan that only gets about 25mpg...
>>
>
>
>
> Spew some blue smoke for me, huh?


No smoke from that baby... Only 71K on it!

JT

 

jim beam wrote:
> Philippe wrote:
>> Leftie a �crit:
>>
>>> I just averaged 50mpg on a quarter tank of gas with my '95 Civic
>>> EX sedan.
>>
>> the lower with an european toyota corolla diesel (1l4 engine 1NDTV)
>> was 65mpg on a hot day, a 80km trip maximum speed 90km/h on high way.
>>
>> the usual is 55mpg
>
> wow, that's pretty sippy.


I've seen mention of European diesel *Volvos* getting about 40.

 

jim beam wrote:
>
> english gallon or american gallon?

Unlikely that they would use a unit of measure that they are not
familiar with or use in real life. Imperial would be the unit of measure.

 

In message <IKydnfkdMOHz52vUnZ2dnUVZ_g1i4p2d@speakeasy.net> , jim beam
<retard-finger@bad.example.net> writes
>english gallon or american gallon?
Don't you mean "Imperial gallon or American gallon?
--
Clive

 

On Apr 26, 5:48 pm, honda.lion...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> This is not what I am saying. Oil spills and damagedoneby drilling
> are very expensive. U.S. companies pay a lot by way of better
> equipment and better planning to minimize both. Reason: Paying up
> front is less than what it would costotherwise.

multitalented

mk5000

Larry: Don't you know the combination, Sheila?
Sheila: I knew it when I was in front! --chorus line