Have you read "something new under the sun"
by J>R> McNeil. Great book just full of such facts.

There was a figure in my history text book, I think (or maybe it was a websight I saw). It had figures on the relative supply of power by human labor, machine, and animals in the pre-Civil War and other times in the U.S. It was fascinating. It's at my parents' house in St. Louis now, and being in Chicago, I can't dig it up, but I'll try to find it when I go home for Thanksgiving.

Julian Elson

Must have been a lot of horses in the UK in 1800 thought!

Speaking of SUVs, here's a question I've been unable to answer:

If we magically tranformed all SUVs into ordinary sedans, what would be the impact
on US fuel consumption?

Put another way, is the popular characterization of SUVs as "poster boys" of waste truly warranted?

"If we magically tranformed all SUVs into ordinary sedans, what would be the impact on US fuel consumption?"

Surely a gain a fuel efficiency of 20% would not be trivial. Perhaps we need SUVs, but there is a substantial cost to fuel efficiency and there is every reason for us to be conservation and ecology minded. Compare a Ford Explorer with a Saturn or Honda sedan.... Which is more fuel efficient?

Compare a Ford Explorer with a Saturn or Honda sedan.... Which is more fuel efficient?

For one or two passengers, the SUV loses, of course. But more passengers or lots of cargo makes such a vehicle more of a tool than a toy.

Let's try this: What % of vehicles on the road now are SUVs that spend most of their time ferrying only one or two people, or enough cargo to fill a Honda's trunk? If we magically transformed those into Hondas and Saturns, what would be the "reward" in fuel usage?

In the interest of full disclosure, I do NOT own an SUV, and put less than 1,000 miles/year on my car.

I own an over-powered SUV. I bought it for its 'pep' because I want to be able to get out of other's way when necessary. I also like the better visibility that sitting higher can bring. This defensive posture is now less effective because of newer, bigger, more powerful, and thus more threatening SUV's. It's a bloody arms race!

I own an over-powered SUV. I bought it for its 'pep' because I want to be able to get out of other's way when necessary. I also like the better visibility that sitting higher can bring. This defensive posture is now less effective because of newer, bigger, more powerful, and thus more threatening SUV's. It's a bloody arms race!

Apologizing for formatting in advance:

Top Kyoto Minister Admits He Has Two SUVs

Nov 22, 9:45 am ET

OTTAWA (Reuters) - So what does Canada's natural resources minister drive when he's not pushing ratification of the Kyoto climate change protocol?

Minister Herb Dhaliwal confessed that, well, he has two Volvos and two sport utility vehicles -- General Motors 4x4s, to be precise. One pair for Ottawa and one pair for his home in Vancouver.

He was one of two cabinet members unveiling Canada's plans to implement the Kyoto climate change accord to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases, which included calls to citizens to buy smaller fuel-efficient vehicles.

“David and I don't always agree on the SUV issue,” he chuckled, gesturing to Environment Minister David Anderson, who had just blasted urban driving of the gas-guzzling SUVs.

When Anderson's not being driven in a government car, he drives a Toyota Corolla. “The K car died,” he said.

Dhaliwal said there were many ways to make energy savings. For example, he referred to solar panels on his roof

"Must have been a lot of horses in the UK in 1800 thought!"

One should not forget the health hazards of horse excrement. Almost certainly, the smell must have been awful during that time period. Should we wish for the good old days? Hell no, most of those people died before they were 50. Our way of life is far superior.

Minister Herb Dhaliwal's hypocrisy should not be overlooked. The parasitical Canadians want to have their cake and eat it too. These people are not our friends. It's time for America to wake up and realize that the Canadians are nothing but a bunch of free loading buffoons. I have been saying this for a long time. Thankfully, others are finally jumping on the bandwagon. Jonah Goldberg of the National Review is way behind the times. but it’s better late than never.

In Manhattan in the late 1800s they had a terrible time dealing with the horse waste problem. Not the smell as much as the logistics of getting all the mucked-up stable straw off the island.

Wait... I'm afraid David Thomson's confused me.... people lived worse in the 1800s, when horses were the dominant means of transportation.

Therefore, we, in attempting to improve our own welfare, should not try to develop and promote methods and technologies that would abate problems associated with our society and means of transportation.

Huh?

Julian Elson

Julian

I can help. I think David's argument is

Cars are better than horses
Therefore any criticism of cars is wrong
And the rest of the world are parasites

Matthew

"I can help. I think David's argument is

Cars are better than horses Therefore any criticism of cars is wrong"

Not at all. Cars are better than horses, and we will have to do our best with them until something better comes along. Is that so hard to comprehend? Has a new form of transportation been invented in the last five minutes that I'm unaware of? Should I rush over to the Drudgereport to see if I missed a just released news story? Also, why are the Liberals on this discussion board not addressing the hypocrisy of Minister Herb Dhaliwal?

I wasn't aware SUVs are *completely incapable* of improving their gas mileage or reducing their emissions. Sounds like that old "rich democrats are hypocrites because they don't give all their money to the poor" line, which is equally nonsensical.