<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Must View:  &#8220;It&#8217;s like these guys take pride in being ignorant&#8221;</title>
	<atom:link href="http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/</link>
	<description>The Latest on Climate Science, Solutions, and Politics</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 12:18:00 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Donald B</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17454</link>
		<dc:creator>Donald B</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Aug 2008 15:21:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17454</guid>
		<description>To CharlesH:

People are not too stupid to always do the right thing; sometimes they are ignorant of the right thing and just do what they have always done; sometimes they just forget to do the right thing and sometimes they think that doing the right thing is not as important as doing something else.

For Paul K:

You are taking the subject out of context: when one optimizes a variable, one considers the effects (all the effects) of each value and picks the value that gives the best performance in the multidimensional space of all the outcomes that that variable affects. That is presumably what the manufacturer did when he calculated a value for tire inflation to put in the owners&#039; manual. Note that Toyota chose to select not only the tire pressure but a special tire design that has less rolling resistance that the &quot;normal&quot; tire design.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>To CharlesH:</p>
<p>People are not too stupid to always do the right thing; sometimes they are ignorant of the right thing and just do what they have always done; sometimes they just forget to do the right thing and sometimes they think that doing the right thing is not as important as doing something else.</p>
<p>For Paul K:</p>
<p>You are taking the subject out of context: when one optimizes a variable, one considers the effects (all the effects) of each value and picks the value that gives the best performance in the multidimensional space of all the outcomes that that variable affects. That is presumably what the manufacturer did when he calculated a value for tire inflation to put in the owners&#8217; manual. Note that Toyota chose to select not only the tire pressure but a special tire design that has less rolling resistance that the &#8220;normal&#8221; tire design.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul K</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17425</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 20:18:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17425</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;the debate was about safety, which is insane&lt;/i&gt; 

Maximize mpg.  Pump your 32 psi tires up to 45psi for amazing results. Then as your bouncing off the road into the ditch contemplate the insanity of optimizing tire inflation for safety rather than mpg.

[&lt;em&gt;JR:  Proper tire inflation increases safety and mileage.&lt;/em&gt;]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>the debate was about safety, which is insane</i> </p>
<p>Maximize mpg.  Pump your 32 psi tires up to 45psi for amazing results. Then as your bouncing off the road into the ditch contemplate the insanity of optimizing tire inflation for safety rather than mpg.</p>
<p>[<em>JR:  Proper tire inflation increases safety and mileage.</em>]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: charlie</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17424</link>
		<dc:creator>charlie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 19:56:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17424</guid>
		<description>Eric -- because of the Nader lawsuit the deadline was pushed back to 2012 or something.  There is a difference between the &quot;active&quot; and &quot;passive&quot; tpms.  Nader wanted Active.  Detroit wanted passive.  Again the debate was about safety, which is insane -- the passive system detects when 25% of the air is lost.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eric &#8212; because of the Nader lawsuit the deadline was pushed back to 2012 or something.  There is a difference between the &#8220;active&#8221; and &#8220;passive&#8221; tpms.  Nader wanted Active.  Detroit wanted passive.  Again the debate was about safety, which is insane &#8212; the passive system detects when 25% of the air is lost.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cyril R.</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17406</link>
		<dc:creator>Cyril R.</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 16:04:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17406</guid>
		<description>Of course they take pride in it. Being obtuse is a well established profession, y&#039; now.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Of course they take pride in it. Being obtuse is a well established profession, y&#8217; now.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17403</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 15:21:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17403</guid>
		<description>ChalesH - one of the major problems with efficiency  in terms of power generation (not talking about tire gauges here) is that the way the current system is set up, power companies have no incentive to be efficient. The more energy you use, the more they get paid. Being more efficient has no financial incentives. Some states are working to change that, but it has yet to be actually changed.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>ChalesH &#8211; one of the major problems with efficiency  in terms of power generation (not talking about tire gauges here) is that the way the current system is set up, power companies have no incentive to be efficient. The more energy you use, the more they get paid. Being more efficient has no financial incentives. Some states are working to change that, but it has yet to be actually changed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: EricG</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17397</link>
		<dc:creator>EricG</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 14:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17397</guid>
		<description>Hey, I did some research on this last night and discovered a few things:

1. I could not find a single 2008 auto which had a tire pressure management system (TPMS) as standard equipment.  All the car specs I reviewed (not many, as it was getting late) list TPMS as &quot;Available&quot;.  The rule reads as follows:

&quot;This final rule establishes a new Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) requiring installation of a tire pressure monitoring system
(TPMS) capable of detecting when one or more of a vehicle’s tires is
significantly under-inflated.&quot;

The rule is effective for all light vehicles of model year 2008.  I don&#039;t know what part of &quot;requiring installation&quot; I don&#039;t understand, but apparently I don&#039;t understand the rule.

2.  The standard requires the system to notify drivers when tires are 25% under-inflated.  This is a SAFETY rule, not an efficiency rule.  Notification at 10% is needed as an efficiency standard.

3. TPMS technology is advancing rapidly, and there are several companies focused on developing new systems.  It appears the biggest problem has been powering direct systems (in which a pressure gauge is attached to the wheel with RF communication to a display on the dashboard).  These systems have been using batteries in the past, which have short lives when attached to fast spinning hot surfaces, like an automobile wheel.  Of course, there&#039;s a lot of energy in them wheels, and they are figuring out ways to use that rather than batteries.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey, I did some research on this last night and discovered a few things:</p>
<p>1. I could not find a single 2008 auto which had a tire pressure management system (TPMS) as standard equipment.  All the car specs I reviewed (not many, as it was getting late) list TPMS as &#8220;Available&#8221;.  The rule reads as follows:</p>
<p>&#8220;This final rule establishes a new Federal motor vehicle safety standard (FMVSS) requiring installation of a tire pressure monitoring system<br />
(TPMS) capable of detecting when one or more of a vehicle’s tires is<br />
significantly under-inflated.&#8221;</p>
<p>The rule is effective for all light vehicles of model year 2008.  I don&#8217;t know what part of &#8220;requiring installation&#8221; I don&#8217;t understand, but apparently I don&#8217;t understand the rule.</p>
<p>2.  The standard requires the system to notify drivers when tires are 25% under-inflated.  This is a SAFETY rule, not an efficiency rule.  Notification at 10% is needed as an efficiency standard.</p>
<p>3. TPMS technology is advancing rapidly, and there are several companies focused on developing new systems.  It appears the biggest problem has been powering direct systems (in which a pressure gauge is attached to the wheel with RF communication to a display on the dashboard).  These systems have been using batteries in the past, which have short lives when attached to fast spinning hot surfaces, like an automobile wheel.  Of course, there&#8217;s a lot of energy in them wheels, and they are figuring out ways to use that rather than batteries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: charlie</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17357</link>
		<dc:creator>charlie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 03:00:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17357</guid>
		<description>sorry, got cut off.  That estimate of the saving was based on a harper&#039;s factoid:  in 2004,  improving the MPG of all SUVs/Light trucks in the US by 1 MPG would save 900K b/d of oil.  That seems a bit high -- US military use is only about 700K a day -- so I cut that down.  However proper tire pressure can save at least 1 mpg even in city driving.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>sorry, got cut off.  That estimate of the saving was based on a harper&#8217;s factoid:  in 2004,  improving the MPG of all SUVs/Light trucks in the US by 1 MPG would save 900K b/d of oil.  That seems a bit high &#8212; US military use is only about 700K a day &#8212; so I cut that down.  However proper tire pressure can save at least 1 mpg even in city driving.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: charlie</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17356</link>
		<dc:creator>charlie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 02:55:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17356</guid>
		<description>EricG:

Funny story on that law.  The nader people sued to block it.  Successfully -- pushed the law back 5 years.   Safety -- they wanted a stricter standard.  My guess is not implementing the law back in 2004 cost on about 50-100K b/d of oil.

Sigh.

A better strategy would be to make sure all new cars have readouts of mileage (trip computer), and move to measuring it by volume not by fuel injector sensors.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EricG:</p>
<p>Funny story on that law.  The nader people sued to block it.  Successfully &#8212; pushed the law back 5 years.   Safety &#8212; they wanted a stricter standard.  My guess is not implementing the law back in 2004 cost on about 50-100K b/d of oil.</p>
<p>Sigh.</p>
<p>A better strategy would be to make sure all new cars have readouts of mileage (trip computer), and move to measuring it by volume not by fuel injector sensors.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul K</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17354</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 02:07:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17354</guid>
		<description>EricG,
You must have a genie in a bottle because your wish has been granted. A quick Google search turned up this: &quot;By 2008, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulations will require all new cars and light trucks to be equipped with a tire pressure monitoring system. The system must warn the driver if the pressure inside any tire on the vehicle is 25 percent or more under the recommended pressure.&quot; Read all about it &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.tireindustry.org/pdf/TPMS_FinalRule_v3.pdf&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;here&lt;/a&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>EricG,<br />
You must have a genie in a bottle because your wish has been granted. A quick Google search turned up this: &#8220;By 2008, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) regulations will require all new cars and light trucks to be equipped with a tire pressure monitoring system. The system must warn the driver if the pressure inside any tire on the vehicle is 25 percent or more under the recommended pressure.&#8221; Read all about it <a href="http://www.tireindustry.org/pdf/TPMS_FinalRule_v3.pdf" rel="nofollow">here</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul K</title>
		<link>http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17352</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul K</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Aug 2008 01:52:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://climateprogress.org/2008/08/06/must-view-its-like-these-guys-take-pride-in-being-ignorant/#comment-17352</guid>
		<description>Donald B,
My wife is also gauge challenged. I really don&#039;t understand people who don&#039;t properly maintain a large investment like a car, even a used one. My current car is a 1991 Geo Storm (35+mpg in the city with California emission controls), but I&#039;ve owned a lot of low compression 8 cylinder GMs over the years and my comment on premium mpg was based on personal experience with them. If you say it is not so with today&#039;s engines, I have no reason to disagree. The Geo and my wife&#039;s V6 Olds both run on regular with only occasional premium fill-ups for the detergent value.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Donald B,<br />
My wife is also gauge challenged. I really don&#8217;t understand people who don&#8217;t properly maintain a large investment like a car, even a used one. My current car is a 1991 Geo Storm (35+mpg in the city with California emission controls), but I&#8217;ve owned a lot of low compression 8 cylinder GMs over the years and my comment on premium mpg was based on personal experience with them. If you say it is not so with today&#8217;s engines, I have no reason to disagree. The Geo and my wife&#8217;s V6 Olds both run on regular with only occasional premium fill-ups for the detergent value.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
