What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
130 Comments
- WitnessX, on 05/29/2009, -4/+18I think China is going to be able to achieve this goal, given their energy consumption of the country, and their heavy investments into clean energy technologies. The Chinese (people) has historically made do with what they have, and have a culture of not being wasteful, so if this is their goal I'll place my bet on China.
This is our (USA) cue to step it up. We've got the technology, and know-how to be the world leader in this area. We just need to get coordinated, and focused. - Whoopes, on 05/29/2009, -15/+26now if they could just get some crash standards
- altgeeky1, on 05/29/2009, -2/+13China can get away with this, because THEIR "investor class" is more patriotic than that of many Western countries.
In a lot of Western countries, it's considered OK to make a buck at the expense of your country. For example, look at last year's gasoline prices in the US... prices which were NOT driven by "supply and demand"... but by the almighty hedge-fund traders who would buy and sell the same tanker's cargo 3 or 4 times before it reached the US. The regulations against this type of trading were working fine through 2002 thank you very much, but the regs were gutted by a certain president and vice president with strong loyalties and ties to Dubai and Saudi Arabia. Said politicians shall remain nameless. ;-) - Hetman, on 05/29/2009, -1/+12They're asians.
- WitnessX, on 05/29/2009, -4/+15Do you seriously still think China is a communist country? They are Communist in name only. Just look at how businesses are conducted there, and you will see that the communist label no longer applies.
- MxM111, on 05/29/2009, -1/+10Also, Americans are heavier
/jk - skintigh, on 05/29/2009, -5/+14Are you just mocking China or alluding to the false meme that lighter cars are less safe? If the latter, that meme has long been debunked. It may have been true in the 1960s, but not since the advent of modern technology like seat belts, crumple zones, air bags, and modern materials.
"In the last 40 years ... auto racing speeds have increased, yet deaths have decreased significantly while the weights of the vehicles have gone down progressively. Why? Crushable fronts that absorb impact, 'tubs' that shelter drivers after the entire car has disintegrated, a relocation of the front axle and, yes, crash bags. In this case, lighter is markedly safer."
http://www.autosafety.org/comment-lighter-vehicles ...
""There's now a credible opposing view to what used to be the only view," says David L. Greene, a research fellow at Oak Ridge National Laboratory, a Department of Energy research lab. A paper he co-authored in March, looking at car-crash fatality rates from 1966 to 2002, found no statistically significant relationship between fuel economy and increased traffic fatalities. Mr. Greene says that previous research that did find a correlation studied only the immediate years after fuel-economy reform when weight drops were most significant. But studied over a longer period, that correlation disappears, he says.
For years, the accepted wisdom in the car industry held that, all things being equal, heavier vehicles are always safer when two vehicles crash. New studies highlight how other factors -- including a car's size, body design and advanced technology -- can do much to counteract the weight issue.
The newer studies also have homed in on the downside of weight: While a heavy vehicle protects its occupants in an accident, it inflicts more damage to those it hits. That means reducing the weight of the biggest vehicles could yield dividends in both fuel consumption and safety."
...
"There has been a recurring contention that heavier vehicles are safer. But even the experts disagree on that point. The more important question is whether lighter-weight vehicles can be made to be as safe as heavier ones. The evidence suggests they can be."
http://www.calcars.org/calcars-news/155.html
A complete study:
http://cta.ornl.gov/cta/Publications/Reports/TRB_0 ... - inactive, on 05/29/2009, -1/+9they are capitalists.
- altgeeky1, on 05/29/2009, -1/+8GM China does pretty good on crash standards.
- Hetman, on 05/29/2009, -1/+7It has been working for Europe the past 50 years. Taxing gas will spur development of alternative fuels also.
- Bloodboiler, on 05/29/2009, -0/+5New cars averaging 35.8 miles per gallon ( 6.6 l/100 km) is considered good in China and unreasonable in US?
My first German car, made in 1990, could do that. It was not even particularly small or low in power. Just your average car that is not a SUV or sports car nor one of those mini cars any male would hate to drive. Part of that may have been that I was rarely stuck in traffic jams, but still.. Now that I've switched to slightly newer and better diesel car I get consumption around the Chinese 2015 requirement.
Just stop buying god dam over sized and powered cars. A mid size car with suitably sized engine is unbelievably convenient. You get nice acceleration without the extra consumption of big car with big engine, you can stop on a dime and take curves faster, and you don't have to bother filling up the fuel tank so often. - norman619, on 05/29/2009, -1/+6China hasn't been communist in a long time. They are on their way to being a capitalist nation. They are more of a socialist capitaistic society with a sprinkling of fascism.
- ibakeit4u, on 05/29/2009, -1/+6Actually the Smart 4x2 gets way better gas mileage and will survive a crash better then an SUV (roll cage).
- PandaBearShenyu, on 05/29/2009, -2/+7Most of these comments suck and reek of America ***** yeah-ism and denial.
- matt77, on 05/29/2009, -1/+5stix213: "It takes more material in the car to protect you"
Maybe that was true 30 years ago, but not so much now. Here are some IIHS frontal crash test results.
H3: http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=907
Prius: http://www.iihs.org/ratings/rating.aspx?id=641
Note the Prius gets the highest rating in all categories. The H3 scores lower overall and scores "Poor" (the lowest rating) for the right leg/foot. That's just an example, but I guess if you want to protect your legs, you should choose a Prius over an H3. And of course having less big heavy vehicles on the road would make everyone safer. - KSUdesigner, on 05/29/2009, -1/+5Except focus and coordination is not something our government does well. Sadly, distraction and bickering is the norm for U.S. politicians.
- chaddc, on 05/29/2009, -0/+4Since Hong Kong has its roots in the British Empire, I wonder if they are using UK Gallons (4.54 liters) or US Gallons (3.78 liters). That would make a huge difference in the MPG standard.
- ibakeit4u, on 05/29/2009, -1/+5Thats because they don't support a bloated military machine.
- Wag3Slav3, on 05/29/2009, -6/+10The only reason you might not survive a crash in a small Chinese car in america is that every soccer mom in the usa is driving a 2 and a half ton tank instead of a small practical car. This is because she doesn't "feel safe" and she like it when her sugar daddy buys her expensive *****.
People drive such monstrosities that they can get into accidents with "normal" (for the rest of the planet) cars and not even know they ran over someone's car. - fury420, on 05/29/2009, -1/+5you may be kidding, but I'm sure on a large scale the difference in Obesity rates will have some effect... I wonder what the difference in weight is on a per-capita basis between US citizens & Chinese citizens
- ibakeit4u, on 05/29/2009, -1/+5Ahh, yes because the market has been working out so well for other things.
- Whoopes, on 05/29/2009, -2/+6I was just talking about how many Chinese cars are awful in crashes.
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&se ...
interesting article btw - KSUdesigner, on 05/29/2009, -1/+5I don't hear a whole lot of Americans screaming that they want lower mileage standards. Yes we like our big vehicles, but we like saving money on gas just as much.
- dododohead, on 05/29/2009, -1/+4I would like to note that you probably did it by accident, but it should be "hear."
....Before some ***** on digg comes and gets you for it. - damack, on 05/29/2009, -1/+4You have to remember the Chinese don't have experience in many fields(though they create good products in many other fields).
Having said that though China are putting up the most advanced country wide rail system on the planet and paying people half a years wage not to buy cars so they might meet it.
We will have to see how this works out.
It could either go well for them or their lack of experience might come back to haunt them but their pushing very hard on this front. - GrammerPants, on 05/29/2009, -2/+5Oil consumption has nothing to do with saving the world, it has to do with making your country more secure. China is just taking care of its own interests, a side affect is that it may help clean up the planet.
- Solkre, on 05/29/2009, -2/+5Safety just weighs the car down you know.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dimg2n2Azwg - knowitman, on 05/29/2009, -0/+3I wouldn't call the internal combustion engine a dead technology. That is a true statement of ignorance.
- cliffzdude, on 05/29/2009, -0/+3He was mocking China and their lack of crash standards, funny that was lost given how many times videos of new Chinese made cars failing crash tests oh-so-miserably have been here on Digg.
- inactive, on 05/29/2009, -1/+4No.
- reuscel, on 05/29/2009, -5/+8And the USA is a democracy in name only.
- Solkre, on 05/29/2009, -0/+3I want to clarify that I'm not saying drive a Hummer here. I have a 97 Ford Taurus that fits me and my two kids well. I'm unhappy with my 20-24mpg and will be looking at a 4cyl sedan when it's time to trade in. However I wont trade reasonable safety for the most possible gas savings.
- collution, on 05/29/2009, -1/+4I didn't know we could here from China.
Interesting. - knowitman, on 05/29/2009, -0/+3Many cars in the late 80s and some in the early 90s can easily get higher gas mileage than today's cars. They don't have things like airbags, seatbelts, protective cages, etc etc.
- inactive, on 05/29/2009, -1/+3too little too late.....the highest concentration of CO2 emissions is concentrated over China/Thailand etc. and to try and reduce it by cutting vehicle emissions is kind of a joke considering its China's industrial sector thats making most of the pollution.
- inactive, on 05/29/2009, -1/+3Yes.
- darkened, on 05/29/2009, -2/+4The issue is the lack of diesel technology in America, not the size of our vehicles. Some of GM's best selling vehicles were diesel powered that already averaged this gas mileage however due to US laws they aren't even allowed to sell them here.
- tamman2000, on 05/29/2009, -0/+2you do realize that the diesel is an internal combustion engine, right?
- borez, on 05/29/2009, -0/+2China has ( city figures) 100 cars for every 10,000 people, this is an export initiative to expand their car market abroad. No doubt.
- taibo, on 05/29/2009, -0/+2There are a ton of reasons, but the main one is that Hong Kong is a city, and China is a country with over a billion people.
You can't just turn the world's largest Communist state to a Hong-Kong-like capitalist democracy like that without some major disruptions. - mkriss5681, on 05/29/2009, -7/+9The real reason why China did this is to protect their car industry. One of the reasons why American cars do not sell well overseas is because the terrible mpg does not fall under other countries regulations.
With Obama pushing for higher mpg in vehicles it opened the possibility for US auto manufactures to really get competitive in Eurorpe & Asia. Now even with the higher mpg laws we still won't be able to market our cars to China because it won't meet their laws. - PandaBearShenyu, on 05/29/2009, -1/+3Too bad they have 4 times the people and pollute the same as the U.S. right?
- zeth006, on 05/29/2009, -1/+3I think Wagslav has it right.
It seems as though in an overwhelming number of cases (maybe 9/10) I see huge hummers and SUVs...with just one passenger inside. Such a waste of gas. These same people are the ones who complain the most when gas prices go $3 and beyond.
The other day I saw a really short middle-aged Indian lady who couldn't have been more than half the height of her SUV...I regretted not having saved my cellphone camera.
Typical retard who says "Hate to say it, but I'll trade some MPG for a car I could survive a crash in" just wants an excuse to compensate for feeling small and helpless.
Impotent little git. - knowitman, on 05/29/2009, -1/+3I wish I could digg you a few more times.
- zeth006, on 05/29/2009, -0/+2That's perfectly fine. My mid-sized sedan gets 24-25 mpg as well. I didn't have gas mileage only in mind. It was simply the best deal out there--and everyone who disagreed with me at the outset (mostly due to its less-known brand) had to take a pause when I told them the dealer I got the car from went out of business a month after the purchase. Even mom's saying that was luck.
If it's a decision among sub-compacts/compacts/midsized, you make the value judgment. At 24-25mpg you're still saving significantly more than those idiots who're paying to fill a 15mpg and whining about it.
At the sub-compact/compact range, the average you get is 35mpg.
I'm learning through my first car experience that a smaller car may be preferable. The chance that I'll get into a major accident as a result of my desire to satisfy my male instincts to drive like a racer are next to nothing. I'm not a reckless driver and I'm single. Yes, I know I'm not God and that anything can happen. But the level of protection that my car would afford me vs. a compact can't be considerable enough to justify thousands of dollars more of gas bills a year. And it certainly isn't sufficient justification for getting a hummer. I think anyone who continues to yack on with that mindset is lying to himself and needs to get a proper wake-up call instead of crying about gas bills. - mickstephenson, on 05/29/2009, -0/+2I was going to search out a youtube video of part of a program called "Paul Merton in China" Where it shows a massive chinese landfill site where many, many people live permanently scavenging food to stay alive, but instead I found this other clip, and well it's more fun and far too charming not to share.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y4LIThTB8Ww - brad3378, on 05/29/2009, -0/+2source?
- ohplease, on 05/29/2009, -0/+2We need to give China an alternative to building all those damned coal plants.
- Rioracer916, on 05/29/2009, -0/+2That happens in the US as well, China isn't some special case.
The traffic laws here are a great example of that. Most of the time keeping up with the flow of traffic causes you to exceed the speed limit, but you can get a ticket for obstructing the flow of traffic as well.
Also running a business in the US makes it impossible to follow the letter of every single federal, state, county, and local law. There are too many of them and a lot of the laws and fees aren't even enforced. -
Show 51 - 100 of 135 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is