<?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: So Much For That; EPA Won&#039;t Back Up  GM&#039;s  230 MPG Claim</title>
	<atom:link href="http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/</link>
	<description>What is the future of fuel?  What&#039;s new?  What&#039;s next?  Since 2007, Gas 2 has covered a rapidly changing world coming to terms with its oil addiction.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 21:57:52 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chevy Volt Gets Combined EPA Rating of 60 MPG &#8211; Gas 2.0</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-54788</link>
		<dc:creator>Chevy Volt Gets Combined EPA Rating of 60 MPG &#8211; Gas 2.0</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 24 Nov 2010 21:05:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-54788</guid>
		<description>[...] this stuff online. There is so much old, outdated information out there on both of these cars (GM&#8217;s 230 MPG fiasco for example) and instead of clearing the air, I feel like the EPA just added more [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] this stuff online. There is so much old, outdated information out there on both of these cars (GM&#8217;s 230 MPG fiasco for example) and instead of clearing the air, I feel like the EPA just added more [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ChuckL</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-11811</link>
		<dc:creator>ChuckL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:14:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-11811</guid>
		<description>MD,  Kilo-watt is a rate of consumption. The term you are looking for is kilo-watt-hour, which is using power at a rate of one kilo-watt for one hour.



What we really need in this argument is a standardized test to arrive at a close estimate of monthly operating costs, since this is really what we are concerned about. This must include all maintenance, all normal use items (expendables) all power replenishment costs, and any home refueling equipment costs which can be prorated over three years.



I definitely agree with you that MPG is a misleading term in this discussion.



What is interesting in this little MPG story, or battle, is that Ford which did get over 80 mpg from a Fusion Hybrid in a special test in which they ran a Fusion Hybrid on one tank of gasoline until it quit, and they  did tell us how they did it, and Ford has not claimed that this is what you can expect from your new Fusion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MD,  Kilo-watt is a rate of consumption. The term you are looking for is kilo-watt-hour, which is using power at a rate of one kilo-watt for one hour.</p>
<p>What we really need in this argument is a standardized test to arrive at a close estimate of monthly operating costs, since this is really what we are concerned about. This must include all maintenance, all normal use items (expendables) all power replenishment costs, and any home refueling equipment costs which can be prorated over three years.</p>
<p>I definitely agree with you that MPG is a misleading term in this discussion.</p>
<p>What is interesting in this little MPG story, or battle, is that Ford which did get over 80 mpg from a Fusion Hybrid in a special test in which they ran a Fusion Hybrid on one tank of gasoline until it quit, and they  did tell us how they did it, and Ford has not claimed that this is what you can expect from your new Fusion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ChuckL</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-35130</link>
		<dc:creator>ChuckL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-35130</guid>
		<description>MD,  Kilo-watt is a rate of consumption. The term you are looking for is kilo-watt-hour, which is using power at a rate of one kilo-watt for one hour.



What we really need in this argument is a standardized test to arrive at a close estimate of monthly operating costs, since this is really what we are concerned about. This must include all maintenance, all normal use items (expendables) all power replenishment costs, and any home refueling equipment costs which can be prorated over three years.



I definitely agree with you that MPG is a misleading term in this discussion.



What is interesting in this little MPG story, or battle, is that Ford which did get over 80 mpg from a Fusion Hybrid in a special test in which they ran a Fusion Hybrid on one tank of gasoline until it quit, and they  did tell us how they did it, and Ford has not claimed that this is what you can expect from your new Fusion.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>MD,  Kilo-watt is a rate of consumption. The term you are looking for is kilo-watt-hour, which is using power at a rate of one kilo-watt for one hour.</p>
<p>What we really need in this argument is a standardized test to arrive at a close estimate of monthly operating costs, since this is really what we are concerned about. This must include all maintenance, all normal use items (expendables) all power replenishment costs, and any home refueling equipment costs which can be prorated over three years.</p>
<p>I definitely agree with you that MPG is a misleading term in this discussion.</p>
<p>What is interesting in this little MPG story, or battle, is that Ford which did get over 80 mpg from a Fusion Hybrid in a special test in which they ran a Fusion Hybrid on one tank of gasoline until it quit, and they  did tell us how they did it, and Ford has not claimed that this is what you can expect from your new Fusion.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Jones</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-11810</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:01:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-11810</guid>
		<description>&quot;russ,&quot; above, is 100% correct.



GM never said this was an EPA rating. They said it was based on internal testing in-line with the current EPA proposal. Is it possibly misleading? Of course. Fraudulent? Not in the least.



GM needs hype right now. If they jump the gun, don&#039;t castrate them - they are trying to make a come back.



-bZj



PS: As a qualifier, I work for Toyota (my company even makes Prius parts).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;russ,&#8221; above, is 100% correct.</p>
<p>GM never said this was an EPA rating. They said it was based on internal testing in-line with the current EPA proposal. Is it possibly misleading? Of course. Fraudulent? Not in the least.</p>
<p>GM needs hype right now. If they jump the gun, don&#8217;t castrate them &#8211; they are trying to make a come back.</p>
<p>-bZj</p>
<p>PS: As a qualifier, I work for Toyota (my company even makes Prius parts).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian Jones</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-35129</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian Jones</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 03:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-35129</guid>
		<description>&quot;russ,&quot; above, is 100% correct.



GM never said this was an EPA rating. They said it was based on internal testing in-line with the current EPA proposal. Is it possibly misleading? Of course. Fraudulent? Not in the least.



GM needs hype right now. If they jump the gun, don&#039;t castrate them - they are trying to make a come back.



-bZj



PS: As a qualifier, I work for Toyota (my company even makes Prius parts).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;russ,&#8221; above, is 100% correct.</p>
<p>GM never said this was an EPA rating. They said it was based on internal testing in-line with the current EPA proposal. Is it possibly misleading? Of course. Fraudulent? Not in the least.</p>
<p>GM needs hype right now. If they jump the gun, don&#8217;t castrate them &#8211; they are trying to make a come back.</p>
<p>-bZj</p>
<p>PS: As a qualifier, I work for Toyota (my company even makes Prius parts).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MaxHedrm</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-11809</link>
		<dc:creator>MaxHedrm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-11809</guid>
		<description>Bwahahah. I just saw one of these ads before a ONN (Onione News Network) video on YouTube. Seem amazingly appropriate! :^D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bwahahah. I just saw one of these ads before a ONN (Onione News Network) video on YouTube. Seem amazingly appropriate! :^D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MaxHedrm</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-35128</link>
		<dc:creator>MaxHedrm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 02:22:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-35128</guid>
		<description>Bwahahah. I just saw one of these ads before a ONN (Onione News Network) video on YouTube. Seem amazingly appropriate! :^D</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Bwahahah. I just saw one of these ads before a ONN (Onione News Network) video on YouTube. Seem amazingly appropriate! :^D</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mitch</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-11808</link>
		<dc:creator>Mitch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:51:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-11808</guid>
		<description>Hi,



&quot;My average commute consists of about 60 miles round trip, but in a Volt that would only cost me twenty miles worth of gas, probably under a half-gallon since the Volt will still get very good gas mileage.&quot;



NO gas if you charged at work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>&#8220;My average commute consists of about 60 miles round trip, but in a Volt that would only cost me twenty miles worth of gas, probably under a half-gallon since the Volt will still get very good gas mileage.&#8221;</p>
<p>NO gas if you charged at work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mitch</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-35127</link>
		<dc:creator>Mitch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 01:51:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-35127</guid>
		<description>Hi,



&quot;My average commute consists of about 60 miles round trip, but in a Volt that would only cost me twenty miles worth of gas, probably under a half-gallon since the Volt will still get very good gas mileage.&quot;



NO gas if you charged at work.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi,</p>
<p>&#8220;My average commute consists of about 60 miles round trip, but in a Volt that would only cost me twenty miles worth of gas, probably under a half-gallon since the Volt will still get very good gas mileage.&#8221;</p>
<p>NO gas if you charged at work.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave</title>
		<link>http://gas2.org/2009/08/12/so-much-for-that-epa-wont-back-up-gms-230-mpg-claim/#comment-11807</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 13 Aug 2009 00:10:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://gas2.org/?p=3231#comment-11807</guid>
		<description>@Gil Friend: I&#039;d be surprised if they weren&#039;t factoring in the energy it takes to charge the batteries. I bet they came up with the 230MPG number by using the EPA&#039;s petroleum-equivalent fuel economy formula at http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2000/June/Day-12/i14446.htm , which tells you how to convert an electric vehicle&#039;s watt-hour/mile to miles/gallon.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Gil Friend: I&#8217;d be surprised if they weren&#8217;t factoring in the energy it takes to charge the batteries. I bet they came up with the 230MPG number by using the EPA&#8217;s petroleum-equivalent fuel economy formula at <a href="http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2000/June/Day-12/i14446.htm" rel="nofollow">http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2000/June/Day-12/i14446.htm</a> , which tells you how to convert an electric vehicle&#8217;s watt-hour/mile to miles/gallon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

