Go GREEN Environmental Bracelet

My Nissan Leaf Forum

Help Support My Nissan Leaf Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

LEAFfan

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2010
Messages
4,830
Location
Phoenix Area
Since we can't choose a green-colored LEAF, we can wear a silicone forest green bracelet to show our support for the environment. I found these with a search. There are also 'green' bumper sticker magnets, pins, and ribbons. If you're interested, here is the url: http://www.bumperstickermagnet.com/swbgrna001.html :mrgreen:
 
I'm puzzled. How does this "show support for the environment"?

It's a green silicone band with "Hope, Courage, Faith" embossed on it. If anything, it shows support for the silicone bracelet factories.
Buying or Wearing it doesn't cause anyone to behave differently.

Maybe Nissan can give these out to their dealerships as part of the greenwashing campaign. :mrgreen:
 
GroundLoop said:
I'm puzzled. How does this "show support for the environment"?

It's a green silicone band with "Hope, Courage, Faith" embossed on it. If anything, it shows support for the silicone bracelet factories.
Buying or Wearing it doesn't cause anyone to behave differently.

Maybe Nissan can give these out to their dealerships as part of the greenwashing campaign. :mrgreen:

Okay scrooge, I guess you didn't read on their website. This particular one supports the environment. If you want something that says, "Go Green", then you can purchase a bumper sticker, ribbon, or pin. The 'Hope' stands for a specific battery warranty, 'Courage' is for the early adopters, and 'Faith' is for trusting Nissan. :mrgreen:
 
Lets talk Green:
Nissan claims that on a 24 kwh battery, the Leaf can go 70 miles on the highway at 55 mph.
A coal plant (primary power source in US) puts out about 2.1 lbs of CO2 per kwh.
That means that to go 70 miles at 55 mph, the Leaf is responsible for 50.4 lbs of CO2.
Now:
My 350hp 1989 Mustang burns gasoline which emits 19.4 lbs of CO2 per gallon.
My Mustang gets 30mpg. That means to go 70 miles at 75 mph, it uses 2.33 gallons of gas.
That is 45.2 lbs of CO2.....
hmmmmm.....
Maybe those of us driving 21 year old muscle cars should be the ones buying the green bracelets.
 
Coal? Not here. Mostly Natural Gas, Nuclear, and renewable:
http://www.sdge.com/documents/billinserts/misc/PowerLabel_1-mar09.pdf
We get only 7% from Coal.

Natural gas is closer to 1.32 lb CO2 per kWh:
http://www.eia.doe.gov/electricity/page/co2_report/co2report.html

Try them numbers and hand over that bracelet. Then go stick your nose near your tailpipe and see if you can detect anything other than CO2. :)

I love it.. good practice for the Smug I need to master.
 
50Mustang said:
Lets talk Green:
...
hmmmmm.....
Maybe those of us driving 21 year old muscle cars should be the ones buying the green bracelets.
Not if you also want to account for the electricity (or other HUGE energy produced in some dirty way) it takes to get the oil from the ground, transport it to the refinery, refine the oil into gasoline, transport the gasoline to the gas station ... so that you can finally pump it into your Mustang :cry:

But ... welcome to the Forum :)
 
50Mustang said:
Lets talk Green:
Nissan claims that on a 24 kwh battery, the Leaf can go 70 miles on the highway at 55 mph.
A coal plant (primary power source in US) puts out about 2.1 lbs of CO2 per kwh.
That means that to go 70 miles at 55 mph, the Leaf is responsible for 50.4 lbs of CO2.
Now:
My 350hp 1989 Mustang burns gasoline which emits 19.4 lbs of CO2 per gallon.
My Mustang gets 30mpg. That means to go 70 miles at 75 mph, it uses 2.33 gallons of gas.
That is 45.2 lbs of CO2.....
hmmmmm.....
Maybe those of us driving 21 year old muscle cars should be the ones buying the green bracelets.

Ok, let's! How about zero emissions with my LEAF when I'll be charging it off-peak with our PVs? I don't know about your electric meter, but ours will be running backwards! :mrgreen: So, sorry to burst your tailpipe, but your Mustang not only is a major polluter, but you'll be supporting BIG OIL and all that foreign money going to terrorists. "Going Green" doesn't just mean zero or low emissions. Btw, even if someone has to use the grid, it will STILL be at least 60% cleaner than an ICE car. :)
 
@50Mustang: You're right that if you're powering an EV from 100% coal-generated electricity, you're probably causing more damage to the environment than with a similar gas-powered car. But you fail to consider that in many places coal provides a mere fraction of the electrical mix. And an electric car powered by "green" energy such as hydro, geothermal, wind, or solar generates no pollution at all. Also, even the production of gasoline consumes quite a bit of electricity in the refining process. There's more discussion on this at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=820 and also see http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=462 and http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.php?f=13&t=11

The great thing about an electric car is you can choose where your "fuel" comes from. Like LEAFfan, you can put solar panels on your house to recharge it if you want :)
 
50Mustang said:
Nissan claims that on a 24 kwh battery, the Leaf can go 70 miles on the highway at 55 mph.
A coal plant (primary power source in US) puts out about 2.1 lbs of CO2 per kwh.
That means that to go 70 miles at 55 mph, the Leaf is responsible for 50.4 lbs of CO2.
As others have stated, your numbers are wrong. USA average CO2/kWh is just under 1.3 lbs/kWh.

Also of note is that 70 miles on a full charge at 55mph is at 95* with the AC blasting. You'll typically go much farther on 24 kWh.


50Mustang said:
My 350hp 1989 Mustang burns gasoline which emits 19.4 lbs of CO2 per gallon.
My Mustang gets 30mpg. That means to go 70 miles at 75 mph, it uses 2.33 gallons of gas.
That is 45.2 lbs of CO2.....
According to fueleconomy.gov, your V8 '89 Mustang is rated at 15 city / 22 hwy. Real life numbers from people range from 11 - 27 mpg. So your claim of 30 mpg is anywhere from mildly optimistic or a flat out lie.

hmmmmm.....
 
According to fueleconomy.gov, your V8 '89 Mustang is rated at 15 city / 22 hwy. Real life numbers from people range from 11 - 27 mpg. So your claim of 30 mpg is anywhere from mildly optimistic or a flat out lie.

hmmmmm.....

You gotta remember.... this isn't a stock 1989 Mustang. It's a 350 horse, low 12 second Mustang.
I put 2500 miles on it in a month and averaged 28-30 miles per gallon.
That's what I love about good old American V8s..... good power and fuel efficiency when tuned right..... and potentially more environmentally friendly than an electric car charged from a coal plant (more than 50% of America's power comes from coal).

Just throwing out the fact that our old muscle cars are not much if any more harmful to the environment than your electric cars.
Just because you dont have a tailpipe doesnt mean you're not responsible for pollution.
Moral to all of you is.... don't be the ass-hat at the store that scolds me for "harming the environment" because they are ignorant to the facts.
 
50Mustang said:
You gotta remember.... this isn't a stock 1989 Mustang. It's a 350 horse, low 12 second Mustang.
So I assume that you still have the factory catalytic converters on it, as well?

50Mustang said:
That's what I love about good old American V8s..... good power and fuel efficiency when tuned right..... and potentially more environmentally friendly than an electric car charged from a coal plant (more than 50% of America's power comes from coal).
And again, stretching the truth by a good margin since less than 50% of America's electricity comes from coal. 45% YTD for 2010 according to the EIA.

50Mustang said:
Just throwing out the fact that our old muscle cars are not much if any more harmful to the environment than your electric cars.
Only if CO2 is your only criteria for harmful emissions. Never mind the benefits of centralizing power plants and the fact that the grid is constantly getting cleaner with renewable portfolio standards constantly getting stronger. Never mind the fact that we import over 60% of our oil sending about a billion dollars a day to foreign countries.

50Mustang said:
Just because you dont have a tailpipe doesnt mean you're not responsible for pollution.
I don't see anyone here claiming otherwise - but I do see a lot of people with solar panels on their roof to power their car. Can't do that with your V8.

50Mustang said:
Moral to all of you is.... don't be the ass-hat at the store that scolds me for "harming the environment" because they are ignorant to the facts.
Funny - coming from the guy who appears to be making up facts with every other sentence and prefers to cherry pick facts to fit his agenda rather than stick with the truth...
 
Sure, my numbers may be a little off, but not that far. My point is the same. Prius, Leaf, and other Hybrid, electric car owners who make it a point to scold me for my pollution because they assume that my V8 car is 100 times worse on the environment than their hybrid or electric car are completely wrong. A well built American V8 is not that much worse than an electric or Hybrid car, if it is even worse at all.
 
50Mustang said:
Sure, my numbers may be a little off, but not that far. My point is the same. Prius, Leaf, and other Hybrid, electric car owners who make it a point to scold me for my pollution because they assume that my V8 car is 100 times worse on the environment than their hybrid or electric car are completely wrong. A well built American V8 is not that much worse than an electric or Hybrid car, if it is even worse at all.
If you want to compare your at best 30mpg Mustang to a 50mpg Prius, it's pretty clear that the Prius uses at least 40% less fuel per mile even when using your inflated fuel economy numbers. Or your Mustang burns at least 80% more fuel per mile than the Prius. How is that "not much better" or "worse" than your Mustang when the only criteria you are using is CO2/mile and the Prius clearly burns far less fuel per mile?
 
I don't think Mustang has come here for any good reason, just to stir the **** as they say. Best to ignore him because the end of the debate comes here; ICE is at best 35% efficient, EV is anywhere from 80%-90% efficient. Add in the fact that we'll be paying pennies to travel while he's stuck paying whatever big oil wants him to pay :lol:
 
50Mustang said:
My 350hp 1989 Mustang burns gasoline which emits 19.4 lbs of CO2 per gallon.
My Mustang gets 30mpg. That means to go 70 miles at 75 mph, it uses 2.33 gallons of gas.
Not fair to compare your best (and odd) case scenario with LEAFs worst case scenario.

50Mustang said:
Maybe those of us driving 21 year old muscle cars should be the ones buying the green bracelets.
I am glad you are getting 30mpg, because the latest Mustang doesn't. You should get a bracelet for sticking with your classic version.

You should also look 10 or 20 years from now. Electricity will be mostly generated from renewable sources like Sun or Wind, while ICEs will continue to be gas guzzlers and drain natural resources and keep polluting the environment.

You can't change the world overnight, but you have to start sometime and somewhere. Or at least try...
 
leaf561 said:
I am glad you are getting 30mpg, because the latest Mustang doesn't.
Actually, the 2011 V6 Mustang does get 31 mpg on the highway (with the 6spd auto) while still making 305hp - Ford has done a great job squeezing economy out of their latest engines.

The V8 however, falls quite a bit short at 25 mpg highway. But 5 liters of displacement and 400 hp will tend to do that. City fuel economy also suck thanks to the large displacement - both engines are below 20 mpg there.

Of course, Ford's Focus EV will be much better than those.
 
Back
Top