America's obesity problem equals a billion gallons of gas per year

[MugenOne]

The Atlantic reports that the amount of fuel we're using is on the rise as well, as heavy occupants need more fuel to get from Point A to *insert drive-thru joke here*. A 2006 study shows that Americans weigh so much more than they did in 1960 that we're using up an additional billion gallons of petrol every year.

That's about $4 billion a year at today's gas prices, and nearly one percent of overall fuel usage. And that was back in 2006 – as we continue to plump up, the dollars continue to pile up. Inside Line reports that each pound we gain as a population adds up to another $39 million. It's too bad we can't get stop/start tech for our appetites.

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...omy-demon.html

This study is BS. The 2012 Toyota Camry weighs about 3190 lbs. The 1988 Toyota Camry weighed about 2690 lbs.

Even if you're 200 lbs. overweight, that's only 6% of the total weight of the car.

But obesity is the problem, right?

[Scott_Lafrance]

Originally Posted by MugenOne

The Atlantic reports that the amount of fuel we're using is on the rise as well, as heavy occupants need more fuel to get from Point A to *insert drive-thru joke here*. A 2006 study shows that Americans weigh so much more than they did in 1960 that we're using up an additional billion gallons of petrol every year.

That's about $4 billion a year at today's gas prices, and nearly one percent of overall fuel usage. And that was back in 2006 – as we continue to plump up, the dollars continue to pile up. Inside Line reports that each pound we gain as a population adds up to another $39 million. It's too bad we can't get stop/start tech for our appetites.

http://blogs.insideline.com/straight...omy-demon.html

This study is BS. The 2012 Toyota Camry weighs about 3190 lbs. The 1988 Toyota Camry weighed about 2690 lbs.

Even if you're 200 lbs. overweight, that's only 6% of the total weight of the car.

But obesity is the problem, right?

Actually, the CAFE standards are the problem. The government has put car companies in an impossible situation. They are requiring ever increasing safety standards while at the same time requiring ever increasing fuel efficiency. You can't have both. Heavier cars are safer, but less fuel efficient. Lighter cars are more fuel efficient, but less safe.

[didymus]

Originally Posted by MugenOne

This study is BS. The 2012 Toyota Camry weighs about 3190 lbs. The 1988 Toyota Camry weighed about 2690 lbs.

Even if you're 200 lbs. overweight, that's only 6% of the total weight of the car.

But obesity is the problem, right?

Well, yeah. But study isn't BS just because you choose not to believe it.
Certainly a 6% increase in payload causes some increased fuel consumption, though I don't know how they arrived at the billions of gallons figure.

More important is that many people choose gas guzzlers even though they are single, I'm sure that wastes more gallons than obesity. There's a lady where I work (quite svelte) who got a Navigator just because she could get out of her driveway w/o shoveling.

It's not just cars, either.
A driver told me that since he started buses have gotten 18" wider to accommodate bigger butts. Even at that, many riders occupy two seats causing the rest of us standing.

[Scott_Lafrance]

So, the gist of the story is that fat people consume more resources?

[SamH]

Originally Posted by didymus

A driver told me that since he started buses have gotten 18" wider to accommodate bigger butts. Even at that, many riders occupy two seats causing the rest of us standing.

Yet most of the commuter buses I see are still 80% empty.

[scipio337]

Originally Posted by Scott_Lafrance

So, the gist of the story is that fat people consume more resources?

Not to mention, think how much every unwanted person born adds to the human biomass!

I personally know people who say "I do not want to have children because I don't want to contribute to the anthroprogenic global warming/population crises"

[Scott_Lafrance]

Originally Posted by scipio337

Not to mention, think how much every unwanted person born adds to the human biomass!

I personally know people who say "I do not want to have children because I don't want to contribute to the anthroprogenic global warming/population crises"

Maybe they should join VHEMT.

http://www.vhemt.org/

[tomarin]

I don't want to sound like a utopianist, but if only more people would bike ...?

[Cristiano]

Originally Posted by tomarin

I don't want to sound like a utopianist, but if only more people would bike ...?

Yes on the Pulasky Skyway!

[scipio337]

Originally Posted by Scott_Lafrance

Maybe they should join VHEMT.

http://www.vhemt.org/

As VHEMT Volunteers know, the hopeful alternative to the extinction of millions of species of plants and animals is the voluntary extinction of one species: Homo sapiens... us.

[tomarin]

Originally Posted by Cristiano

Yes on the Pulasky Skyway!

Hey I've biked over the George Washington Bridge. Got really bad vertigo, too.

[Scott_Lafrance]

Originally Posted by scipio337

Yes. The ultimate solution for global warming, pollution, exploitation of Mother Earth is the Voluntary Human Extinction Movement.

[Trader]

12 posts in this thread and no one has suggested higher taxes yet? Are all the statists attending an Obama rally somewhere?

There are several ways to fix this. In order to buy gas you should have to scan your Obamacare ID card which contains your BMI. Fat people get hit with a 10% additional tax. This could also work at grocery stores and restaurants.

Or, just like truckstops have scales, add a scale to every gas station. Since heavier vehicles also cause more damage to roads, it makes sense to tax vehicles according to their weight. It would also be a stimulus for scale manufacturers, although we would also have windfall profit tax on them.

This fits very well with the motto, "If it moves, tax it." When you stop moving permanently, we will have the death tax.

[Cristiano]

Originally Posted by Trader

12 posts in this thread and no one has suggested higher taxes yet? Are all the statists attending an Obama rally somewhere?

There are several ways to fix this. In order to buy gas you should have to scan your Obamacare ID card which contains your BMI. Fat people get hit with a 10% additional tax. This could also work at grocery stores and restaurants.

Or, just like truckstops have scales, add a scale to every gas station. Since heavier vehicles also cause more damage to roads, it makes sense to tax vehicles according to their weight. It would also be a stimulus for scale manufacturers, although we would also have windfall profit tax on them.

This fits very well with the motto, "If it moves, tax it." When you stop moving permanently, we will have the death tax.

Get rid of that fat you bunch of lazy gluttons!

Oops, does that includes me because I overly chubby?

Please do not tax my chocolate!

Maybe we can discuss that over a slice of .

[manualman]

Originally Posted by Scott_Lafrance

Actually, the CAFE standards are the problem. The government has put car companies in an impossible situation. They are requiring ever increasing safety standards while at the same time requiring ever increasing fuel efficiency. You can't have both. Heavier cars are safer, but less fuel efficient. Lighter cars are more fuel efficient, but less safe.

They've achieved the impossible then. My 1995 Saturn SL stick shift was an mpg class leader of its day. Seating for 5 (snug, but doable), roomy enough for commuter use (I'm 6'2"), and 40mpg highway rating that I'm STILL getting after 17 years and almost 150,000 miles. It would be rated 36mpg in today's EPA rating system.

A 2012 Chevy Cruze Eco (NOT a hybrid) weighs hundred of pounds more, has umpteen airbags, side impact bars, ABS, stability control, meets current CARB emissions, is roomier, is rather faster and more powerful, is MUCH quieter and more refined... and its current EPA rating is 42mpg highway (and people are GETTING that, unlike some fishy ratings out there).

Granted, they had to invent new tire tech, better aerodynamics, high tech turbocharging and engine fuel management and 6 manual gears instead of my 5. But they in fact HAVE done the impossible. They made it bigger, faster, safer, more comfortable, quieter AND more efficient. Nice work, GM. (They should give me a discount for this! ) Not cheaper though. You really can't have it all. It's stinks to pay $19k for a new compact car.....