巴士醞釀加價 陳祖澤促市民「接受可能出現調整」

原帖由 <i>dicksonboy</i> 於 2007-5-9 00:54 發表 <a href="http://www.hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/redirect.php?goto=findpost&pid=909700&ptid=203779" target="_blank"><img src="http://www.hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/images/common/back.gif" border="0" onload="if(this.width>screen.width*0.7) {this.resized=true; this.width=screen.width*0.7; this.alt='Click here to open new window\nCTRL+Mouse wheel to zoom in/out';}" onmouseover="if(this.width>screen.width*0.7) {this.resized=true; this.width=screen.width*0.7; this.style.cursor='hand'; this.alt='Click here to open new window\nCTRL+Mouse wheel to zoom in/out';}" onclick="if(!this.resized) {return true;} else {window.open('http://www.hkitalk.net/HKiTalk2/images/common/back.gif');}" onmousewheel="return imgzoom(this);" alt="" /></a><br />

<br />

<br />
Do you know how much fuel does AC buses burn compare to non A/C buses?<br />
Just think about your home<br />
if you turn the AC on 24 hours a day, 7 day a week,<br />
how much will the electricity bill be?<br />
<br />
people h ...

<br />
Practically zero, because the dynamos of the internal combustion engines only drags energy when it is turning but does not burns fuel as a separate entity
Added with fuel savings from modern engines, it is very likely that modern a/c buses burn roughly the same amount (or even less) fuel than their older non a/c counterparts.

原帖由 manlok 於 2007-5-9 01:57 發表

Practically zero, because the dynamos of the internal combustion engines only drags energy when it is turning but does not burns fuel as a separate entity
Added with fuel savings from modern engines, ...

Then how come gas mileage is worst off with AC turn on?
This hold true from my own little car to our buses

Theoretically, my little car should have 32 miles per gallon in city, but I have never seen this happen
no matter how hard I try, turn off AC, easy accelration, less braking, nothing works
I have no idea how the car manufactuer figured out i can get 32 miles per gallon in city.
The point is: theoretically, the new technology may save gas; but practically, I have doubts

[ 本帖最後由 dicksonboy 於 2007-5-9 02:59 編輯 ]

開冷氣徙油，每個車主都好同意呢個論點
因為壓縮泵會佔用大約20-30匹馬力，當你起步、加速時，就要更多力量
先可以起動架車，架車無力，個司機又踩大少少油，再徙多0的油

原帖由 nwfb23 於 2007-5-9 03:09 發表
開冷氣徙油，每個車主都好同意呢個論點
因為壓縮泵會佔用大約20-30匹馬力，當你起步、加速時，就要更多力量
先可以起動架車，架車無力，個司機又踩大少少油，再徙多0的油 ...

Thank you!~ and thats what i am talking about!
the engine may have been made to be fuel efficient with AC
but is that the way it works out?
Theoretically, yes! Practically, nah-ah~ I don't think so!

[ 本帖最後由 dicksonboy 於 2007-5-9 12:57 編輯 ]

我覺得可加可減最失敗的是
計算到要減時，頂多只是提供長途"來回“優惠，
一到加就大數咁加，變相一加就可以收多d. 減就減好少。

所謂全冷令利潤增加三成既理論真係好誤導,

一,本來既冷氣收費係相等甚至更高,
全冷後賺少左既例子都唔少,

二,唔係由零架冷馬變成全線冷馬,
所以即使假設冷熱成本相同都唔等如收益多三成,

三,冷馬既成本根本高於熱狗,
就算冇三成咁多都唔係賺多左好多,

平心而論,呢幾年因為退熱狗換冷馬既數量係唔少,
但同時硬件有提升,載客量減少,又冇左利潤管制(保障)
我覺得最多打個和,回報率唔會有上升.