[need a table here]
You can see that whether you look at any aspect of the car, 2008 beats its grandfather hands down. It is faster, more powerful, more fuel efficient, and less polluting. Any engineering feat requires that we make a compromise. If we want to build a faster car, the milage might suffer. This is true for today's car. But the crucial point is that when you compare it to the cars a generation ago, we see that we have miraculously managed to improve each facet. And it is even cheaper - lot more people are affording cars like the 1975 corvette, than they used to 30 years ago. Heck, even a run of the mill 2008 honda accord is sportier than the 1975 corvette. (need to confirm, and quote sales figures for 2008 honda accord vs 1975 corvette)
Now you will say wait a minute, I am not comparing apples to apples. I am comparing a top of the line sports car of 75 to a family box of 2008. The numbers are obviously greater for the family sedan, than a sports car. But that's the whole point - in 1975, you paid a pretty penny to get 270 horsepower engine that gave you certain acceleration, speed and agility. Now that power comes standard on some of the higher end accords. The bar has been raised. The price has dropped down. More people are getting what only a select few got in terms of performance.
Of course you can't buy the mystic and glamor that the old corvette brought you in 1975. To get the same glamor, you might have to buy 2008 corvette - and that one has a comparable price. But glamor is such a funny thing. Glamor or bragging rights by definition have a small supply, and hence will command higher and higher price. I will be entirely happy if glamor keeps getting expensive. I consider it as a welfare tax on rich people that the rich people charge each other.
It is easy to misconstrue the above example. You might think that I am saying progress is only for rich people. After all, only rich people can afford corvettes. Even the honda accords are not that cheap - they cost about 5 times the world's per capita income. Even examples of computers becoming cheaper does not go down well with a poor farm worker in China.
True, that cars are expensive enough so that only the rich at this moment can afford them. But when we focus on objects, we loose track of the bigger picture. We need to think comfortable transport, with great flexibility - rather than a car. That is improving all the time over the last 100 years. Just before the advent of railways - 95% of the world population did not travel beyond 10 miles. Not that they did not need to, or did not want to, but because it was so darn hard! Travelling was fraught with danger.
The transporation machinary has been growing and becoming more comfortable too. And yes, the number of cars is increasing. With the advent of Tata Nano, (and the competition it has spurred) the huge population between 40th and 60th percentile earners can suddenly afford cars. We are at the beginning of S curve for the cars to become widespread. And if you have concerns about pollution, look at the corvetter comparisons. Modern cars simply don't pollute. Period.
There are some who complain about the carbon footprints and greenhouse effect. To them I can only say this is such a low item on the engineering problems humanity faces, it is below the cut line right now. When most other problems are solved, humanity will solve this problem too. (Unless everyone realizes that we don't have any control over it - but that's another article!)
Yes, I envision that the world of 9 billion minds will have something like 2 to 3 billion cars. Those all put together will cause less pollution than the 200 million or so that we have right now. In fact, they will probably run on electricity that is generated using wind, sun and nuclear power - hence they will have a smaller carbon footprint too. How will this happen, and why do I believe in it? Read in an article to be written soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment