Overweight And Obese US Drivers Burn A Billion+ Extra Gallons Of Gasoline Per Year
by John Laumer, Philadelphia 
on 12.20.08
GM's After-Volt, "OW" Prototype, Flint MI R&D Center. Image credit:Tuning Fever, Flintstones Car
Gasoline consumption associated with moving the extra weight carried by US citizen drivers and passengers was estimated with a fairly sophisticated-looking math model, making comparison to population characteristics of the 1960's.
In 2006, Jacobson and McLay found cars and light trucks consumed up to 938 million additional gallons of fuel each year as a result of average weight gain that had occurred since the 1960s. In the new study, Jacobson and King found the amount of additional fuel had jumped by nearly 200 million gallons, to 1.137 billion gallons a year, an increase of about 21 percent.Via:Wellness, Obesity increases gasoline consumption
The paper, as published in Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, includes some amazing facts in the abstract. See below for details.
The mathematical model presented in this paper estimates that as many as one billion additional gallons of gasoline are consumed each year due to overweight and obesity in the US, accounting for up to 0.8% of the fuel consumed by these vehicles annually. This additional fuel consumption causes carbon dioxide emissions of up to 20 billion pounds or more, accounting for up to 0.5% of the annual carbon dioxide emissions in the transportation sector.Via:Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, Measuring the potential for automobile fuel savings in the US: The impact of obesity
The good news is that GM execs are all over this story and, with the aid of our bail-out money, have begun final prototype work on a car to satisfy all the weight-loss New Year's resolutions.
The flex fuel prototype (pictured, above), in which both passenger and driver can take turns beating feet, is reported to get especially good mileage.
The carbon offset business also sees an opportunity in selling to the 'spare tire' market that may stem from a Cap & Trade regime in 2009.
More Heavy Stuff
A Picture is Worth: Michaelangelo's David After a Stay in America ...
You Are Where You Eat
Big Surprise: America's Fittest Cities are Also Most Walkable ...
Fasting – Re-Thinking The System That Is Food
Quote of the Day: Seth Godin on Green (Not Purple)
CarFree City, USA: Walk Away From Oil
World's Most Energy Efficient Vehicle? A Bicycle
Japan's War Against Weight
Go Play Outside; Nobody Else is
Follow @TreeHugger on Twitter & get our headlines with @TH_rss!
Thirsty for more? Check out these related articles:
- Forget Going Green Because It's the Right Thing to Do—Go Green to Make Your Neighbors Jealous
- Trust Stella McCartney: Meat-Free Mondays are Hip, not Hippie!
- Green Glossary: Intellectual Property
- Improve Air Conditioner Efficiency with 9 Cool Tips
- Take it from a Beatle: Cut Your Carbon Footprint by Making Mondays Meat-Free
- Dengue Fever Will Run Rampant on a Warmer Planet: Are You Prepared?
That just about sums up the USA. Lazy, fat stupid and greedy. What is needed is some real hardship to show then the meaning of life.
938 gallons is a ridiculous number. For the average driver it should be around 4.3 gallons a year. That's 12,000 miles a driving at 22mpg with their .8% figure.
They should have used the average to avoid looking like chicken little.
I bet the extra food consumed uses far more oil.
Assuming 300 calories a day of extra intake (about 30lbs overweight):
300 * 365 * 10 (the pollan number) /31000 = 35 gallons
Imagine what that energy could be worth if used to fuel ones legs for transit! 3 miles a day of walking or up to 10 miles of biking (leisurely pace).
http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/12/obesity_burns_e.php is it 200 million or a billiion +?
they should make cars that you pedal from the inside
"938 gallons is a ridiculous number. For the average driver it should be around 4.3 gallons a year. That's 12,000 miles a driving at 22mpg with their .8% figure."
Crhilton, the article claims 938 million (or 1137 million in the new study) gallons/year for the whole country... which does, in fact, average out to 3 or 4 gallons of gas per person per year. So your math is right, but your reading of the article is not.
I have an idea. Let's blame overweight and obese people for global warming. Let's call them fat, stupid and greedy. We can broadly lump them all in the same broad category. They all must be fat because they eat overproccessed non-local food in huge amounts and never walk to anything, instead struggling to lift all of their corpulence into the seats of their gas-guzzlers. Since a relatively high percentage of them aren't ardent environmentalists, it's a way to place more blame on our political enemies. I mean, it might be an absolutely TERRIBLE idea if we wanted to win them over to the cause of saving the planet, but since all we need is a cartoonish scapegoat, these people will serve as a stand-in for the deadly sins of gluttony, avarice, AND sloth. It's a 3-for-1 deal. Besides, they're big enough for 3.
What I would love to see: How much additional fuel is burned because of the weight the automobiles have gained. I think the family car of 1960 has gained more than the family.
I'm not sure where I'd go to research that.
"What I would love to see: How much additional fuel is burned because of the weight the automobiles have gained. I think the family car of 1960 has gained more than the family. "
Here is some rough numbers; a 1960 Chevy Impala weighs about 3,600lbs. A 2009 Impala has a curb weight of 3,555lbs. Not much difference.
Cars got lighter after they switched to unibody construction and use lighter materials like aluminum and plastic. Unfortunately the constantly increasing safety standards require more crumple zones and more airbags that add weight. This is part of the reason modern cars aren't significantly better in fuel economy than their predecessors. Aerodynamics and other factors play a role too.
Being that a 60 Impala and 09 are significantly different vehicles; let me use something else that hasn't changed as much, the Civic.
96 Honda Civic weighs 2303lbs, a 2009 weighs 2877. When you compare crash tests of the 96 of a 09, it makes the 96 look like some kind of crude Chinese death trap. Same with the two impalas I listed.
"I'm not sure where I'd go to research that."
I know there are articles on it, but I grabbed all the numbers above just by googling for the specs of the cars.
Back on topic, the results do not surprise me at all. It takes more energy to move more weight.