Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Fuel economy is the distance travelled per unit volume of fuel used; for example, kilometres per litre (km/L) or miles per gallon (MPG), where 1 MPG (imperial) ≈ 0.354006 km/L. The higher the value, the more economic a vehicle is (the more distance it can travel with a certain volume of fuel).
Per Deutsche Bahn calculations, the energy used per 100 seat-km is the equivalent of 0.33 litres (12 imp fl oz) of gasoline (0.33 litres per 100 kilometres (860 mpg ‑imp; 710 mpg ‑US)). [ 87 ] [ 88 ] The data also reflects the weight of the train per passenger.
Traditionally, litres per mil were used in Norway and Sweden, but both have aligned to the EU standard of L/100 km. [1] Fuel consumption is a more accurate measure of a vehicle's performance because it is a linear relationship while fuel economy leads to distortions in efficiency improvements. [2]
Energy efficiency in transport can be measured in L/100 km or miles per gallon (mpg). This can be normalized per vehicle, as in fuel economy in automobiles, or per seat, as for example in fuel economy in aircraft.
In the example provided by the US DoE in its final rule, an electric car with an energy consumption of 265 Watt hour per mile in urban driving, and 220 Watt hour per mile in highway driving, results in a petroleum-equivalent fuel economy of 335.24 miles per gallon, based on a driving schedule factor of 55 percent urban, and 45 percent highway ...
An Ohio mother is mourning the loss of her two adult children and is focused on getting them "justice" after they were both shot and killed this week. On Tuesday, Dec. 10, after 7 p.m. local time ...
In 2019, Wizz Air stated a 57 g/RPK CO₂ emissions (equivalent to 18.1 g/km of fuel, 2.27 L/100 km [104 mpg ‑US] per passenger), 40% lower than IAG or Lufthansa (95 g CO₂/RPK - 30 g/km of fuel, 3.8 L/100 km [62 mpg ‑US] per passenger), due to their business classes, lower-density seating, and flight connections.
The Ronald L. Sargent Stock Index From January 2008 to December 2012, if you bought shares in companies when Ronald L. Sargent joined the board, and sold them when he left, you would have a 22.9 percent return on your investment, compared to a -2.8 percent return from the S&P 500.