The Early History of San Francisco, as Revealed on the Door of a 2005 Honda Civic

San Francisco, California was colonized by Spain in 1776.  In 1846, when California was seized by the United States, the town was home to 575 males, 177 females, and 60 children.  Gold was discovered east of San Francisco in 1848, the Gold Rush got underway in 1849 (go Niners!), and by 1850, the city had a population of 94,766.

This is the official seal of the City and County of San Francisco, adopted in 1859 and photographed here on the door of a city-owned 2005 Honda Civic.  The seal consists of these elements:

• To the left is a miner, no doubt from the class of 1849.
• To the right is a sailor, no doubt just arrived via San Francisco's great natural harbor.
• Between them is an image of a steam ship passing through the Golden Gate.
• At the bottom is the city motto: "Oro en Paz, Fierro en Guerra," or "Gold in Peace, Iron in War" (The peace part is still quite true, the war part, today not so much.)
• At the top is a phoenix, rising from the flames. Why? Between 1849 and 1851 -- in the span of just three years -- San Francisco quite literally burned to the ground and was rebuilt six times.

Comments

[Silvester]

How typical of California, a municipal government buys a HONDA instead of a better built and more affordable American product.

God forbid they bought a Chevy Cobalt or some other car that's made by an American manufacturer.

I love this blog, btu I had to throw this out there.

[Telstar Logistics]

Hi Silveser!

Thanks for your note. San Francisco operates a very mixed fleet, as you can see in this wider photo taken at the same time. (Note the Taurus in the background.) I suspect the virtue of the Honda shown here is that it's a reduced-emissions natural-gas powered vehicle. THAT, I would argue, is very typical of California -- but I don't think it's a bad thing. US automakers haven't been particularly innovative when it comes to alt fuels or powerplants, alas.

[Silvester]

Once again I LOVE the blog & appreciate the feedback to the feedback.

GM came up with the EV1 and did the dance for the sake of california, then the whole thig blew up in their face and every one else, Honda included has not come up with a car as innovative as the EV1.

Hybrids are super lame. Their cost and complexity outweighs any benefits, theoretical or real world.

Check this out:

http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=417227&in_page_id=1770

Toyota and Honda both play the P.R. game by making bullshit cars like the Prius but in the end the real solution will come from General Motors & BMW who are placing their bets on HYDROGEN.

Imagine a car that did not suck as bad as the fugly Prius but it also put out nothing but H20 out of it's exhaust?

That's innovation.

IMHO the big picture is such that hybrids are a waste of time and a distraction for the sake of marketing.

[TelstarLogistics]

Interesting. Hybrids may indeed be a technological cul de sac. Hydrogen also seems problematic... given that it requires an entirely new fueling infrastructure.

Personally, I'm in favor of gradually jacking up the taxes on gasoline until that the stuff costs about $6 to $8 per gallon -- and then keep it that way. Painful? Yes, very. But it'll force a lot of change, the market will react accordingly, and may the best tech win.

[Chris]

Hybrids are most likely a dead-end, it is true. However, until we get a realistic alternative, they do offer the very big advantage of using a lot less gas than other cars. The fact that they're not perfect doesn't change the fact that they are currently the most practical, real-world option available.

Condemning a 50-mpg car just because it's not a still-theoretical hydrogen car doesn't make any sense at all. Until we get a better solution, getting 50 mpg is still better than, say, 30 mpg...