David MacKay gives a heuristic derivation of air resistance of a driving car in his book Sustainable energy without the hot air.
He starts with a tube of air with the cross sectional area of the car $A_{\text{car}}$ and the length $d$ which is the distance, the car is moving with constant velocity $v$.
He estimates the power which the car transfers to the air tube as the kinetic energy of the air tube due to the interaction with the car divided by the time it takes the car to cross it. For the kinetic energy, he makes the assumption that the velocity of the air tube is equal to the velocity $v$ of the car.
My question is: How may this assumption be justified? I tried to make a simple model of the massive car colliding with a single lightweight air molecule but in this case, the standard formula for elastic collisions implies that the air molecule has a final velocity of $2v$.
(I'm aware that I'm ignoring the drag coefficiant so far. If we take the car to be a cube, it should be very nearly equal to $1$. Also, MacKay pictures its influence as effectively shrinking the cross-sectional area of the air tube and not as influencing its velocity. I'd prefer to have an answer from within this framing but I'm also open to arguments why other framings are better.)