Pardon me but these so-called GREEN cars aren't very green.
If they plug in to charge then it takes power production, which isn't
done by windmills, to charge the car.
If it uses those hybrid, batteries run when needed then gas motor..you
know what happens to those batteries when they're used up?
And what kind of environmental damage is done to MAKE those batteries
for those "green" cars.
Why do environmentalists tell lies and people believe it so much?
Okay, for the record here, I like to breathe clean air as much as
anybody, but, here goes.
Because it's an easy way to make lots of money!
Let's pick on Al Gore for a minute. His whole life was/is a lawyer and
politician. How much sweat do you think he's ever created? After
politics, he is now head of some "green" company in Europe where he
makes boco dollars and then he gets an Oscar for all of his
environmental efforts. Of course his electrical bill is 20 times
higher than the national average, but hey, it all comes from clean
sources, right? (Yea, right) Meanwhile he drives around in a limo and
testifies before Congress that people need to consume less energy. I
guess he's not classified as a person.
According to scientists, the ozone layer is closing up decades before
they calculated it should, if you can believe them either way. GOOD
THING WE GOT RID OF R-12 WHEN WE DID! Oops, the third world countries
still make and use it......
Back to the Oscars. It was stated that most of the actors came there
in hybrids, but their limos were parked around the corner. Any truth
to it? Who cares, they are the biggest hypocrites.
Now, I'm sure I'll get lambasted here, but I'm just using one example
when it could be pointed at all politicians and actors drive limos
but tell other people to be cleaner. I'm just saying that whenever
somebody says to be greener and cleaner, chances are they are a
Okay, go ahead and reply. Everybody here will want their 15 minutes.
I think environmentalists are telling lies. Are they saying, "The batteries
are green because they don't require any resources to make, last forever,
and have no environmental consequences when they are disposed of?" I don't
However, environmentalists are not looking at all the environmental costs of
electric and hybrid cars. But that is not the same as lying.
Some stats that i recently read over here in the UK
Car and Vehicle polution contributes a massive 1% of the UK's total CO2
If the UK stopped all CO2 output tomorrow, China would have made up the
difference inside of 18 months.
The only way to slow pollution would be to ban third world and developing
countries from us9ng dirty technology, and that would be next to impossible.
Green cars are not a solution to the problem. But drivers are an easy
In the US, transportation is reponsible for a little over 1/4 of the
I am wondering why England is different.
So it's ok to pollute because others are going it.
So it's ok for developed countries to make more pollution than developing
Transportation is responsible for about 1/4 of the greenhouse gases in the
US. Reducing the amount of CO2 made by cars is one solution to the problem.
There are many other solutions needed, like reducing the CO2 made by power
plants and heating buildings.
No its not OK to pollute because other are going to. However just because
one countries tackles it's own pollution issues, doesn't mean that problem
will be solved because other countries will still pollute.
Polution is a world wide problem. The developed coutries are the most
energy hungry and create the most pollution in generating that energy.
Undeveloped countries produce a fraction of the global pollution.
Just because the UK or US tackles pollution, maybe we will create pollution
free transportation. Developing countries will replace the pollution. The
world wide problem will never be solved whilst this is the case.
We need to REDUCE pollution, not move it to China.
There are many other solutions needed, transportation is a good place to
start. Progress can be made by developing new, cleaner technologies. Real
clean technologies though, not moving the pollution from the exhaust pipe
the power plant.
Just taxing drivers and car owners to oblivion in the hope that they will be
persuaded not to use their vehicles is NOT the way to solve this issue.
This is what is happening in the UK, it will not work over the long term.
That article is a very nice example of poor reporting and misusing figures.
However, there is another take-home message: The environmental cost of a
vehicle is not just in the amount of fuel needed to run it, but also the
amount of fuel and natural resources to make it and its replacement parts
(like the $2500 battery pack).
OR that no one cares WHERE we put the dead batteries?
OR what chemicals are used that we wouldn't normally make if not for
OR that most of those batteries are on trains, diesel trains, being
delivered to the "green" car factory.
I remember 20 yrs ago the big thing about regular AA,AAA,9Volt
batteries, about people filling landfills with them and the dangers to
the ground water.
I guess the greenies forgot.
Looks like all the fuzzy thinkers are out today.
I'd recommend you read to the bottom of the article,
and check the response from "wallofcheese." He's right. The "study" is
bullshit and the article is worse.
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.