What do you mean there is no proof? C02 is a greenhouse gas. It is
completely necessary to trap heat in our atmoshphere. Much like your body
needs salt. However, if you were to drink saltwater you would get sick.
It is not conjecture. It is proven fact. Now you may want to wish it is, but
thats nothing more than a hick turning a blind eye.
co2 is a greenhouse gas... baloons sent up to messure the amount in the
atmosphere calculate an increase every year... C02 does not escape the
atmosphere into space... the pressure of space alone would hold it in...
But the process of Global Warming could be the reason for increases in
CO2 gas in the atmosphere - while man does create CO2, the environment
also creates CO2 gas - there are thousands of years of ICE Core Samples
to prove that CO2 increased before man was producing it.
- Igitur qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
No proof that *CO2* is the primary reason for 'global warming'.
It's a fact that CO2 is *a* greenhouse gas. As is methane and water vapour, both
of which are actually far more powerful greenhouse gases.
CO2 is actually a rather minor greenhouse gas.
And the Polar Ice Caps aren't melting and raising sea-level either despite what
the you may have been told.
Currently most sea-level rise is due to oceanic warming.
How can you say the ice caps are not melting? If you are saying that they
are not raising sea level then that may or may not be true. However, the ice
caps are melting. I have seen the changes via NASA satelite photos over the
last several decades...
This is what I am talking about. I never said the sea levels had risen
fully. Any ice that is already in the water and does not touch the bottom
would not raise the sea level. If all the ice above sea level were to melt
the oceans would rise only 23 feet. That is a ton of land but not enough to
With that said, the ice caps are indeed melting and the fear would not
berising sea levels. Once you got to that level the earths weather is what
you would have to fear.
On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 09:03:16 -0600, R.Hemmu wrote:
You know, if they make a decent hybrid that isn't a sub-compact like the
Prius, people might just be more interested.
It is funny how the hybrid folks keep wanting us to get squeezed into
those tiny econoboxes like the Prius and Civic and Volt and Fit.
I have a lot of time for that point of view, although I wouldn't call a Civic
size car that small myself.
The first manufacturer to make a hybrid car that's a bit more practical will be
hard pressed to keep potential purchasers from over-running their salesrooms.
You've obviously never tried to squeeze behind the wheel of one. Even the
Accord and Camry are small. I used to hit my knees on the dashboard in
the passenger seat when carpooling and sitting in the passenger seat.
I felt really bad for the poor souls in the back seats.
I've only ever been in the situation where a knee contacted the trim with one
car and that's the rather small Ford Fiesta.
Other than that it didn't actually feel very small and was very comfortable to
The only time I've suffered in the back of any car was in a Ford Escort where
the back seats seemd to have no support (they felt like they were made of
cardboard) and made my back ache horribly.
A Ford Granada's (large car) front seat also gave me leg ache as a result of
poor thigh support.
Guess which brand of car I tend not to consider ?
I'm just amazed the auto makers don't see it.
They *do* see it, or at least see that building a car that doesn't
compromise anything yet is significantly more efficient than today's
models would make them very, very wealthy. There's people working on
it, and have been for at least a decade if not more.
The problem, which you refuse to acknowledge, is that today's state of
the art does not allow a practical serial-hybrid vehicle that doesn't
have significant tradeoffs in purchase price, longevity, range,
performance, or a combination of the above.
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
So why do they keep building idiot 'technology demonstrators' that are bound to
No series hybrid need have any trade-off in range. Let's kill that one dead for
Longevity ? An electric motor will outlast any ICE. The only longevity issue for
type of EV is battery life. Expect an EV to need a new battery several times
its working life. Ultracaps used for high power bursts during acceleration and
regenerative braking have effectively unlimited life AIUI. Electronics generally
virtually unlimited life.
That leaves price. Until a large manufacturer commits to building EVs (PHEVs in
case) in very large numbers, component costs will remain high. There's your
and egg situation.
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.