IMHO, anyone who believes we should lower our greenhouse gases, ought to review their daily habits, and see how they can lower their own emissions.
Since it seems that our government only cares about profit and big business, we need to do what we can to hit 'em where it hurts, the pocketbook.
Until US citizens demand a change by voting with their dollars, it's not going to happen.
Honestly, I don't believe ethanol is a long term solution either. It will require expansion of cropland, and I haven't kept up with it, but the aquifer in our central plains was being depleted by irrigation.
Much of our produce is now being imported, which is a waste of fuel. I'd much rather see more nature parks than an increase in cropland fields. Hopefully some of those parks would be close enough to bike to;)
2006-07-05 04:09:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I know they are beautiful to look at, but there are more important things in life at stake. The 4th of July is no doubt a huge reason to celebrate but burning firecrackers on that day is the worst example of Independence Day celebration any Nation can set. Also smaller countries celebrate many occasions with firecrackers, eg, the festival Diwali in India and Sri Lanka. People sure need to learn a new way to celebrate which is least hazardous to the environment. Think of the pollution created each time. Of course by creating sufficient awareness yahoo can help in carbon neutrality.First, my "credentials." While I live off-the-grid entirely and our family became a "carbon neutral family" last year, and I have read extensively on the issues, I don't have feel I have the credentials to advise Yahoo!. (I'm actually surprised so many folks here feel they do!) Of course, I do still live a high-tech life on my 40 acres in the foothills. I have a 3-mile WiFi link to a local DSL provider, I have no phone lines to the property, but use a VOIP provider for my telecommunications needs, and manage engineers from my remote location using a variety of communication modalities.
2016-03-27 04:43:27
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Why don't you? You could take the trouble and expense to do that independently to the rest of the country if you really cared that much. And your example would help inspire others and maybe we could get the ball rolling. During WW2, some people in occupied Europe found ways to make cars run with home made ethanol. They had a need to do so, but it is hard work. Hard work but not rocket science. The sad truth is that people are just too lazy to do it when cheap gasoline is available on every street corner and you have to go to work and save for your kid's college and your own retirement.
See this web site:
running_on_alcohol.tripod.com
2006-07-05 03:16:29
·
answer #3
·
answered by campbelp2002 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
What is carbon neutral fuel? Ethanol is full of carbon. Americans are use much less fuel then Brazilians, just don't use internal combustion engines. Walk to work, or ride your bicycle.
2006-07-05 03:10:39
·
answer #4
·
answered by Richard B 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is a little bit politics, a lot of money, and a huge matter of scale. We currently produce as much if not more ethanol than brazil.
So that should tell you just how much brazil doesn't use in fuel and how much more the US does.
2006-07-06 14:17:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Brazilians use ethanol .Ethanol is a hydrocarbon like gasoline,but when burned gives water and does not pollute.To make ethanol we use soil and sun.For details try journeytoforever org
2006-07-05 06:51:15
·
answer #6
·
answered by qwine2000 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Because the oil companies run the Republican party, which currently runs the government.
2006-07-05 03:08:01
·
answer #7
·
answered by wmp55 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
too busy doing things that are much more "important."
2006-07-05 03:06:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋