English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

If we have the technology to build cars that run on cheep and non toxic gasses, ( like the highbred cars in america.) Then why aren't the government putting money into this? Why aren't they makeing this a priority instead of highering taxes, and complaining about how much fuel we use... Is it to do with how much they are rakeing in as a government?

2006-08-08 08:11:36 · 24 answers · asked by cjdec 2 in Politics & Government Government

Unfortunatly I live in the UK where there are currently no plans to introduce the hybrd car! Fuell is more expencive in the UK as im sure you all ready know if you live/ visited hear. I know the government are getting every last penny out of us... It's not hard to see... But why complain that we are killing our planet when they are the only people who can do anything about it! There is even a congestion charge to get in and out of London... More Tax!

2006-08-10 08:09:25 · update #1

24 answers

yes its to do with raking in cash from fuel. and thats a fact.
Fuel has been made from potatoes, and vegetable oil etc etc

2006-08-08 08:17:41 · answer #1 · answered by claire1731manchester 2 · 0 1

Yes we have the technology, but not the infrastructure. The infrastructure is so costly that the consumer will be unwilling the foot the bill. In the long run the consumer always foots the bill.

Much of the cost of the infrastructure is directly related to the cost of energy, therefore, the fantasy that as the cost of oil goes up the trade-offs decrease is a lie!

Remember the 1st Worlds economy is based on energy making use more efficient & our products need energy to be used. Without an econmically viable replacement for fossil fuels expect the economy of 1850 by the year 2050.

Even with all of the governments assets, they don't have enough to be able to afford the Renewable Energy infrastructure. If the baby-boomers retirement bill collides with the energy crisis the 1st World's economy may never recover. Social Security's surplus can only be invested in government debt.

2006-08-16 03:27:09 · answer #2 · answered by viablerenewables 7 · 0 0

When you get to economics class, if you pay attention, you'll learn that the more the government gets involved in an industry, the more an industry suffers for it. Government does not produce anything marketable, so it has nothing to sell. Then where does it get its money? From the taxpayers. In order for the govt to give one dollar to the alternative fuels industry (which it already has, in amounts that would shock you), it has to take one dollar from you, its citizen.

And having the technology is one thing. Establishing the industry so that it can function economically is another thing entirely. For example: the govt gave a HUGE funding initiative to the ethanol lobby last year (which is why you're now seeing lots of gas pumps that boast "We're 10% ethanol!"--they have to comply with new federal regulations).
The thing is, ethanol isn't like gas that can be pumped from its refining source. It's much less stable, and must be mixed at its destination , which means additional transportation costs for all of the components, plus new mixing equipment installed at every destination. This is much less cost effective than piping oil, and will stay that way until the market demands for ethanol rise to the level that producers can safely invest in new, more economical methods.

Market demand fuels research, not governments. If the government gives the alternative fuel types lots of money, the alternative fuel types have lots of money--from your pocket. And without any guarantee that they'll invest in economical or industrial development.

And the government isn't complaining about how much fuel we use...WE'RE complaining about how much fuel we use. The government gets theirs through taxation of the oil companies either way.

2006-08-08 08:26:39 · answer #3 · answered by Woz 4 · 0 0

The Government is putting a lot of money into development. Who's raising taxes? I haven't seen a tax hike. Alternative fuels isn't the only priority of our government. We have 30 million illegals that want fed, schools want more money, every government program, welfare, and social services want more. There is only so much you can do. Everybody has a cause.
Ethanol right now would cost us more than oil. They are working to develop more affordable solutions. You need to have a little Patience or get a degree and start moving the development along.

2006-08-08 08:20:27 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The Oil companies have more clout than the environmentalists or ordinary citizens. Have you seen how much profit the oil companies have made lately, in the mean time people are losing their jobs because fuel has become too expensive. Yes, the government should step in and stop this from happening but they won't, the US/UK Governments and Oil Companies are in bed together on this one. The politics of pricing oil goes way back to the 1960's with Saudi Arabia, ARAMCO, and the US government.

As far as development of new fuel sources, private enterprises are going to have to do that, for instance the auto companies like Toyota, Honda, Chevrolet and Ford. If they join together they can control the type of cars they make and sell. They have to be willing to take responsibility for our environment.

As individuals we have to send the message to our government that we demand lower fuel prices and more choices in fuel and cars, but first we need to do everything we can to reduce our dependence on OIL. Write letters, send emails, sign petitions, speak publicly, and get involved and don't leave it up to the government to do this for you.

2006-08-15 01:45:45 · answer #5 · answered by i have no idea 6 · 0 0

When i was doing my apprenticeship, I worked on plant for the oil company shell. There i was told that technology for a water powered car engine had been developed, but shell had bought the patent on it. Seems to me that there is too much profit in oil and petroleum to go with a water powered engine at the moment, but when the resources deplete shell can come out and say 'don't worry folks we have an alternate type of engine, the water powered car' and they will then own that technology and will continue to make billions of pounds from the public. It's all about money, these people don't care about pollution or global warming, just profit.

2006-08-08 08:18:48 · answer #6 · answered by Jay 3 · 0 0

Exxon pays the politicians to kill any bill that would fund anynew technology that could threaten their business.

"American" auto makers already make a car that runs on ethanol, OR gasoline. They sold them in BRAZIL first.
They're called FLEX cars. Apparently its a SIMPLE mod that can be installed on almost any car!!!! I wonder who own the patents for it in the US. HMMMM!?
What we need is a Hybrid car that is also a Flex car. That way at least you don't have to use gas at all.

>>>>>>>>Seperate, but RELEVANT POINT<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
Wal-Mart is supposedly going to start selling the E85 at its filling stations.
I hope not. WHY?
The Question isn't "How do we reduce our consumption of oil?".
It's "How do we FREE OURSELVES from these conglomerates who OWN & CONTROL America, while simultaneously using less oil?"
If walmart sells e85, they will need a ****-****-ton of it. Not your Local Independent Farmer's supply, but the supply of some GigantoFarmCorp. Then, instead of being owned by Exxon, it'll be ConAgra. Nothing will change, just the landlord.
You don't gain freedom by surrendering control/responsibility.
Thanks for listening to my rant
KG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>EDIT>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
1. "the more the government gets involved in an industry, the more an industry suffers for it." YES billions of dollars in subsidies make you SUFFER!
2. "In order for the govt to give one dollar to the alternative fuels industry (which it already has, in amounts that would shock you), it has to take one dollar from you, its citizen."
OR they could NOT give EXXON A BILLION ******* DOLLARS!!!!!!!!

3. "And having the technology is one thing. Establishing the industry so that it can function economically is another thing entirely." TRUE gotta find a way to screw honest people out of $$$

4. COST to prodice 1 gallon of Gasoline $2.02
COST to prodice 1 gallon of Ethanol (sugar cane) $0.92
COST to prodice 1 gallon of Ethanol (Corn) $1.02
50% LESS production cost.

5. "Market demand fuels research, not governments."
OK the government constantly funds new markets in every field. But not the most important one (Energy)?

6. "if the government gives the alternative fuel types lots of money, the alternative fuel types have lots of money--from your pocket. And without any guarantee that they'll invest in economical or industrial development."
And Exxon does invest in development?

"The government gets theirs through taxation of the oil companies either way."
This should read "...taxation of the oil CONSUMERS..." consumers pay the taxes. companies have accountants to make sure they don't pay taxes.

2006-08-08 08:39:04 · answer #7 · answered by kevin g 3 · 0 0

Pressured air !

This already exist in mexico, but Usa, and Canada government and industry make huges pressions to avoid the PRESSURED AIRE CAR to reach Usa, and Canada.

Give free non toxic air conditionner ( air get out at low temperature)

Give 300 Kilometers of autonomy, for a coupples of cents of electricity, ( compressor)

Can have is own compressor to refill of air, that work with electricity,

Cost less to make, many reasons, but all electric features are made with radio transmission comands, so no cables...


Inform yourself on air cars....

And also, what I offer you is many informative documents about how the governmetn manipulate the peoples and retires Patents that give low cost energy.

2006-08-11 19:17:28 · answer #8 · answered by The Patriot 4 · 0 0

I really understand the frustration with in you that generate this question. But the government don't support this research more because our economy is petroleum based and to alter it would have an adverse effect on the economy. But do I think we should do something about this, ABSOLUTELY! but it will be a very complicated venture with out one quick answer.

2006-08-13 03:57:43 · answer #9 · answered by toolman 2 · 0 0

Because the government wants to make money. One barrel of oil cost the government about $15-$20. They just put this tax and that expense and make it so expensive. Few years ago an Indian scientist invented oil from tea leaves which he used to run cars. Got an aword from Indian government and never heard of him since than. (He might be dead).

2006-08-08 08:17:08 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

Because the people in charge of the oil are government or affiliates. Our president (US)is from an oil family, has ties to oil companies & sells oil companies federal land for $1 an acre. They are probably paying people to stop researching better fuels so they can rape the people. I love my hybrid! LONG LIVE "GREENER" GAS!

2006-08-08 08:17:50 · answer #11 · answered by sandradee310 2 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers