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

Contrary to public opinion...

1. There is NO such thing as a zero-pollution car. To charge batteries, you must make electricity...which comes from a fossil-fuel belching
powerplant...hence pollution. Solar grids and batteries are extremely toxic to manufacture.

2. You cannot mfg a single item, not even a toothpick without producing pollution.

3. Be it ethanol, electron's, oil, or hydrogen, etc, don't be in a rush for this "alternative energy". Oil was once a nusance...then they found a use for it....and there goes the price! The same thing is happening to the price of corn...or "cheap electricity" Once something goes mainline, the price is going to be control by monopolies(just like today)

Electric car? We need to decrease the world population, that's the business at hand.

2007-03-06 10:36:05 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Cars & Transportation Car Makes Chevrolet

10 answers

---------
Did you know your gas-powered car uses electricity? It's true. Large amounts of electricity are used to refine gasoline.
*
Also, unlike electric cars which have their fuel delivered by wire (the electric grid is 95% efficient), gas vehicles must have their fuel delivered to thousands of gas stations by inefficient and polluting trucks.
*
So gasoline makes pollution during refining, it pollutes when it's delivered, and it pollutes when you use it. All this extra energy is why gasoline is so expensive (electric car drivers can drive around for a penny or two per mile.)
*
Anything is better than gasoline.
-------------

2007-03-07 03:41:02 · answer #1 · answered by apeweek 6 · 0 0

1) Not all electricity is produced by burning fossil fuel. I admit that the majority is made by such, but if you kept up with science, instead of poking fun at it, you'd see that the efficiency of cleaner sources is improving. Recently a new paint was created that lets most light through it (instead of reflecting it), which could drastically increase the efficiency of solar panels - sun = polution-free energy.

2) Sure, some pollution is still made by making anything, but if you can reduce pollution manufacturing a single item (or the pollution that comes from use of the item after it's made), it will add up. Save $1 for a year, and you can get yourself something nice in the end - kinda thing.

3) Decrease world population? Stop having sex then.

2007-03-06 18:49:43 · answer #2 · answered by Cartese 1 · 1 0

You need to Understand something:

First off, not all Electricity is produced from Fossil Fuel. And in the next 20 years, it will probably come more from Dams, and Windmill Generators. Therefore, you CAN have Electricity without creating ANY Pollution.

Secondly, Electric Cars will need LESS Maintanence!! This means that they are quieter, and Cheaper to Maintain!! This means that you wont have to change Motor Oil as often in an Electric Engine, compared to a Gas Engine. No Spark-Plugs, no Fuel Lines; none of that stuff!! I wish my Car was Electric!!

Last of all, the Price of Electricity is controlled DIRECTLY by its Availability, becuase it is so EASY to produce. It is Renewable, and it is so widely used in Houses. The reason Gas is getting more expensive has to do with its Supply & Demand. The Supply is not going to be around Forever. Gasoline is ALSO NOT Renewable, and takes Millions of Years to naturally be produced by the Environment. And you CANNOT create Artificial Gasoline, because of its Chemical Properties. You can ALWAYS Create your own Electricity!! :) And you can ALSO Create your own Hydrogen with Electrolysis!! :)

And of all of our Problems with Health & War, Since when is Population EVER a Problem. It is Population Density, and if you Travel enough, you will find that there is enough land in the World that is Decilate enough, that we will not have ANY more Problems with a World 5 TIMES our Current Population, than we do now!! By that time, we will be able to Populate Space Colonies!!

So why would you have any desire to Decrease World Population?? That sounds like a Terrorist Plot!! :(

2007-03-07 01:51:55 · answer #3 · answered by Diog 3 · 1 2

I really cannot answer you about this, eventhough ethanol is for sure the most simple and easy solution in the short term. On the other hand, as a brazilian consumer, I can explain how it works in Brazil.

First of all, let me start explaining that we have been using ethanol for almost 30 years as fuel; in the beginning (long, long time ago) we had problemas with rust; but now, nobody even thinks about it. Of course our engines had to be modified and receive adequate protection.

In the last 5 years, the big hit in our country is using bi-fuel (ethanol and gas in any given combination - the engine automatically adapts to the mix); therefore, it doesn´t matter wheather the price of ethanol is high or low, since the consumer adapt its consumption to its own necessities. Our gas receives around 20% of alcohol. Four-fuel (this one includes natural gas and pure gas) are being tested.

Our buses already run with a mix of diesel and bio-diesel.

My point is: why America doesn´t start using more ethanol NOW?

1. Eventhough its corn production is not so efficient as cana de acucar (cane), it is a possibility.
2. It helps under developed countries such as Brazil and many regions such as central america or africa.
3. It may help friendly governments, not fueling terrorists with america´s money.
4. It is much more environmentally safe than oil.
5. It creates more jobs and will not end.
6. It is a transitional solution, until better technologies are avaiable. such as hydrogene.

Some people say that it is strategically wrong, because US would then depend on Brazil. In very short time(not more than 5 years), a lot of countries may produce ethanol, including Africa. Isn´t it much better than depending on arabs or Venezuela or Sudan or any other unfriendly government?

Also, ethanol from cane (as it is in Brazil) is much more efficient than the one produced from corn (US). Check the numbers:
- Energy to produce 1lt: 1518kcal x 6597
- Cost of production: US$ 0,28 / lt x 0,45
- CO2 / lt produced: 500gr x 790gr

Plus, the government pays nothing in Brazil to producers (as opposed in US) and the net production of CO2 is zero, because of the consumption of this gas during plantation

2007-03-06 19:12:40 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The GM car is to keep you greenies pacified. Not that I expect you to listen, but the pollution levels in this country's air and water are FAR LOWER than they were 50 years ago, despite the fact that the population has doubled. That is an indisputable fact.

The solution is increasing wealth and GDP so that the US can afford to spend more on advanced pollution control technologies. Population has virtually nothing to do with it. In fact, fewer people means more generalists and fewer specialists developing pollution control technologies. Wealth on the other hand, is linked with the increased desire to spend for a better environment, a luxury good. Which is why the US and Europe are far cleaner today than poorer nations per capita like China or Russia that do not want to pay for pollution control.

Capitalism is the answer, my friend.

2007-03-06 19:09:17 · answer #5 · answered by bourbon_on_my_cornflakes 3 · 0 2

First and foremost, policies need to change in this country to make such alternatives viable. Whenever you see a situation, look at the money trail upwards and see who has what lobbiest in Capital Hill, fighting for their best interest. And see if you have a government that is truely working for the benefit of it's people, or a select rich few.

Then we can start to make a difference...

2007-03-06 20:11:26 · answer #6 · answered by A A 3 · 1 0

Around here, there are power plants at dams, windmill generaters, solar power, and Nuclear. The small persentage of coal burning plants, creat less pollution per watt, than any car. So your point is knocked down. The mainstream doesn't care about the dwindling supply of petrolum. Nor are they willing to do anything about it themselves. The key to beating this problem is self renewable energy. It is analternative to the dead end road of petroleum. Seach Joe cell and water car. There are yahoo groups dedicated to changing water to hydrogen, without outside engergy.

2007-03-06 18:55:47 · answer #7 · answered by doyou 2 · 1 0

Obviously you don't get a thing. With the new Chevrolet Volt you will not need a drop of gas. Gas is the major part of pollution and eliminating it would be essential to an American saving money. With this car you could get to and from work on a single charge and NOT POLLUTING THE ENVIROMENT. Hows that for pollution?

2007-03-06 18:53:50 · answer #8 · answered by Someone 4 · 1 1

I totally agree with you on the population point, but power plants generate electricity 24/7 whether there is demand or not, having an electric car which can be recharged during off peak hours would make use of surplus generating capacity. By the way in some parts of Europe they have 2 prices for electricity, peak and nighttime, many people can time shift their consumption to take advantage of this, small step in the right direction, and every bit helps. Also power plants have economies of scale, they can install massive scrubbers etc to be relatively clean as compared to 1000's of cars.

2007-03-06 18:46:29 · answer #9 · answered by cimra 7 · 2 2

That is the answer of course. Reduce the population, and I nominate you to be the first one to be "reduced".

2007-03-06 18:42:16 · answer #10 · answered by mister_e79 3 · 4 2

fedest.com, questions and answers