We don't need hydrogen fuel cells which are not going to happen. Don't believe the hype. We don't need gasoline or diesel. We need electric cars. They don't have to use coal. We can easily do solar and wind driven electrical power. Give the finger to the big corporations and start cleaning up this environment. For you Christian's who support gas companies ... What does it profit a man to gain all the gold and lose the very air he breathes?
2007-04-19 05:43:17 · 8 answers · asked by Rothwyn 4 in Environment
Actually, we DO have electric cars. They're just a little harder to find. Also, EVs do not have all the 30-year-old "flaws" that people seem to think they still have. News flash, folks. Technology doesn't stand still. Look below.
*
Here's the latest electric car on the market:
*
http://phoenixmotorcars.com/models/fleet.html
*
The Phoenix electric pickup truck - using new, advanced Altair Nanosafe batteries (based on research from MIT) - can:
-Travel up to 250 miles per charge
-Carry 5 passengers plus cargo at 95mph.
-Charges batteries in as little as TEN MINUTES.
-Has batteries that last 250,000 miles (never need replacement.)
*
The Phoenix is a real car, being built for fleet use right now. Here's another electric car for sale right now:
*
http://www.teslamotors.com
*
The Tesla electric sports car can out-accelerate a Ferrari (0 to 60 in under 4 seconds), does 130mph, and close to 250 miles per charge. If that's not enough performance for you, here's a concept EV:
*
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/03/19/zap-releases-details-and-drawings-of-their-impending-644-horsepo/
*
How about up to 644 horsepower and a top speed of 155 mph? The ZAP car has a 350-mile range, using the same Altair batteries as the Phoenix.
*
No other alternative fuel has electric vehicles beat for efficiency. High efficiency means less fuel per mile. Less fuel means less pollution (no matter what gets burned at powerplants), and low fuel cost.
*
And batteries don't pollute. The newest EV batteries have extremely long lifespans (up to 250,000 miles), and are fully recyclable. Plus Li-Ion batteries aren't considered 'HAZMAT' by the EPA anyway. Certainly not compared to the drilling, pumping, shipping, refining, and burning of gas and oil!
*
By the way, hydrogen fuel cell cars are still electric cars - with the added expense of a fuel cell and hydrogen tank added on. Why do any of the above cars need that?
-------
2007-04-19 07:32:11 · answer #1 · answered by apeweek 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Because no one cares about the environment. Prime example of this is NASCAR. Also electric cars do not currently have anywhere near the preformance that a gas powered car has. Also they are limited to 100 miles before they need to be refueled. Further more if we all had efficient electric cars that operated just as well as gas cars we will close to the same amount of fossil fuels as we are currently using if not more. The reason for is that 90% of the power plants in the US are either coal, gas, nuke. Each uses a energy source that create a undesirable by-product. So if you want to convert all the power plants and cars to "renewable" energy sources I hope you enjoy living at much higher cost of living that we have now because all of us will have to fork out the money to pay for these upgrades.
On a personal note I am a christian but I dont support gas companies. I support whoever is cheapest so I can save all my money. What good is the air going to do me if I cant enjoy it, and dont give me the nature walk speech. I lived and grew up in the country and could never understand the whole nature thing.
2007-04-19 06:08:32 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
People don't miss what they've never had. Electric cars are "new", so if there is a delay in producing them, people don't really know the difference. Now if you suddenly removed, say, microwave ovens, there'd be riots...
2007-04-19 05:52:00 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Outrage?
A replacement for internal combustion fossil fuel vehicles needs to be an economically feasible one. Currently, solar and wind energy for the purpose of storage and distribution in a method to charge vehicles is unreliable. Coal is currently the most effective method, and the dirtiest.
Battery technology is not currently a viable replacement. Life span and disposal afterwards are concerns that are often overlooked when evaluating the environmental impact of electric powered vehicles. The batteries themselves are hazmats!
There is no such thing as a zero emissions vehicle. The concept of a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle is the closet we have come. It is worth being researched and developed.
And why the attack on Christians? I thought this was a technological/environmental issue? People of just about every faith drive all kinds of vehicles and have all different views on the environment. Makes me wonder what would motivate you to single out Christians to call on the carpet?!?!?!
2007-04-19 06:08:59 · answer #4 · answered by brweldon81 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The government need to legislate us into it, and with oil men in the White House, that's not even close to something that will happen. I'd love nothing more than to leave petroleum products behind-but my attraction is more energy independence than anything else--its a matter of national security. If we used corn-based fuels, we would no longer need to concern ourselves with the Middle East or what OPEC has to say.
2007-04-19 05:55:06 · answer #5 · answered by melouofs 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I know! I just watch who killed the electric car and I was really upset at the measures taken to destroy the EV1. We should all be outraged that we had zero emission cars on the road, spent taxpayer money to build charging stations and then have the cars not only pulled from the market, but crushed so that no one could ever use them again.
2007-04-19 05:58:15 · answer #6 · answered by surfergirrl 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Consider how much of our present electric power comes from solar and wind and now add all the energy used by every car in the country. Translate that into all the additional hydrocarbons and coal needed to generate all that power. It may not be such a great idea.
2007-04-19 05:58:26 · answer #7 · answered by Gene 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
because at present they are not as good as the common car( petrol or diesel powered). we don't get the same thrill of driving nor their designs are really attractive
2007-04-19 05:57:00 · answer #8 · answered by AMJ 2 · 1⤊ 2⤋