GLOBAL WARMING question: SHOULD THE 1ST WORLD STOP USING CARS OR SHOULD THE 3RD WORLD HAVE RIGHT TO USE them?

Question

Cars are becoming cheaper and cheaper and in 10 years they're going to be twice as many. So be prepared to answer this question.

Oh, forgot to mention: cars are a main source of pollution and global warming.

cdjack,
Who's saying only the US should stop using cars. I said "1st world". But since you mention it, just add some more details to your answer: Should the # of cars per capita in the US be the same as in the rest of the world? If yes, what treaty would back that up?

Answer 1

Cars don't make any difference. If you want to reduce co2 by 50%, build nuclear power plants to replace fossil fuel power generation.

Answer 2

You should be asking if 3rd world countries have the right to develop. Yes they do. The only way they can do so in an environmentally sustainable fashion is if we set a good example and help them. We have been using fossil fuels for decades. The fact is the US and China are still is the biggest polluters in the world and need to change . If the USA doesnt change countries like China who have millions of people in poverty will say if the US its why should we. What does that solve. The only country that hasn't agreed to lower emissions is the US.

Answer 3

Cars are a real problem in society, not just because of global warming.
- They are an extremely inefficient form of transport. Most of the energy is used in transporting the vehicle instead of the payload.
- They are an enormous cost to society once you factor in the road toll, the cost of repairing smashed cars and the amount of land used for roads and parking.
- They are pollutiing, they cause death, injury and disease.
- They are responsible for using up one of our most valuable and yet finite resources, oil.
- And on top of that, yes, they are one of the world's great contributors to greenshouse gas emission, considered to be responsible for global warming.

The problem is that cars are incredibly convenient and extremely useful, and people are prepared to pay a significant proportion of their income to have one (or even more). The way cities are structured in western civilization has even become dependent on them.

I think that an important part of solving the greenhouse gas issue is to move away from cars as the primary form of transport, to develop better public transport. That is still costly since you need a lot of infrastructure (such as rail lines) and it is still polluting. But it is less so per head of population. We lose some convenience. We would have to restructure our societies. In the long run, however, it's a much better way. Of course another possibility is to develop non-polluting cars, e.g. somehow working off solar or wind energy. That would give us the best of both worlds. We don't have that technology, however, while technology for public transport is already in existence.

Answer 4

Yeah that will stop global warming alright. Good thinking. If the USA cuts all CO2 emissions, and China emits 10 times what we ever emitted, global warming will be halted somehow. Makes perfect scientific sense to the liberals. Only USA pollution is harmful, the rest of the world emits harmless pollution. YUP.

Answer 5

We can't eliminate all cars but we can reduce the need for them by improving public transportation. Electric trains and buses powered by nuclear, wind, or solar plants would reduce emissions greatly. Hydrogen fuel cells and other green technologies would reduce or eliminate the harmful emissions from cars. We need to stop letting big oil run our lives and get serious about low-emission and zero-emission transportation.

Answer 6

The 3rd world should have the right to use them. Anyway, cars are not the only problem or even the biggest problem. Coal fired electric generation is a big problem. And ships, trains, trucks, buses and planes are part of the problem too.

Answer 7

1) Cars aren't becoming cheaper...they're more expensive now than ever.
2) What gives you the idea that the car population will doulbe in 10 years?
3) Car exhaust is not the primary cause of global warming... that big ball in the sky that's hard to look at for long...yuo, the shiny one...THAT's the #1 cause of global warmth AND global warming.

Answer 8

We don't have to stop using cars, just make them more efficient. What must stop is people driving around these large SUV's when they are just transporting themselves. This is reckless and anyone driving Hummers and the like should get rid of them and be more responsible. Hopefully in the future hybrids will be more practical and other fuel efficient engines are designed and put into place.

Answer 9

There has been technology to power vehicles on bio or hydrogen cells for almost 40 years now. Emitting only water as exhaust, the rich get richer by selling oil.

We don't have to stop using cars but we have to stop depending on them so much, and find ecologically friendly forms of fuel.

Answer 10

fantasy #a million--- animal or animal led to farts are depleting the ozone reality--- Methane gas is merely no longer concentrated surprisingly sufficient to have negitive effects on the ozone while they are expelled from the digestive tracts of animals. Secondly the gas isn't continually methane, this is each and every thing from sulfer dioxide to carbon dioxide. merely positioned farts do no longer dissipate the ozone. fantasy #2--- eating in basic terms vegetables is greater helpful on your digestion besides. reality --- on a similar time as eating meat is suitable to bigger disadvantages of coronary heart ailment and different actual ailments there is not any conclusive info that the intake of non altered organic grazed meat is harmfull to you. we've eaten it for thousands of years thousands of generations can't be incorrect... whether in case you attempt to stay a eco-friendly existence eating meat this is selection fed and humanely raised and slaughtered is effective. no chemical ingredients, drugs, hormones, Cloning. merely a hundred% organic selection fed and humanely killed meat. reality is its the processing of the beef that motives the pollutants... no longer the animals themselves. As for Vegetarian residing while produce is grown employing insecticides and chemical ingredients the tip consequence is not greater helpful then eating meat. purchase in basic terms organicly grown close by produce you will get greater helpful high quality greater helpful tasting and be helping the small relatives farmer.

Answer 11

Why this spamming with hundreds of global warming questions? Read the thousands of proposals in this forum ...