The ... err.... Environmentinator!

[Ishmayl-Retired]

You know... Some of you will probably think I'm a nutjob for saying this, but if the constitution was amended to allow, I think I would have to put some serious thoughts towards this guy...

Direct Link to Article[/url]

[Elven Doritos]

Dude drives an SUV, y'know.

[Raelifin]

Good for him. I must admit that I find his idea of "hybrid hummers" a bit distasteful, but at least he's on the right track.

[Ishmayl-Retired]

Yeah, that was my first thought as well, but hell, I drive a pick-up truck that doesn't really get the best mileage in the world.  "The first step to saving the world is realizing that the world needs to be saved... realizing that something is wrong."  I think he's taken a good first step from his particular political venue.

[SDragon]

Although I think he's going about it the wrong way, I think his idea of marketing environmentalism to have mass appeal is an interesting one. I think it has some serious potential. I'll have to wait andd see more before I pass much more judgement, though.

[Epic Meepo]

I must admit that I find his idea of "hybrid hummers" a bit distasteful...

hydrogen[/i] Hummers, not hybrid Hummers. A hydrogen-powered Hummer would have a full-electric engine whose only exhaust is water vapor.

[SDragon]

I must admit that I find his idea of "hybrid hummers" a bit distasteful...

hydrogen[/i] Hummers, not hybrid Hummers. A hydrogen-powered Hummer would have a full-electric engine whose only exhaust is water vapor.

Which are, actually, highly inneficient energy sources. The energy used to run fuelcell engines is actually more then the energy the engine itself gives off. Really, it would be better to just have an electric car.

That said, fuelcell and biofuel engines are still better then using fossil fuel.

[Ishmayl-Retired]

I'm not so sure about their not being efficient... I've done a bit of research on them that seems to say otherwise... but just for the sake of bitching ;), the reason hydrogen engines are so inefficient right now (if they are)is because our government doesn't support their research and development; what do you expect when the president of your nation is in bed with Exxon?  There have been talks about adding a new tax that would go straight to R&D for fuelcells, hydrogen engines, etc, but as long as we have the people in power who are in power, these things will never change.

[SDragon]

I'm not so sure about their not being efficient... I've done a bit of research on them that seems to say otherwise... but just for the sake of bitching ;), the reason hydrogen engines are so inefficient right now (if they are)is because our government doesn't support their research and development; what do you expect when the president of your nation is in bed with Exxon?  There have been talks about adding a new tax that would go straight to R&D for fuelcells, hydrogen engines, etc, but as long as we have the people in power who are in power, these things will never change.

I'd be interested in seeing these studies, but I agree completely on the rest.

[snakefing]

Scientifically, hydrogen and electric cars are an environmental non-entity.

You see, there are no hydrogen mines out there to get hydrogen. You have to make it. Using energy, you know, from other sources. Which, if it is natural gas, oil, or coal-based, still emits carbon dioxide.

The same goes for electric.

Biodiesel is better. It gives off carbon dioxide when burned, but that is mostly equivalent to the CO2 that was absorbed by the plants that were converted to fuel originally. So that doesn't really count as an environmental impact. Still, it takes some energy to manufacture biodiesel, and that energy could be environmentally damaging (or not).

The advantage of hydrogen, biodiesel, or electric vehicles is that they are not inherently damaging. So if your energy infrastructure is more environmentally friendly, these vehicles won't undercut it. They'll be just as friendly as your overall power-generating scheme. But this still depends on making some progress on solar, wind, tidal, geothermal, and hydroelectric energy sources. Without creating new and worse problems.

Also, just an under-appreciated fact: It takes something like 50 years for CO2 emitted into the atmosphere to have its full effect. So even if we stabilize the atmosphere today, we're still commited to decades of global warming. Good luck with that.

Hope you younger guys like the world we're leaving you!

[Epic Meepo]

The advantage of hydrogen, biodiesel, or electric vehicles is that they are not inherently damaging.

The advantage of hydrogen, biodiesel, or electric vehicles is that they give you the ability to say, "Up yours, OPEC!"

As for saving the environment, that depends entirely upon things like wind and solar power, since even a battery-powered car requires more energy input (during the charging of the battery) than the battery alone will ever put out. Dang laws of thermodynamics!

[Tangential]

I'd like to point toward this article, as a nice comparison between electric cars and our gassy friends.
http://www.catalystmagazine.net/shorts--occasionals/environment-shorts/youth-analysis-electric-vs.-gas.html
 (My bias in that I did most of the number crunching for both of the lovely ladies POVs)

[Velox]

Even if these energy sources are inefficient, as one poster already stated, they move us away from dependancy upon fossil fuels and oil company monsters.

Even if we use fossil fuels to create the energy needed to produce alternate car fuels, it's still a step in the right direction. A couple thousand power plants using fossil fuels are much easier to regulate than the millions of cars driving around spewing out carbon.

That is, if the people made the laws regulating these power plants, and not the companies who own the power plants.