Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!





Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?

12467371

Comments

  • ponderpointponderpoint Posts: 277
    Back to the topic....

    "Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?"

    Funny how nobody wants to cover what happens to the extensive batteries required in the hybrids, including the car companies. Oh sure, they gloss over it, but they never really cover the processes of deterioration and recovery/recycling.

    Whoops! There goes all your fuel savings!

    An inconvenient truth.

    That domestic terrorist group "ELF", kind of the same thing. Simply torch the SUV's in the lots, and they've saved the planet a lot of grief. Pretty much every sane person realizes ELF is a misguided bunch of morons, but even worse they've certainly proved they're not chemists! The horrific pollution from one car fire produces toxins and pollutions inconceivable to the actual use of the vehicle, even if it was operated day to day for (I don't know, it was fantastical amount of years, google it!) eons and eons!

    Sometimes chemical processes are a little more complex than the simple equation coming out of a tail pipe.

    I had read the analysis somewhere of how people that are really frugal are actually the best at being earth muffins, inadvertently, but the best.

    The ultimate vehicle for stingy people? A Volkswagen Diesel Jetta! Careful considerate driving combining trips and coordinating activities had this the hands down winner, especially now that the EPA is coming out with "realistic" MPG ratings.

    As far as global warming? I'm a little more worried about a "Toba" event than my cars tail pipe. What is "Toba"? All you global alarmists are such experts at the cocktail parties should know this handily... Right? I mean a ninth-grader in science class does, it's so common.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,043
    I don't think that E85 is on the Toyota radar until it becomes available in the big markets like CA. I don't see that happening so they will side step that bullet. It costs GM & Ford so little to offer FFV that it is a way for them to look green. After all that is the name of the game.

    If there was a serious concern to cut GHG in the USA we would have offered vehicles with small clean burning diesel engines to go along with the introduction of ULSD. There are a few from the EU coming in. An example that I am looking at is the Mercedes GL320 CDI compared to the Escalade. The Caddy puts out 2.2 tons more CO2 per year than the diesel from Mercedes. Look at the VW Jetta TDI compared to their latest Gas engine car. They managed to get the emissions to where the EPA is happy at the expense of using more gas and dumping almost 2 tons more CO2 than the diesel version.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,043
    Give it another twenty or thirty years and will go back to the global cooling fanatics again, I don't know who I prefer more.

    I think you will find it is basically the same people and the same agenda.
  • ponderpointponderpoint Posts: 277
    "If there was a serious concern to cut GHG in the USA we would have offered vehicles with small clean burning diesel engines to go along with the introduction of ULSD."

    Yep. Couldn't have said it better myself.

    Oh, and apparently we're not suppose to use the name "Diesel" anymore.... It's "high compression engine" now. One must always have fashionable verbiage at the cocktail parties, especially if your moronic cousin movie star type is going to be there!
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "Right? I mean a ninth-grader in science class does, it's so common."

    Well, in all fairness, I doubt it. Most 9th graders can't even find Indonesia on a map.
  • kernickkernick Posts: 4,072
    ponder: I'm a little more worried about a "Toba" event than my cars tail pipe.

    me: Yes I think Darth Vader said it best in Episode IV (the 1st movie): his line was something like: "Don't be so proud of the power of this technological marvel; it is insignificant compared to the power of the Force." :)
    If you look at the population distribution of the Earth, you either come to the conclusion that people thrive more in warmer climates, or that people migrate to warmer climates. A little global warming might make Canada, and Siberia (and all of northern Asia and Europe) a little more appealing!

    In fact -8F this morning (in Mar!) where I live, did not makke me feel that the Earth is too warm!
  • tpetpe Posts: 2,342
    If you look at the population distribution of the Earth, you either come to the conclusion that people thrive more in warmer climates, or that people migrate to warmer climates. A little global warming might make Canada, and Siberia (and all of northern Asia and Europe) a little more appealing!


    I agree. A little more global warming and Canadians might start thriving like our neighbors to the south.
  • pernaperna Posts: 533
    As far as global warming? I'm a little more worried about a "Toba" event than my cars tail pipe. What is "Toba"? All you global alarmists are such experts at the cocktail parties should know this handily... Right? I mean a ninth-grader in science class does, it's so common.

    1. I LOVE the phrase "earth muffin". I'm too lazy to go back and see if it was you who actually used it, but I like it so much I just might get a couple t-shirts printed up with the phrase next time my wife and I go do something earthy like help clean up a public park. That just cracks me up.

    2. At the end of the day, "real" enviromentalists are interested in getting people to conserve natural resources and take care of what we have. Don't do things like empty your oil pan into a drainage ditch and you and I will be fine. :shades:

    Does it annoy me when people buy much bigger vehicles than they actually need? Yes, but mostly due to the safety more than the environmental aspect. I look at these people as just being extremely naive, in more than one respect, but I'm not a-hole enough to push my opinion on them as to what *I* think they should be driving.

    As for global warming, I don't care what it is that actually gets people to conserve, not pollute, and not waste natural resources. It doesn't matter if George Clinton and the P-Funk Allstars are actual aliens and will give you a free ride to Mars in their spaceship if that is what it takes for people to take their responsibility to the environment seriously.
  • rorrrorr Posts: 3,630
    "As for global warming, I don't care what it is that actually gets people to conserve, not pollute, and not waste natural resources. It doesn't matter if George Clinton and the P-Funk Allstars are actual aliens and will give you a free ride to Mars in their spaceship if that is what it takes for people to take their responsibility to the environment seriously."

    Personally, I think this is true of the vast majority of those squarely in the GW camp.

    However, would this be a case of "the ends justify the means"?
  • dificadifica Posts: 9
    I've got to say, i don't really think gas-electric hybrids are a solution to America's need of fuel-efficient vehicles.

    I honestly don't think that that many people would buy a Prius or any other hybrid if diesels were widely available and permitted in all states. After all, hybrid techology requires quite a lot of weight to be added into a car and also it costs more.

    Seeing these points, why would anyone buy a more expensive, similarly economical and slower hybrid when compared to a 21st century diesel?

    Yeah, in the USA that would be due to the fact that the amount of diesel vehicles in sale is barely too much to fit in one garage, and most of those are light truck diesels, which still don't do the trick. Heck, some gas stations appearently don't even sell diesel in the US.

    In Europe, there are lots of cars the same size as the Prius with diesel engines that are similarly economical, but their performance blunts the Prius. Not that you could really tell (unless you really concentrate on listening) that it was a small diesel instead of a small gas engine.

    Hopefully the car companies will start to realize that Americans could be made to buy diesels and that they're fine, not like those Oldsmobile 5,7 litre diesels of the 80's.
  • Kirstie_HKirstie_H Posts: 10,897
    Though I wouldn't label myself an "earth muffin" (regardless of how cute a t-shirt it would make), I'm pretty much in your camp.

    However, I feel that for me, personally, there's a boundary of compromise. I'm not planning to purchase a Navigator to make my daily drives, which are mainly solo excursions. By the same token, I'm not going to have my legs scrunched up, nor drive something that is just no fun for me simply to feel like I'm doing my obligatory part.

    Willful waste of resources is very selfish, but I do want to enjoy life as well!

    MODERATOR
    Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
    Share your vehicle reviews

  • prosource1prosource1 Posts: 234
    Have You Read Scientific Facts or are You Just Swallowing What the Media is Feeding You? Know the truth!

    http://www.nov55.com/gbwm.html

    There is no consensus among valid scientists, who practice science and don't derive their income from activists, when dealing with 'global warming'. People need to wake-up and learn the facts. People are being deceived and eventually fleeced by mainstream media and billionaire investors e.g. Ted Turner who is investing millions into global warming technology. Who would know better to market and influence the population but Ted Turner. I am not buying it and you shouldn't either. Did you know the pictures we see of ice melting in Greenland is a farce. Antartica, and cold climates not influenced by the 'gulf stream' currents are actually experience serious decrease in temps. We are more in danger of an ice age. What a farce! Educate yourself so you know the truth!
  • saabgirlsaabgirl Posts: 184
    As for global warming, I don't care what it is that actually gets people to conserve, not pollute, and not waste natural resources.

    Well, I'm not so sure of that one. I agree with the piece of your idea that conservation -- GW or no -- is far, far preferable to squandering the earth's resources. And each of us should do something to improve our performance as stewards. However, I think it's necessary to play this straight, because people are sick of B.S. and, as a practical matter, B.S. has a way of blowing up and splattering the B.S.er -- as well as whatever cause he or she happens to be B.S.ing about. It's an Inconvenient Truth that the example you set in housing and energy consumption should not undercut your spoken message. And it's no good saying that you live in a house and drive a vehicle that's similar to Tony Soprano's, but your good works offset your porcine ways. People hear that and think, "Yeah, more B.S. Thanks, I already have plenty." My new version of the Rodney King line is, "Why can't we all just grow up?"
  • prosource1prosource1 Posts: 234
    I bet he's got a 8mpg Ram Hemi in the garage on the other property. I have never seen such truckload of propoganda and pseudo-scientific manipulation. And they gave him a grammy. Unbelievable. They must think we are all morons to believe it.
  • prosource1prosource1 Posts: 234
    Oooops. That would be unbelievable! I heard he invented the iPod tho so maybe they should
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,043
    $30,000 per year in electricity to run his mansion. That will require a lot of carbon credits. I think it was an Oxcart (oscar)
  • ponderpointponderpoint Posts: 277
    "There is no consensus among valid scientists"

    Ah.... a refreshing breeze finally. Unfortunately most of the major media outlets have to keep the ratings up.... this excludes "valid" scientific evaluation with all that silly dry data that has to be analyzed.

    Sorry prosource, real hard data from real scientists is just not entertaining these days. Real science is SO boring.

    What's really going to be entertaining is when the Pacific Rim decides it wants to kick up its heels.... Finally.

    Hey! How did the Gore-meister arrive at the Oscars? Was it a Prius? Just idle inconvenient curiosity there....
  • imidazol97imidazol97 Crossroads of America: I70 & I75Posts: 18,370
    I find more than one home for him in the Nashville area when I try searching. I suspect there's more than one 'mansion' in play here. If he were driving a Corolla and living in on of the typical homes I see around Smyrna near the Nissan plant which is near where he lives in one of those homes and if he drove to DC, I'd believe his schtick. Otherwise I don't think anyone knows about global warming for sure.

    No, I don't think cars are responsible. They've just gotten the blame. Cleaning up the engines since 1970 has been good, but factories and other sources are to blame and cars are only a smaller facet.
  • jeffmcjeffmc Posts: 1,742
    To combat global warming, I turn the A/C on full blast & roll down the windows. Imagine how much cool air we'd pump into the atmosphere if everyone did that. :shades:

    ( :P )
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,043
    I agree that cars are much cleaner today. I believe removal of lead from the gas was a big stepping stone. Now if they can just get the MPG in line it would be good. I think there is more resistance by big business to slowing the flow of gasoline, than to cleaning the air.
  • ponderpointponderpoint Posts: 277
    I think a lot of global alarmists "read" their foes as being against all pollution and emissions control and this is ridiculous. They are very important.

    I have a friend that grew up in Burbank, CA in the sixties and seventies and he said the pollution controls really worked and to him, it was noticeable as the years went by. He's also smart enough to know that the LA Basin has a natural propensity to be hazy and smoggy.

    He's also smart enough not to have utility requirements that soar well into the thousands of dollars even though he could afford it. It's just stupid and wasteful, but some of global warming mouthpieces violate even this simplistic act in their day to day lives.
  • gagricegagrice San DiegoPosts: 29,043
    That was me. I lived in So. Pasadena and Burbank in the 1940s & 50s, till we moved to San Diego in 1958. I would go back to visit family in the 60s and 70s. I could hardly breathe the air was so bad. It is much, much better now than it was back then. Still the excess smog seems to back up against the San Bernardino Mountains. I would say it is Ships and Planes causing the bulk of the pollution now, not cars.
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070314/AUTO02/703140301

    Thank-god the Europeans didn't fall off the Golden Gate Bridge like some have in our country. ;)

    Rocky
  • rockyleerockylee Wyoming, MichiganPosts: 13,989
    http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070314/OPINION01/703140333

    My god, some want to place a platform for these auto executives right next to Sadaam. :sick:

    Rocky
  • tpetpe Posts: 2,342
    I'm not sure how Congress can draw the parallel to the tobacco industry. The tobacco industry was making false claims as to the danger of their products. When it comes to GHG emissions it is purely a function of mpg, which is clearly posted on every vehicle sold. Now if the automakers are suppressing this magical technology that will allow vehicles to achieve higher mpg then that's another matter. I personally don't believe it, which is why I question these people who advocate a 4% per year increase in mileage standards. If you really can legislate technology why stop at 4%, wouldn't 10% be better? A lot of people would say that 4% per year is attainable? What's that insight based upon?
This discussion has been closed.