----- Original Message -----
From: Charlie Bell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, May 20, 2001 4:42 AM
Subject: RE: W. on the Environment
> Dam wrote:
> > Plus, green autos would make very inefficient use of this
> > electrical power.
>
> Pure electric cars are indeed inefficient, and all you're doing is moving
> the pollution from the production of the electrictricity to a power plant
> elsewhere.
>
> However, to say that *green* autos are inefficient is not true.
>
> Hybrid cars are extremly efficient, and will become more so. They're
> approaching 80mpg now with some of the cars, and this is while retaining a
> fair slice of 'performance': 0-60 in around 10 seconds, top speeds of
around
> 100 mph.
>
Well, I was probably not as clear as I want to be. Even GWB likes hybrid
cars, and their increase use is already calculated into most energy outlooks
that I know about. They will help and they are a good thing.
But, this is not what I thought of as totally green. Petroleum is stil
used. And, I'd like to point out that my first new car, which could carry
4, got 50 mpg. I bought that car over 20 years ago. It is quite possible
that we can improve milage 20%-50% with such a change. And that would be
good. But, it would only dent the increase in the use of fossil fuels, it
would
> LPG is becoming a lot more common in Europe.
> There's more than one option for efficient engines.
There are indeed different possibilities besides standard petrol. I think
it is quite likely that the introduction of these types of cars will lower
pollution in the cities, and, may allow the removal of certain pollution
control equipment that lowers gas milage. But, LPG comes from gas wells,
which are basically the same as oil wells. Other options are, as you said,
moving the source of burning. It is quite possible that we could move to
hydrogen fuels, with natural gas or nuclear as the soruce of the electricity
for these fuels, cutting pollution in the cities. It would probably cut it
overall, with the greater room for engineering afforded in large scale power
plants.
>
> Not lugging 2.5 tonnes of metal about when a 1200kg car would be fine is a
> good option too.
>
> To answer a different point:
>
> Solar energy. I have a solar boiler. So does almost every house in Cyprus.
> No government subsidy, no huge cost. It's cheap, only a matter of a couple
> of hundred dollars more than fitting an electric boiler alone. I need to
use
> electricity to heat my water only when we've had a day with no sun when
the
> ambient temp is below 10 degrees. The rest of the time, toasty water. 2
> hours after sunrise, it's at around 45-50 degrees, plenty hot enough for
> showering and washing up.
>
> Charlie
>
Things like solar boilers can help a bit. IIRC, Cyprus is fairly well
situation for their use. I don't think that they would work as well in
Scotland or Minnesota, for example. One has to think of why they are common
in Cyprus, but not common elsewhere.
But, even if they do find universal acceptance, they will not stop the
increase in the use of energy. Maybe they will reduce consuption 1% from
what it would be without these solar boilers. But, most projections on
energy use forcast a big spike up in the use in developing nations. The
firgures I've seen have us increase worldwide usage of energy by 50% in the
next 20 years. (This is slower than the recent 3%/year growth by quite a
bit, BTW. That would result in about an 80% increase in the next 20 years.)
I'm guessing that conservation measures that are likely, such as hybrid
cars, are already factored into these numbers. If we raise taxes on energy,
accelerate development of these cars, etc, we might have the 50% reduced to
30%. That is, indeed, a very worthwhile goal, and I support minimizing the
increase in energy usage. I also support anything we can do, like solar
boilers, to cut down the use of fossil fuels.
But, the bottom line is that, over the moderate term and without doing
tremendous damage to the world ecconomy, we can only lessen the increase in
the use of coal, oil, natural gas, and nuclear energy. We can also pick
between these four, to some extent.
And, if we do things like raise taxes, we will drive hardworking people into
bankrupcy. They will be hurt and angry about it. It is still the right
thing to do, but it will not be without harm.
