Go back
The Clean Energy Scam

The Clean Energy Scam

Debates

3 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by der schwarze Ritter
Ethanol increases global warming, destroys forests and inflates food prices, says Michael Grunwald. So why are we subsidizing it?

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1725975,00.html
It also melts gas tanks on boats.

However it is renewable and produces no nasty pollution other than the CO2 that causes the warming, which any fuel will produce. Even the food we eat makes us produce CO2. CO2 is just part of getting the energy out of fuel that combusts.

Vote Up
Vote Down

And, if I am not mistaken, all the CO2 from the combustion would be taken out of the air again by the next year's crop as the plants needs CO2 to grow.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by uzless
Bah!

Here is the future. We don't need more oil. Just use it smarter. In less than 10 years most of us will be driving things like this..

http://www.thestar.com/sciencetech/article/410337

Here's the key info:

Fully charged, the Volt could drive about 40 miles without using any gasoline, and a small conventional engine would recharge the vehicle, ...[text shortened]... k of gas..500 miles.

These are on sale in 2010 and will sell for approx 32K. Get in line.
But doesn't this car have to be charged electrically? My understanding is that electricity is largely
created through coal, which burns far dirtier than oil. If the argument is an environmental one
(rather than a 'foreign oil' one), isn't this worse?

Nemesio

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nemesio
But doesn't this car have to be charged electrically? My understanding is that electricity is largely
created through coal, which burns far dirtier than oil. If the argument is an environmental one
(rather than a 'foreign oil' one), isn't this worse?

Nemesio
Heard of clean coal? Check it out. Also, we do have this way to create electricity.. its called nuclear. Even the co-founder of GreenPeace Patrick moore stated that nuclear energy was the future and that he was wrong for initially oposing the use of nuclear.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Nemesio
But doesn't this car have to be charged electrically? My understanding is that electricity is largely
created through coal, which burns far dirtier than oil. If the argument is an environmental one
(rather than a 'foreign oil' one), isn't this worse?

Nemesio
Uh, read the article. This car is electric. It has a small gasoline engine that burns gas to recharge the battery. It will have a range of 500 km before it needs to be refueled but you would use a fraction of the amount of gas compared toa normal vehicle.

Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by SMSBear716
Heard of clean coal? Check it out. Also, we do have this way to create electricity.. its called nuclear. Even the co-founder of GreenPeace Patrick moore stated that nuclear energy was the future and that he was wrong for initially oposing the use of nuclear.
Clean coal is NOT clean. It is less polluting than regular coal. that's it.

It is still by far the most polluting way of creating electricity.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.