LotusTalk - The Lotus Cars Community - View Single Post

fitfan · 06-14-2009, 01:06 PM

^^ both are true - even if you discard the co2=global warming thing entirely. then building are still the #1 consumer of our energy resources (2/3 of all electricity produced and in the us a good majority of that is coal - case in point upstate ny enviromental toxins from energy production killing just about everything living there). your average honda if so efficent emisison and economy wise, the enviromental impact to achiver greater has minimal impact.

man made emmision are not bogus, they are real. the impact of thoose emisison is debatable, but the fact they have an impact is not (how much, not if). so we are faced with a displaced emmision issue more than a car pollution one. buildings don't have a "tail pipe" so as was mentioned - cars are an easy "visable" target. but more stringent regulation is drops i nthe bucket compared to other areas of focus where major return can be had.

very true that electrical drive system will greatly imrpove in the next 10 years. so thats good. we can not be fully independant on solar PV / wind (renewable / clean) power until we solve our consumtion issues, reduce those, and then PV/wind supply becomes more vaible. ( - you can not run an office building on the PV that would fit on its roof - the current bldg 'model' consumes more than the pv on site could produce)

so if we can reduce our building energy consumption to anything even close to net zero (the cool aid about cars) we suddenly have an energy surplus of a huge magnitude. then - ev's on a mass scale become viable. most of our car issues are social / cultural - not technological.

...of course america is rooted in the murder of anyone who believed in living in harmony with the enviroment we rely on to live. so i am not overly optimistic.

....sorry for that last bit -a philosophical rant

06-14-2009, 01:06 PM	#26 (permalink)
fitfan Regurgitated User Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: San Diego! Posts: 4,097	^^ both are true - even if you discard the co2=global warming thing entirely. then building are still the #1 consumer of our energy resources (2/3 of all electricity produced and in the us a good majority of that is coal - case in point upstate ny enviromental toxins from energy production killing just about everything living there). your average honda if so efficent emisison and economy wise, the enviromental impact to achiver greater has minimal impact. man made emmision are not bogus, they are real. the impact of thoose emisison is debatable, but the fact they have an impact is not (how much, not if). so we are faced with a displaced emmision issue more than a car pollution one. buildings don't have a "tail pipe" so as was mentioned - cars are an easy "visable" target. but more stringent regulation is drops i nthe bucket compared to other areas of focus where major return can be had. very true that electrical drive system will greatly imrpove in the next 10 years. so thats good. we can not be fully independant on solar PV / wind (renewable / clean) power until we solve our consumtion issues, reduce those, and then PV/wind supply becomes more vaible. ( - you can not run an office building on the PV that would fit on its roof - the current bldg 'model' consumes more than the pv on site could produce) so if we can reduce our building energy consumption to anything even close to net zero (the cool aid about cars) we suddenly have an energy surplus of a huge magnitude. then - ev's on a mass scale become viable. most of our car issues are social / cultural - not technological. ...of course america is rooted in the murder of anyone who believed in living in harmony with the enviroment we rely on to live. so i am not overly optimistic. ....sorry for that last bit -a philosophical rant __________________ Driving it around!