"Green technology pollutes the planet"

[ET]

[KeithE]

The link to Amy Oliver Cooke's article about Green Technologies Pollutes was dead. is what I think ET was referring to.

As to the substance of her argument, I'll have to dig deeper into more reputable sources. So far it is true that wind turbines, cell phones, hybrid cars and many other common-day electronic gadgets require some rare earth elements (REE). How much I do not know but there is currently no shortage. And currently China produces most (95% or one googled up source said 97%) of the currently used REE; but Argentina, the US and Canada all have reserves of some of the rare earth compounds needed.

But no fair comparison of how much green energy "pollutes" vs the various forms of fossil fuel in this article. Her diatribe against Prius's was particularly one-sided and led me to believe she has a prior agenda. Looking at her she is anti-environemnt, anti-tax to the core.

[Gene Scarborough]

[ET]

Gene: Maybe you can "splain" what relevance your post has to do with mine? Your post has nothing to do with the environmental impact of (supposedly) "green" energy. It has nothing to do with trading one dependency for another. It has nothing to do with the myths and rhetoric that surround alternative energy "solutions".

In short, your post is useless for this discussion.

[ET]

[Gene Scarborough]

ET---

Energy and the environment DO go hand-in-hand. In recent years it is dawning on us that oil reserves are running out and if we want to continue quick trips under a stronger power than leg or horses, we must come up with alternatives.

I am constantly trying to reason with you about the importance of cooperating with the laws of nature so humans do not become a burden to a system which can easily eliminate us from this planet.

Since you are so wise, why don't you tell us what is more wise than getting away from fossel fuels and finding green solutions!

Lucy is anxious to hear Ricky 'splain it!

[ET]

[Gene Scarborough]

ET---

My approach and discussion is PRO-active while your logic is RE-active.

Why did we spend billions on going to the moon and a space research station?
Why did we put up the Hubble Space Telescope?
Why bother with satellite technology since you can't eat one?

Just a few similar questions where decisions on tax dollars produced something besides war and destruction of the Middle East / Pakistan / Afghanistan! Moreover, have you not noticed that EVERY regime toppled in the continent of Africa on its northern borders was that of a hated dictator---all backed at some time by the US!!!!!!

Those of us with longer experience remember how Castro beat the dictator of Cuba helping Americans enjoy cheap vacations in Cuba while raping that country over sugar and bananas, wide acceptance of the Mofia, etc.

[KeithE]

[Gene Scarborough]

Most electric hybrid owners will be thrilled with their gas mileage----until that $10,000 battery replacement rolls in in a few years.

To date, no one has come up with a lifetime rechargable battery. That could become a definite environmental issue in the future unless someone comes up with a process of recycling old batteries!

[Ed Pettibone]

Ed: Support for Gene's comments. http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2 ... _used.html

[ET]

[KeithE]

[ET]

I didn't say I had any distaste for Prius owners, but vanity plays a lot in what leads people to buy a car, whether it be a pickup truck, an SUV, a Mercedes, BMW or a Prius. Just as there are people who buy a sports car or luxury car for reasons other than necessity, I have little doubt that there are significant numbers of folks who buy Priuses to make an environmental statement, not because it makes any economic sense, just like buying a Porshe or Mercedes ever makes any economic sense. You don't need a BMW or Porsche to get around town. You do it for status or because you have a lot of money to blow, but usually for vanity.

As an engineer who loves running numbers, you are probably quite aware that almost all hybrids do not make economic sense. I would very much consider a Prius, but when a Chevy Cruz and other small cars aren't that far off from the mileage one gets in a Prius, there's not a tremendous motivation to spend the extra bucks except for some "reduce my carbon footprint" notion.

But really, Keith...you take issue with some outdated gas mileage figures? That's what you choose to take issue with? Your mpg figures are good, but the highway mileage can be beat by something like a VW diesel. A guy at work gets around 49 mpg with his. Something like the Chevy Cruz Eco can get around 40-42. If more diesels like they have in Europe were available here in the U.S., your MPG figures wouldn't be all that outstanding.

Hey, whatever floats your boat, man. You got a Prius. Enjoy it. I've got no issue with that. But let's not forget the (Bush) and the (Clinton)? Anybody remember those government programs that were going to give us a hydrogen powered, 100 mpg car? More glorious failures to the tune of billions of dollars from those who love centralized planning of the economy, and it shows that even Republicans can fall into that garbage to score political points.

But all of this doesn't really have anything to do with the shortcomings of alternative energy or their potential for generating pollution just like every other form of energy. It doesn't have anything to do with alternative energy being significantly more expensive than fossil fuels. It doesn't have anything to do with alternative energy being dependent on when the wind blows and when the sun shines, which has no connection to when and how much power is needed.

[Gene Scarborough]

You gentlemen are burning up Google to "prove" something which common sense should tell you:

We are on a quest for better technology / we should be more aware of our footprint on this earth and be most careful lest we go the way of the dinosaur / those big lizards had pea size brains and were here to be preditors / when the food and warmth went away----so did they!!!

Read all you want. Speculate all you want. Enjoy whatever comes your way---for better or worse---with untried technology!

I bought a $42K Bobcat with the promise from the sales guy that "most of the bugs have been worked out." That was some $10,000 off base! Fortunately, when I reminded them of how Vermeer stood behind the glitches on a $21K chipping machine of which I owned the 90th machine off the assembly line---they consented to pay for their mistakes in manufacture and testing.

No new technology is without error!!! Just make sure you know how to put it on the line with a large corporation (Ingersoll-Rand) when they try to bull you into running their Research and Developement program out of your wallet!!!!

[KeithE]

[ET]

A few notes:

1) Not everybody that drives a Prius is an eco-nut, nor is anyone who has bought into the "AGW" myth. There are plenty of them out there, however. If you really desire evidence of their existence, I have quite a list of "suggestions" by such nuts as to what to do to address "AGW". Many of them are quite comical.

2) Wouldn't mind having an off-topic discussion on your experience with the Prius. I keep vehicles for long periods myself. Our current fleet is a '97 Camry, a '98 Suburban and a '06 Ridgeline. None of them quite candidates to be replaced by a Prius. By your figures you can justify a Prius based on the numbers, but if one considers a hybrid version of the same vehicle (such as a Camry hybrid vs gas), then it can take years longer to get the ROI for sinking the extra money into a hybrid. Since the Prius has no gasoline version, the comparison isn't quite as good as comparing a Camry/Accord/Civic variations. One article about the matter that I read pushed the ROI out to 10 years for the Camry hybrid.

3) I don't worry about "AGW-induced flooding" in my lifetime or in my children's or grandchildren's. Remember all those global-warming doomsday predictions about Katrina-type hurricanes being a regular part of our future? Oops.

4) I will attempt to be more diligent in the future as to the date range of the articles I post, although I bet one will still find that the Prius - like the Chevy Volt - is not exactly a "car of the people". I'll try to keep my MPG figures more up to date.

5) Here's one article that mentions some of the waste in these energy projects, including the PNGV and FreedomCAR: . Puts PNGV cost at $1.5 BILLION. The cars with MPG in the 80ish range were supposed to be in showrooms....3-4 years ago. Yet you're driving a Prius. Concept cars? You can find those at auto shows every year. Doesn't mean they are practical, affordable or ever going to become a reality. The article also notes the large costs associated with ethanol and wind energy.

6) Worthy research? As I've said before, you folks in the "99%" are not so much against subsidies to corporations as long as it goes to the ones you like. It's not the subsidies to which you object, it's the notion that they aren't going to the "right" corporations or CEOs. Noted in the article in the previous item is that the Prius was developed without significant subsidies from the Japanese government, yet some 5-6 years after this article came out U.S. automakers are still playing catch-up...and we have no "FreedomCAR" or other PNGV variant. FAIL..EPICALLY.

7) Energy storage? Yes, I am aware of that to wind and solar energy's inherent unreliability. I find the stored energy in coal, oil and natural gas to be far more efficient than building humongous battery packs from sea to shining sea.

But still no discussion on the pollution from alternative energy, it's inability to provide power when and where needed, the potential huge increase in utility bills. No comments about the huge swaths of land that will be required to erect those solar panels and wind turbines. If it takes a state the size of New Jersey to provide the U.K. with one sixth of their power, how much land will it take to provide the U.S. with any significant amount of energy?

[Gene Scarborough]

I remember an episode of The Twilight Zone when a man was picked up by a floating car. About the same time was a Chrysler concept car with a gas turbine having much promise for savings on high miliage. Don't forget those who predicted total failure for Orville and Wilbur Wright here at old Nags Head!

ET---what do you see as some wise measures to be more kind to this planet? I have visited LA and you could not see the hillsides for the smog. That's not my idea of healthy living.

[Ed Pettibone]

[Dave Roberts]

No single technology is the solution to future energy needs. We need an abundance of different technologies. Wind is only a small part. I passed a solar farm recently in Eastern NC, and that shows some limited promise, but it will hardly produce the kind of energy we need. We are likely, for many years, to be dependent on coal, oil, and nuclear power for major portions of our energy needs. Face the facts, no new technology is without its bugs, but many of the old ones also have their problems. I still don't see anyone wanting to build his or her home directly downwind from a coal-fired power plant unless it's ET.

[KeithE]

[ET]

[ET]

[Gene Scarborough]

ET---you definitely need a stiff drink and chill, brother, chill out!!!!!

[Dave Roberts]