Date: Wed, 16 Apr 2003 09:48:36 -0500 From: "Walt Kienzle" <wkienzlenopsam.net> Subject: Re: GM to increase SAAB lineup
Nutmegger" <nutmegger_7717nopsamo.com> wrote in message news:b7jbkf$1f5rp$1nopsam38055.news.dfncis.de... [snip] > That's part of the problem! The US refuses to look ahead or plan for the > future. This is a point into putting money into it for the good of our > world. We shouldn't let consumers dictate standards, the gov't could offer > tax cuts for people who consider such or put funding into such research. The problem with looking ahead is that uninformed, well meaning, people have been saying for the past 30 years that the world would run out of oil in 10 years. It hasn't happened yet and apparently won't happen soon, at least not in the next 10 years. The dire warnings on this have lost all credability. And why is it that "the US refuses to look ahead", why isn't it the entire Earth? There are highly advanced technical companies in other countries that are well qualified to develop new technology that they can offer worldwide. You make yourself sound like an arrogant American that thinks only Americans have the know-how to solve the problem. As for tax cuts, already done, and have been in place for a few years now. The US government has always given tax credits for companies doing any kind of research and they also give tax credits for consumers that buy alternate fuel vehicles. > > 2) The unspoken secret is the > > apparently cool alternatives, like Hydrogen Fuel Cell, still get the > > hydrogen from the hydrocarbons of natural gas, so you still aren't using a > > renewable resource. > > I've heard snippets of info about this. > > >If they could extract the hydrogen from water, I > would > > go for it right away. > > Now that would be cool. > > >Even the other interesting alternatives, like CNG > and > > LPG use renewable resources, but offer advantages in performance/longevity > > and lower emissions, and these are popular with owners of large fleets > that > > can install their own fueling systems. > > Maybe owners of large fleets should be required and/or offered incentives to > switch. You seem to be very uninformed on this topic where you are offering your opinion. Not only have various state and federal incentives been in place for years, the US government has imposed requirements on themselves, that government agencies convert their fleets to alt-fuel vehicles. This includes all military branches, and the USPS. > > >But public fueling stations are > rare > > and hard to find; home fueling systems are expensive and there aren't too > > many sources for them either. > > What did they do when cars were first invented? I wasn't around then, but I believe that gasoline was considered a waste material in the refining process (fuel oil is what people wanted). Because it was cheap (almost free because refiners didn't know what to do with it), blacksmiths used it for fuel, so you could get some from any blacksmith. Not much was needed, because fuel tanks were small and cars didn't go far. People then thought that travelling at speeds faster than 30 MPH would cause death. When Henry Ford made cars popular, he also owned all the gas stations, so he made sure enough gas was available where his cars were sold. > > >Fuelmaker.com is working on a lower priced > > system, but it isn't available yet. Car manufacturers offer a selection > of > > CNG or LPG factory equipped vehicles, but once again, it is too much cost, > > inconvenience and too little benefit for the average consumer to have an > > interest. > > And that, exactly is where the problem lays, and it is time for our gov't to > take more of a stand on this. I'm sick of this "money talks" stance of our > nation. I don't see how this is a "money talks" stance specific for our nation. No consumer in any part of the world will willingly pay for something that they don't want or need. Car manufacturers offer alternate fuel vehicles for people that believe in the benefits, but it takes additional equipment that has a cost for that to work and they don't give it away at a loss. For LPG and CNG, the special fuel tank alone can cost several hundred dollars, then there are the additional components for the fuel injection/engine management system, and the additional emissions testing and certification that is needed. Should our government mandate this equipment and make everyone pay the higher prices? That doesn't sound like a free country to me; that sounds like the nanny state.
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |