Effectivness and general plan on current sciences to halt global warming in the transpotation sector?

Question

I have been reading many articles about electric cars, bio-diesel and hydrogen gas to be used in vehicles. With all of these options however, I don't see how they will be able to reduce global warming.Take electric powered cars, plug-in. Car makers such as Toyota are planning on mass producing these in the near future. When you really think about it we get most of our electricity from either burning of gasoline or coal. These produce a mass portion of pollution in the U.S. and in order to power cars with electrictity would be even less efficient when you take into the account of the power lost when power travels through power lines and the somewhat primitive battery technology we have today. When you think about it, burning oil right at the car is truly the best way to go. I am under the impression that these new "alternative" designs just exploit the ineptness of US buyers. I am 15 years old and encourage you to exploit the flaws in my thinking. Knowledge is enlightenment they say

Answer 1

You are correct! The fuel will be burned at the plant or in the car, so it really does not matter in the long run. Some may say that it's more efficient, not really. Like you say, A significant amount of power loss occurs while electricity travels over long power lines, while charging batteries, and will also be frustrating to the driver when he has to plug in every night and then deal with the batteries whenever they go bad with time.

About the best thing to do is make cars more efficient, but I don't feel that this energy bill is the right way to do it either. As people want to move, they will. The gov should not force anything upon it's people!

So until we have Mr. Fusion (Back to the Future 2) we will be using gas.

Let me give you a lesson about Bio-Fuels. I am a 19 year old farmer, hence the name "tractordriver88", and we farmers are all about bio fuels because it's good for our business. But as an average citizen, i think it's a joke. Bio fuels were created because the amount of corn was rising due to increased efficiency and production in farming, and the markets were growing smaller. But then, someone figured out that ethanol and bio-diesel were good in engines, they started building plants that will take this corn and turn it into ethanol. Suddenly, everyone thought it was the answer to the world's problems because it's earth friendly. Now the UN is calling us traitors for turning food into fuel when we could be sending it over seas to the poor people. But, like any other business, we are going to give our corn to the people who pay the most, and right now, it is the ethanol plants.

So, their is profit to be made from bio-fuels, but like any other craze, it will end.

Answer 2

You are correct. If these alternatives were cost and pollution effective, there would be widespread use today in many countries around the world where energy costs are and have been much higher than in the U. S. (Japan, Europe, etc.).

To believe otherwise is to believe all the great Engineers, Scientists, and Entrepreneurs in all these countries are stupid.

Why are the "Green People" in the U. S. so gullible? Do they really think this is the center of the universe for intelligence? Do they actually believe someone just now thought of alternative energy options? Get educated before you adopt some salesman's or politicians pitch.

Answer 3

you are mixing 2 issues:

- how to make cars less dependent on fossil fuel.

- how to produce electricity from non fossil fuel sources.

Now, if non fossil fuels solutions were implemented in both cars and power stations, the end result would be reduction of fossil fuel consumption.

and the ongoing scientific efforts are on both issues, as well as many other issues.

For Example, the UK has declared they plan to produce all their electricity needs from wind power.