Why are people so high on Alterative Powered Vehicles?

Question

Ethanol has less energy than gas and FOOD has to be taken from being FOOD to make energy for Vehicles. Does this seem sane to anyone? The cost in energy to produce Ethanol is higher than OIL not to mention it gets less per gallon miles than Oil so why is everyone on this bandwagon?

Now for battery powered cars. What do we do with all the batteries of older cars when they eventually stop working properly? Imagine all those batteries in landfills leaking acids into the ground water! That is not a better alternative than the oil we use now or am I wrong?

Hydrogen is the way to go but we are far from that achievemen and it has to be worked out in the private sector or again am I wrong?

If you want to save OIL then we need more NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS not oil or coal burning plants think of the amount of oil we could save to put to get prducts such as tires, plastics, and gas and diesel and av-gas. Am I wrong again?

Answer 1

Batteries are fully recyclable.

"Nickel metal hydride batteries are benign. They can be fully recycled," says Ron Cogan, editor of the Green Car Journal. Toyota and Honda say that they will recycle dead batteries and that disposal will pose no toxic hazards. Toyota puts a phone number on each battery, and they pay a $200 "bounty" for each battery to help ensure that it will be properly recycled."

Electric cars are more energy efficient and produce far fewer greenhouse gas emissions than gas cars.

Answer 2

You make alot of good sense! But the reason for ethanol is because it doesnt pollute. Thats basically why. I am for just about anything but normal gasoline.

Answer 3

you make a lot of sense with the battery thing, now as for the ethanol and hydrogen, scientists should work on that b/c it seems like the right way to go, that and nuclear power plants

Answer 4

People have been suckered by environmentalists who hate Big Oil so much they are happy to see alcohol made from nice, clean, benign domestic corn replace evil Oil Company Profits.  Even though alky production drives up food prices and in the tropical zones are accelerating the destruction of tropical rain forests.

And you are exactly correct about nuclear power, it will gain more support as the years go by and people figure out that part time solutions like solar and wind energy aren't going to make a dent in CO2 emissions.  Nuke plants in reasonable quantities can made hydrogen fuel production feasible and economical, and therein lies the solution to making automobiles free of greenhouse gas emissions.

Answer 5

I think a lot of it has to do with peoples mindset and the fact that they are sick and tired of all these wars for oil and would like to be free of the black goo and the Big oil companies once and for all, but unfortunately they haven't time themselves to find their own solution, so they wait till someone does.

People want some sort of control over their own lives because the government has continually sold the people down the river.

Answer 6

Because it makes them feel good, or superior or less guilty.  That's okay by me, as far as I'm concerned, money spent feeling good is money well spent.  As long as they don't try and force me to do the same.  Personally, a powerful sports car makes me feel good, and I'm willing to spend the money it takes.

Answer 7

You are right. Why spend billions to get hybrids that get 45MPG. In the 80's we had two cars I know of that got over 50MPG. The Honda MPX? and the VW Rabbit.

With the new more efficient engines, these cars would probably get 60-70MPG and be cheap cars as well.

Most CO2 comes from electrical power anyway, so lets get back to NUCLEAR now.

Answer 8

Biodiesel is cleaner burning, and actually lubricates & lengthens the life of diesel motors. Waste vegetable oil (recycled from fast-food fryers) can even be used. This is one very feasible alternative fuel.

My boyfriend drives a '04 diesel Jetta that gets up to 50 mpg. It runs quietly as it is a 4 cylinder, not like the big honkin' deisel pickups, and odor & smoke are nearly non-existent, Yet so many people still have 'diesel prejudice' based on their opinions, not facts. Hopefully, that changes soon.

This is a step in at least the right direction: http://www.popularmechanics.com/automoti...

As far as power plants, many places where it is more likely to be a good fit are exploring: hydro, solar, wind, and even geothermal energy sources. These all do not have the problems associated with nuclear - not the danger, or the long-term storage/disposal issues.

Answer 9

Yes you are, at least in part.  I agree with most of your analysis, but not with your conclusion.  Ethanol, at least so far, is not a sensible approach.  Hydrogen may have potential, as may other alternatives.  But nuclear power produces waste products that are deadly for hundreds of thousands of years, and every time the idustry tells us they have a handle on safety, there's another frightening accident.  Perhaps if the government invested the billions that went into developing and subsidizing nukes into true alternatives, we'd find an answer sooner.

Answer 10

Ethanol is bad ONLY if you use the most inefficient methods possible, which is what we're doing. How am I not surprised? In fact, you can make it from switchgrass, cornstalks, or any other plant detritus with the proper systems. So you don't HAVE to take food out of anyone's mouth to make it.

Batteries, like everything else, ARE recyclable. besides, lead-acid is the oldest, least efficient technology out there. Give us a chance!

As to hydrogen, that is not a fuel SOURCE. It requires energy to create it. And transportation is a whole other problem. We have no infrastructure for H2, and no conveinient means of carrying it in vehicles.

Nuclear plants produce nuclear waste which will be dangerous for MILLENIA. Do you really want to saddle your great-great-great grandchildren with that kind of problem when there's a fair chance they won't be able to read the radiation warning signs!

Answer 11

Ethanol is not the solution for anything.  There are other alternative fuel sources that would be much better.  But corn growers have a powerful lobby and promoting it gives the appearance that politicians are actually doing something about our energy problems.

Paul J. Crutzen (a Nobel prize winning Atmospheric Chemist) published a report that the release of Nitrous Oxide (N2O) emissions in the production of biofuels mean that they contribute more to global warming than fossil fuels.

Answer 12

You are right, yet wrong.  Ethanol is a political play and is a really stupid way to go for energy independence.  Nuclear power plants are a good idea - I believe France gets most of its power needs from nuclear.  Hydrogen will be a good idea some day, but be thinking about 50 years in the future.  Electric and radical hybrid is the way to go at this time.  There won't be batteries in landfills - they are to expensive to not recycle, and they can be recycled very easily.  I doubt batteries will leak acid into the ground.  Lithium Ion batteries will be the wave of the near future, in about three years.  They are solid batteries.

Answer 13

Because that's what George Bush thinks is going to kick start our economy after he's given away 3 million jobs to China.

His World War II mentality of our troops coming home to industry is gone now, this is his alternative plan.