False Equivalence

My opinion on global warming, we're 100% effecting the environment. It's absolutely moronic to argue otherwise. Even if we lived life leaving as small of a carbon footprint as possible, us surviving means effecting the environment. What the question is, where is the line. Where are we simply inconveniencing ourselves without any benefit?
 
This point is irrelevant to the global warming debate. Always has been and always will be.
 
So Sav, do you not want to drill at all here in the states or would you rather we get our energy fuel from places like Venezuela and Nigeria where they really pollute the crap out of everything?

I just don't understand the logic of the supposedly pro environment folk. We do actually need fuel and Keanu Reaves isn't going to solve our problem for us anytime soon. This is a point that the environmental nuts seem to always ignore.
 
So Sav, do you not want to drill at all here in the states or would you rather we get our energy fuel from places like Venezuela and Nigeria where they really pollute the crap out of everything?

I just don't understand the logic of the supposedly pro environment folk. We do actually need fuel and Keanu Reaves isn't going to solve our problem for us anytime soon. This is a point that the environmental nuts seem to always ignore.

Rather sad we've made technological advances so much, that Tesla is the only pure electric car on the market.

Cars have been in production for a 100 years, high tech computers have only been in production for less than half that time. We have cell phones that do everything a computer can, and we still have cars that run solely on gasoline.

The difference is, there's no point in having a monopoly on electronics, because people know it can upgrade every year. The oil industry has convinced people there's no alternative other than fossil fuel, so anyone hoping Tesla's are going to be mass produced are weary of it. It could've and should've happened long ago by now, but don't tell me there aren't forces that don't want to see gas go away.
 
Rather sad we've made technological advances so much, that Tesla is the only pure electric car on the market.

Cars have been in production for a 100 years, high tech computers have only been in production for less than half that time. We have cell phones that do everything a computer can, and we still have cars that run solely on gasoline.

The difference is, there's no point in having a monopoly on electronics, because people know it can upgrade every year. The oil industry has convinced people there's no alternative other than fossil fuel, so anyone hoping Tesla's are going to be mass produced are weary of it. It could've and should've happened long ago by now, but don't tell me there aren't forces that don't want to see gas go away.

Tesla isn't th eonly pure electric car on the market. Smart has 2, Fiat has one, Scion has one, Ford has the Focus Electric, Chevy has the Sparq, Nissan Leaf is a midsized, and a few others I'm forgetting. Personally I think plug-in hybrid is the best of both worlds as it can be used as an Ev. But it can use gas for longer range.
 
Rather sad we've made technological advances so much, that Tesla is the only pure electric car on the market.

Cars have been in production for a 100 years, high tech computers have only been in production for less than half that time. We have cell phones that do everything a computer can, and we still have cars that run solely on gasoline.

The difference is, there's no point in having a monopoly on electronics, because people know it can upgrade every year. The oil industry has convinced people there's no alternative other than fossil fuel, so anyone hoping Tesla's are going to be mass produced are weary of it. It could've and should've happened long ago by now, but don't tell me there aren't forces that don't want to see gas go away.

+1
 
I'll just ignore the speculation in what is supposed to be a scientific debate. And despite the attempt to side step my question it still must be answered.

We still need fuel, right? American cars only make up a small percentage of CO2 emissions relative to the entire world's CO2 emissions. So where should we get that fuel?
 
How many of those besides focus looks normal like Tesla. Volt looks normal a little.

Smart's look like smart cars, scion looks like a Scion. and the FIat looks like a Fiat. Guess it would depend what your definition of normal is. Some people don't think the Prius looks normal but it's totally acceptable.
 
Smart's look like smart cars, scion looks like a Scion. and the FIat looks like a Fiat. Guess it would depend what your definition of normal is. Some people don't think the Prius looks normal but it's totally acceptable.

Tesla looks like regular sedan.

People who buy the other brands are going to regardless. If you want people out of the mold to buy then it needs to look standard like tesla.
 
Tesla looks like regular sedan.

People who buy the other brands are going to regardless. If you want people out of the mold to buy then it needs to look standard like tesla.

Gwildor had a great idea, use our trash as fuel. He explained it quite well in Masters of the Universe.
 
Rather sad we've made technological advances so much, that Tesla is the only pure electric car on the market.

Cars have been in production for a 100 years, high tech computers have only been in production for less than half that time. We have cell phones that do everything a computer can, and we still have cars that run solely on gasoline.

The difference is, there's no point in having a monopoly on electronics, because people know it can upgrade every year. The oil industry has convinced people there's no alternative other than fossil fuel, so anyone hoping Tesla's are going to be mass produced are weary of it. It could've and should've happened long ago by now, but don't tell me there aren't forces that don't want to see gas go away.

Do you own a Tesla car?

If not, I guess you just aren't doing your part.
 
I have a friend leasing a Leaf in Georgia. There are tax incentives and of course the saved monies on fuel. Considering it requires energy to power the battery my friend has figured he pays .7 cents per mile. Not 7 cents per mile but .7 cents.

It looks like any other 20teen car just smaller and for all intent and purposes is nothing more than a hot rod golf cart.
My family owns a Prius that averages 48-50 mpg. I'm not smart enough to math out what that is per mile. Certain it isn't a fraction of a penny.

I know I can Google this but, aren't Tesla's like over 50K ???
 
Do you own a Tesla car?

If not, I guess you just aren't doing your part.

I have been known to bike to work, since it's only a 5-10 minute ride at most.

And no I do not have a Tesla as they're out of my price range currently, at least for another year or two.

I drive a gas gussler, but I hyper mile so instead of getting around 22 city I can push it to 26-28. Dad bought me the car for high school in 08, not my choice but it was affordable since it was towed and repossessed.
 
I have been known to bike to work, since it's only a 5-10 minute ride at most.

And no I do not have a Tesla as they're out of my price range currently, at least for another year or two.

I drive a gas gussler, but I hyper mile so instead of getting around 22 city I can push it to 26-28. Dad bought me the car for high school in 08, not my choice but it was affordable since it was towed and repossessed.

Has to be a:

Ford Pinto
AMC Gremlin
AMC Eagle
Plymouth Horizon

I can actually see you in a Pacer. That would be cool. :)
 
I have been known to bike to work, since it's only a 5-10 minute ride at most.

And no I do not have a Tesla as they're out of my price range currently, at least for another year or two.

I drive a gas gussler, but I hyper mile so instead of getting around 22 city I can push it to 26-28. Dad bought me the car for high school in 08, not my choice but it was affordable since it was towed and repossessed.

ding ding ding
 
Back
Top