drifting is harmful to the enviroment!

[TRusst]

There isn't a infrastructure currently but like I said; BP just opened the first Hydrogen refueling station in Singapore last week. They are also planning on growing hydrogen. Picture special forrests created to grow hydrogen. Every "energy" company, auto manfucaturer, and government in the world is dead set on hydrogen. They are already planning on ways to control future energy the way that they currently control oil. I don't trust them I tell ya!

[SilverGhost]

the show i saw on TLC had this dudes truck that had been hydrogen converted, and he drove from LA to NYC and back to LA on only what he could carry in the bed...but i dunno, how long do you guys think it will be till they get alternative fuels mainstream?

[nissanguy_24]

Originally posted by SilverGhost
the show i saw on TLC had this dudes truck that had been hydrogen converted, and he drove from LA to NYC and back to LA on only what he could carry in the bed...but i dunno, how long do you guys think it will be till they get alternative fuels mainstream?

depends. if people like *Censored**Censored**Censored**Censored* cheney and bush stay in power (not trying to turn this into a political debate) who have strong tries with the oil industries then it will be a long time. It just depends though, if we were to get some kind of president who was all about alternative fuels and pushed it then it could be fairly mainstream early.

it will happen sooner or later, its just a mater motivation. And it doesnt seem any one in power has the motivation, and guys with oil ties especially dont.

[AREITU]

Originally posted by Ichi-Go
Actually hydrogen is more polluting to the enviroment. The process it takes to make hydrogen is more pulluting that the gasoline refining and the burning. Once more cars use hydrogen its going to cost a lot of money becuase there is no infrastructer for it. I think hybrid gas/ electric is the way most cars are going in the near future.

But it concentrates it in one specific area. Where it can be away from where pollution shouldn't be, and where it can be more easily controled.

Originally posted by Ichi-Go

If you are worried about polluting dont use your heat or AC in your house. recycle and dont flush your toilet every time.

I think the enviroment needs a good wiff of tire every once and a while.

Word

[hatebbobbarker]

i must be going to hell because i remove cats on brand new cars

[nasty nate 7]

i dont see how drifting is a POSITIVE THING for the environment. its just plain fun. thats why we do it, the hell with the environment

[GRiDRaceTech]

Originally posted by nissanguy_24
depends. if people like *Censored**Censored**Censored**Censored* cheney and bush stay in power (not trying to turn this into a political debate) who have strong tries with the oil industries

SMC, I know you've been brainwashed, so I'll do the best I can. Bush advocates alternative energy sources.

"The President has also called for tax incentives totaling $4.1 billion through 2009 to spur the use of clean, renewable energy, and energy-efficient technologies, such as hybrid and fuel-cell vehicles, residential solar heating systems, renewable energy produced from landfill gas, wind, or biomass, and efficient combined heat and power systems... On transportation issues, through the President’s Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by pollution-free fuel cells. The Hydrogen Fuel Initiative and the FreedomCAR Partnership will provide $1.7 billion over five years to develop hydrogen-powered fuel cells, a hydrogen infrastructure, and advanced automobile technologies that emit no air pollutants or greenhouse gases. And for the first time in a decade, the Administration raised Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for SUVs, vans and pick-up trucks."

Strange for someone with such strong ties to oil.

I bet you could drift one of BMW's 750hLs if you just put skinnier tires out back. W00t.

[Feint]

Bush is a bigger crook than Nixon.

Sorry about that mistake.Replace buses with inner city trains.The study was conducted by Lancaster University,feel free to try and dig it up,it's out there for those who want to see it.

[nissanguy_24]

Originally posted by GRiDRaceTech
SMC, I know you've been brainwashed, so I'll do the best I can. Bush advocates alternative energy sources.

"The President has also called for tax incentives totaling $4.1 billion through 2009 to spur the use of clean, renewable energy, and energy-efficient technologies, such as hybrid and fuel-cell vehicles, residential solar heating systems, renewable energy produced from landfill gas, wind, or biomass, and efficient combined heat and power systems... On transportation issues, through the President’s Hydrogen Fuel Initiative, the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by pollution-free fuel cells. The Hydrogen Fuel Initiative and the FreedomCAR Partnership will provide $1.7 billion over five years to develop hydrogen-powered fuel cells, a hydrogen infrastructure, and advanced automobile technologies that emit no air pollutants or greenhouse gases. And for the first time in a decade, the Administration raised Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards for SUVs, vans and pick-up trucks."

Strange for someone with such strong ties to oil.

I bet you could drift one of BMW's 750hLs if you just put skinnier tires out back. W00t.

4.5 billion sure seems like alot.. lts see 4.5 billion compared to how many billions spent on iraq? gee what is iraqs ONLY naturall resource? hmm?

Debate me if you wish but i am far from brainwashed.

Shall we break it down? 4.5 billion does indeed sound impressive. However if we think of it as cost per citizen.. there are about 275 million american citizens, probably close to 300 million with the illegals and resident aliens ect.. so lets just use citizens. 4.5 billion divided by 275 is about 16.6 dollars per person.

In other words as a tax payer we have all spent just shy of 17 dollars this year on alternative energy sources. Now i was a commuter, so my numbers are going to be way off the chart, but follow me for a moment.

I was traveling 240 miles a day, three days a week, now lets take 1 month. thats 2880 miles a month, if i only commuted to school and back.. this doesnt include trips to town ect.. now lets say my car gets 30 miles to the gallon, not too difficult on the S13 on the freeway. so 2880 divided by 30. That goes to 96 gallons month.. now follow me here..

96 gallons times 2.3 dollars a gallon, its alittle cheaper at the moment but this was the last full month i commuted. (this includes state and local taxes)
thats 220 dollars a month in gas. and trust me i used alot more then this, i have to do my daily driving too, but okay 220 dollars a month straight to oil.. now whats this have to do with that 16 dollars a year? ill get to it,

Federal gas tax is 16.5 cents a gallon thats 15.84 dollars per month in gas taxes for the federal government. Thats nearly the yearly price i had to pay for alternative fuels, and we pay the same for state taxes.

so i paid 32 dollars that month for tax on gasoline. the whole time bush gave 16/12=1.3 of my dollars to certain companys

And remember thats REALLY 16 of my dollars over his 4 year term, not per year. so try closer to 4 dollars a year.

and you mention specificly the FreedomCAR Partnership, funny thing about that is this. In order to fund the FreedomCar partnership bush canceled a preexisting similar plan put under the clinton administration. The funds were redirected for bush's plan, So he really didnt allocate any new fund for it at all. So strike 1.7 billion out of that 4.5 billion you sited.

The other thing about the freedom car partnership is this. The money for the old plan was sent to a series of national labortories. And national research institutions. That money was taken from the national programs and given to the threedom car act which is a partner ship of the automakers. In other words 1.7 billion was basicly handed over to private companys. Another form of corporate welfair? nah probably not, and if the automakers had any kind of incentive to making alternative fueled vehichles it may just work. Or an infastructure in place to fuel them.

The fact is handing money to someone is never a good incentive to get them to do anything, only showing them the potential rewards is. Under the old plan which was called PNGV, partner ship for next generation vehichles, the money went into researching new ways to increase fuel millage of existing cars. The data would then be handed over to auto makers who could increase there fuel economy and use those technologies to produce competitive vehichles against companys like toyota and honda.

The incentive there is very obvious, a sedan from america that gets 40 miles to the gallon will do better against toyota's and honda's hybrids. It was killed in 01 though for the bush plan. And to this day no american manufacturer actually sells a hybrid car.

Furthermore this plan of bush's wont work. Why? theres no incentive for energy companys to actually develope alternative fuels and there infastructure. With out having the two groups work together you wont see alternative fuels comming into use for a long time.

like i said 4.5 billion sounds like a lot, but honestly we probably spent that much in the first 24 hours of the iraqi war. wars are pricy i know, but the point im making is if bush was real serious about this we could see 100 billion easily put forward. But the fact is hes not, Indeed kerry isnt serious about it either, or really anyone on the hill, so because of that, unless we see strong change, you will not see alternative fuel vehichles for a long time.

And yes i know im brain washed.

oops my mistake, it wasnt 4.5 billion for 4 years, it was 4.5 billion for about 8 years (it went into effect around 01 if im not mistaken) So all those numbers are half as much now.

[Tybalt]

Beautiful absolutly beautiful Nissanguy_24

[GRiDRaceTech]

The $4.1 billion in tax incentives will go to the wealthier people who can afford pollution-reducing measures. Don't be angry at our President, who is merely a politician and not the lead scientist or CEO of a company which could make a difference. The private companies need to advance their building techniques to reduce cost. All these lower-emission techniques do cost money, and most require specialized equipment or installation, thus ramping up costs. Maybe if we cut spending on the UN "peace" (read: greed) missions we'd have more. Maybe if the government didn't have to deal with all these illegals we'd have more. Maybe if we cut down on welfare we'd have more. Maybe if we lowered taxes we'd have more. Who supports these programs? Liberals. Now, that's most definitely not the point, but how much is Kerry going to spend on tax incentives? Oh, he doesn't say? Interesting. You can't really bag on Bush when Kerry isn't really promising to fix any of Bush's "problems." (Oh, except that pesky growth problem. He'll put us right into a nice little depression if he gets into office. Right on, brother.)

The $1.7 billion in FreedomCAR money was a government-approved grant. A grant is money that the private companies CANNOT use in any way other than intended. They cannot use it to pay for more powerful gas engines, they cannot use it for more advanced suspension systems, only on the advancement of hydrogen-powered vehicles. They'll be audited by the IRS to make sure they use the money correctly; if they don't, they face stiff fines and possibly jail time for he who approved spending.

No American manufacturer sells a hybrid car? Are you kidding me? What about the Toyota Prius? http://www.toyota.com/prius/
And the Ford Escape Hybrid: http://www.fordvehicles.com/escapehy...dex.asp?bhcp=1
Hmm... and it appears that before the election there will be more hybrids: Lexus RX400h, and the Honda Accord Hybrid. After that, Toyota has confirmed there will be a hybrid Camry by 2006.

Oooh, let's not forget the flexible fuel vehicles: http://www.ford.com/en/vehicles/spec...al/ethanol.htm
http://www.e85fuel.com/information/daimler_chrysler.htm
http://www.e85fuel.com/information/general_motors.htm
http://www.e85fuel.com/information/mazda.htm
http://www.e85fuel.com/information/mercedes.htm
http://www.e85fuel.com/information/mercury.htm

There is an incredible incentive for energy companies to increase production of alternative fuels due to both pressure from environmental groups, possible future tax cuts, less dependence on foreign oil, (which is hard, because the environmentalists won't let us do crap here) and increased numbers of alternative-fuel vehicles.

By the way, I have no qualms about the gas tax of 16.5 cents per gallon; in Britain it is $3.35 per gallon. (And is set to be raised an additional 13 cents)

[hatebbobbarker]

im trying to stay out of this now that its heated, but very well said grid

[nissanguy_24]

Not to bring you down man but Toyota isnt an american company, and the Escape isnt on the market yet.

And we all know about fords natural gas and such fleet vehichles. BUt thats just goes to prove my point, with out incentive for energy companys to build the infastructure we will forever be slaves to gasoline.

I thought the republican way was everyone works for there own because giving people hand outs such as the UN programs and the welfar programs is the horrible liberal thing to do that doesnt work?

So how is this reversed when it comes ot big companies?


The thing is your trying to turn this into a bush vs kerry thing. Its not. No where did i say kerry was going to be better. No where did i say kerry was the better alternative, no where did i say he had any kind of plans. Your trying to turn this political, im just keeping to facts.

The fact is BUSH not kerry is our president. We have something to go on from bush. Kerry could do anything, kerry could solve all the worlds problems and kerry could go mad and shoot everyone in the whitehouse. Its not aquestion of what kerry will do. Its a question of what bush has done. If kerry becomes president, then 4 years from now we can talk about what he has and hasnt done. Your speculation about how he will ruin this wonderful economy of ours is offtopic and mer speculation. After all you said your self he hasnt stated any plans right? so how can you be so sure those plans that dont exist are bad? you cant be, it seems the brianwashed one is not me afterall.

Im not complaining about high gas taxes, not here anyways. Thats a different debate. I am pointing out that more of my tax money by far goes to the government from buying gas then it does for spending on alternative fuel vehichles. In other words the government has by far more incentive to keep me buying gasoline then anything else. And trust me, the president used to run an oil company *Censored**Censored**Censored**Censored* cheny used to run enron. If you think these people are not influenced by the oil industries then you either A believe both these men are of such incredably high moral that they wont let any of these past situations influence them. Or B well i dont know about B, maybe just hoping A is true?

The fact is like you said there politicians, guess what, past experiences and connections threw friends and family effect politicians, its human nature.

This administration, like many others, is not very serious about alternative fueled vehichles.

I guess its the fault of all those liberal programs using up our money. Of course The president's party controls the house and the senate and could probably do away with most of them.. BUt then again isnt alternative fuel a liberal idea? trust me, if we did away with them our taxes would be lower no doubt, however under 'evil' bill clinton many of these programs were instututed and the government had a huge surplus when he left office, and remember he took it up with the second largest budget deficit in our history (the first biggest being this current one) so those really arent holding back alternative fuels.

Now like i said this is not apolitical debate, but if you wish one feel free to start another thread, you know im always ready for one.

EDIT: ahem... it blocked out "Richard cheney's" first name... but i assure you i wasnt calling him anything dirty there.

[GRiDRaceTech]

Toyota may not be an American company, but the Camry is an American car.

The Escape Hybrid is on the market according to Automobile magazine.

Yeah, I did kinda turn this into a Bush vs. Kerry thing... but that's what I do best.

I know you're not complaining about high gas prices, but I just wanted to add that in.

Cheney didn't run Enron, Ken Lay did. Cheney was CEO of Halliburton but has since severed ties.

The fact of the matter is that American people aren't really ready for alternative-fuel vehicles. The average American driver wants something safe, reliable, and BIG. They want SUVs, they want lots of horsepower. John Q. Public is a *Censored**Censored**Censored**Censored**Censored**Censored* when it comes to alternative fuels.

[nissanguy_24]

Err how did i mess up the haliburton thing.. they have numerous vehichles running around out here. They do oil field work and alot of other things. but anyways your right, Ken lay aka kenny boy had strong ties with the administration. Course lay is in trouble now if im not mistaken.

And your right the public for the most part doesnt care. They dont care enough to go out of there way to the one gas station in a town with dozens to get natural gas, or propane or go to costco (they have these in ventura on the coast, probably a few other places too, first i'd seen of them though) to recharge there electic car.

Thats one reason im so for hybrid technologies, although not a solution to the problem it will really help us at the pump and, especialy a guy who travels alot like me, if you want to put money in my pocket to help the economy then you save me money at the pump. It will also lesson our need of oil.. if all the cars suddenly got twice the millage it would take a big dent out of our oil usage. and help us out all around really.

We could drill less which would help the environment out, we wouldnt need as much foreign oil which would make us alot safer in case of big wars and alot stronger poltiicialy in the international community. (several middle eastern countries couldnt get to gether to force us to change our policies for example by cutting off our oil supply. Like what happened in the 70s)

At the same time joe q public, who is admittedly a moron wouldnt be as afraid of it. Hybrids are selling pretty well around so cal it seems. And as gas prices continue to rise and as the SUV fad continues to die down they will become even more popular. If anything though the technology needs to be made cheaper and lighter, and i know toyota and honda are working on it, im sure others are as well.

That is why i believe directing funds away from the old program to this new one was a mistake.

That said i feel that for a long term solution we need to find another fuel, something cheap and something renewable. We will always have nuclear power, but reactors are large and dangerous and the by products are not friendly to, well to life. And you can only transfer nuclear energy via stored electricity, batteries require led smelting which is awful for the environment, so having a bunch of nuclear reactors and using electric vehichles in the future would have many problems.

Things like hydrogen are good ideas, also such things as biodesiel fuel we could grow.. once the technology is off the ground it could be very cheap. and it will give our farmers alot more work to do especialy as the afraica and china begin to seriously come into the agriculture business as they industrialize (i know its abit of an oxymoron but after industrialization there ag business will be able to compete globally)

Likely in the future will use numerous alternative fuel sources where ever they will work best. However this will require alot of money. To me i see it as so strange that no one bats an eye at writing a 80 billion dollar check or so for a war, but if you suggested giving even half that to alternative fuel developement for a year and they would look at you like you were crazy. Or god forbid we hand this much money over to a new space agency (not nasa, they have problems) hell we could be on the moon with that much money in a mater of years.

I dont mean to turn this into a debate over the iraq war or wars in general, but lets face it, there expensive, very expensive. And if we didnt fight wars we could spent alot more money at home. We dont always have a choice about that though.

Im getting off the subject, but i guess all i am saying is what i have said before. There isnt really anyone in power interested in alternative fuels, not yet anyways. i think hybrid technology is the answer in the short term.

Not only that but trust me, oil companys are huge.. they have lobiest... the environmental guys (who i can only assume would push for alternative fuels, that is when there not hiding scared from nuclear, or solar or wind power.. oh no the poor birds!) dont really have the same influence, especialy not with a conservative administration.

They would probably have more clout with someone who was really liberal, maybe a howard dean or something, but for the most part they wouldnt.

Which all brings back to my original brain washed point. it will be alot longer then it needs to be before we see alternative fuels used by the populus if things continue the way they ahve for the last 20 years.