Re: [CF] Re: Re: why carfree?
- Adrian Croucher wrote:
> > Many other products (moreso than automobiles) just end
> > in up the landfill. Also the byproduct released by
> > fuel cell powered vehicles is water and that sir is
> > not a pollutant.
> - Fuel cell vehicles still need to be manufactured, and as mentioned already, manufacture produces a sizeable fraction of a car's pollution.
> - fuel cell cars still need brakes, tyres and lubricants, which do cause significant waterway pollution.
More importantly, fuel cells run on hydrogen. Where does hydrogen come
from? The most economic way is to crack it from fossil fuels like
natural gas and gasoline. You can produce hydrogen from water by
electrolysis but that requires enormous amounts of electricity. And
where does most electricity come from? From burning fossil fuels. 70% in
the US. New Zealand is lucky, it only produces 30% of its electricity
from fossil fuels, but that isn't typical of the world. 90% in
Australia! So fuel cell and electric cars in no way eliminate fossil
fuel pollution, it just changes it from a mobile pollution source to a
point pollution source. Not entirely a bad thing but no panacea.
Lorenzo L. Love
"We recognize, however dimly, that greater efficiency, ease, and
security may come at a substantial price in freedom, that law and order
can be a doublethink version of oppression, that individual liberties
surrendered for whatever good reason are freedom lost."
Walter Cronkite, in the preface to the 1984 edition of 1984
- De Clarke wrot
>I don't think we'll reduce to a "sustainable level" actually. The humanI find that sometimes I fall prey to similar depressed/dejected thoughts
>history we have preserved in writing and other artifacts suggests a boom/bust
>cycle (strangely more r-selected than the K-selected model we're supposed to
>follow). I figure a big die-off from some combination of the traditional
>Four Horsemen, followed by a long hardscrabble recovery, then another spectacular
>boom as we rediscover or invent anew various "labour saving" and "efficient"
>methods and technologies -- then overshoot and bust again. The so-called
>"Dark Ages" after the crash (a while after, as the immediate aftermath is
>pretty grim) are not always such a bad time. There's a lot of hope, purpose,
>and breathing space in the recovery of a recently depopulated area. But I
>fear I won't live to see that phase. If I'm lucky, I'll die by accident or
>natural causes before the geometric progression hits the brick wall.
>That, grim as it seems, is my honest opinion. BUT...
when I think about the big picture. However, I make the decisions I do
because I want a certain quality of life. The car-free lifestyle is
very pleasurable to me. Even if my actions will be of little
consequence in the long run, I'm enjoying my life right now. I also can
hope that I'm making a dent, however minimal, and that perhaps others
will learn by example. I know I've directly influenced several of my
friends to take up bicycle commuting. They haven't given up their cars
but have reduced their use of them.