Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: clean cars

Expand Messages
  • J.H. Crawford
    ... -- ### -- J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
    Message 1 of 3 , Apr 3, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      > >The Mayor did exempt "clean" cars on the PowerShift register.
      > >(Electric, hybrid, gas etc).
      >
      >The term "clean" car (even quoted) is misleading. Electric cars also
      >pollute, since almost the totality of electric power is produced by fossil
      >fuels or (even worse perhaps) by nuclear power - they just shift the place
      >of pollution out of the city. Of course this is somehow better than
      >conventional cars, but far from ideal.
      >


      -- ### --

      J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
      mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
    • J.H. Crawford
      Sorry, everybody, this somehow went before I actually wrote what I wanted to say. ... There is a point here that shouldn t get lost, and that s that it is
      Message 2 of 3 , Apr 3, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        Sorry, everybody, this somehow went before I actually
        wrote what I wanted to say.

        > >The Mayor did exempt "clean" cars on the PowerShift register.
        > >(Electric, hybrid, gas etc).
        >
        >The term "clean" car (even quoted) is misleading. Electric cars also
        >pollute, since almost the totality of electric power is produced by fossil
        >fuels or (even worse perhaps) by nuclear power - they just shift the place
        >of pollution out of the city. Of course this is somehow better than
        >conventional cars, but far from ideal.

        There is a point here that shouldn't get lost, and that's that
        it is possible to clean emissions from static sources much more
        easily and effectively than from mobile sources. Thus, a shift
        to battery cars could result in cleaner air, at least for a given
        number of vehicle miles. There's even talk of CO2 sequestration
        from power plants, which seems clearly impossible from mobile
        sources.

        Regards,



        -- ### --

        J.H. Crawford Carfree Cities
        mailbox@... http://www.carfree.com
      • ktsourl
        Indeed static sources offer the possibility for less pollution, even taking into consideration the energy losses from energy transfer and energy form
        Message 3 of 3 , Apr 8, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Indeed static sources offer the possibility for less pollution, even
          taking into consideration the energy losses from energy transfer and
          energy form conversion - but unfortunately this doesn't happen always
          (and CO2 sequestration is just "talk" for the moment). Even better
          they offer also the possibility to use energy from renewable sources
          (solar towers, wind turbines, waves, geothermal etc) - unfortunately
          still in very few cases. This is the good scenario.

          But the location shift of the dirty phase of energy consumption
          creates also the opportunity to use profitably other less noble and
          more polluting energy sources, like coal, lignite etc which could be
          never effectively used on moving sources. In addition, environmental
          standards can much more easily be lowered if pollution sources are
          less annoying (at least directly) to the users (the majority of the
          world population lives already in urban settlements according to UN
          studies).

          Which of the two scenarios do you think is more probable to happen
          most of the times in a "free market economy"?


          --- In carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com, "J.H. Crawford" <mailbox@c...>
          wrote:
          >
          > Sorry, everybody, this somehow went before I actually
          > wrote what I wanted to say.
          >
          > > >The Mayor did exempt "clean" cars on the PowerShift register.
          > > >(Electric, hybrid, gas etc).
          > >
          > >The term "clean" car (even quoted) is misleading. Electric cars
          also
          > >pollute, since almost the totality of electric power is produced by
          fossil
          > >fuels or (even worse perhaps) by nuclear power - they just shift
          the place
          > >of pollution out of the city. Of course this is somehow better
          than
          > >conventional cars, but far from ideal.
          >
          > There is a point here that shouldn't get lost, and that's that
          > it is possible to clean emissions from static sources much more
          > easily and effectively than from mobile sources. Thus, a shift
          > to battery cars could result in cleaner air, at least for a given
          > number of vehicle miles. There's even talk of CO2 sequestration
          > from power plants, which seems clearly impossible from mobile
          > sources.
          >
          > Regards,
          >
          >
          >
          > -- ###
          --
          >
          > J.H. Crawford Carfree
          Cities
          > mailbox@c... http://www.carfree.com
        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.