| Main > Main Forum |
| Petition to tv makers (your thoughts about that) |
| << < (21/22) > >> |
| saurian333:
--- Quote from: IG-88 on January 11, 2010, 08:28:14 pm ---You mean used motor oil is bad for the water? Doesn't it just disappear into.....that sewer place? --- End quote --- :laugh2: |
| SavannahLion:
--- Quote from: Deadly on January 11, 2010, 11:28:31 am ---The lead these tubes contain is not healthy for anyone. That's the point ... no more no less. If I was a greenie I wouldn't drive two gas guzzling V8's 76 miles a day ;) --- End quote --- First off, there is a lead recovery business. According to one study, they recover something on the order of 98% of all lead from CRTs and car batteries. Even if no lead was recovered from CRTs, seeing a CRT out on the curb was a decidedly rare event up until the last five years or so when flat panels starting taking over the market. CRTs lasted an ungodly long time. flat panels... eh not so long. So which is the better impact? A CRT that last longer than half the life span of your average human being or a LCD panel that doesn't even last long enough for your children to remember it? Edit: On another note. Greenies have the whole automobile argument ---smurfing--- back ass wards. Is the answer really to get more gas efficient cars on the road so we can have three or four times as many of them? Those environmentalist jackasses have done virtually everything to impede the development and construction of a what really counts. High speed trains come to mind. Greenies are more than willing to give millions of children asthma in order to save a two square mile patch of land for a frog no one else gives a flying rats ass about. |
| DJ_Izumi:
--- Quote from: SavannahLion on January 12, 2010, 12:45:11 am ---Is the answer really to get more gas efficient cars on the road so we can have three or four times as many of them? --- End quote --- I'm actually pretty certian that the driving force behind more fuel efficent cars and electric hybrid development is not the 'greenies' but the people who pay for the gas at the pumps. |
| SavannahLion:
--- Quote from: DJ_Izumi on January 12, 2010, 03:06:24 am --- --- Quote from: SavannahLion on January 12, 2010, 12:45:11 am ---Is the answer really to get more gas efficient cars on the road so we can have three or four times as many of them? --- End quote --- I'm actually pretty certain that the driving force behind more fuel efficent cars and electric hybrid development is not the 'greenies' but the people who pay for the gas at the pumps. --- End quote --- Greenies have been pushing for more fuel efficient cars for years. When alternate automotive designs were the norm (look up Porsche), the push was to get cars that ran on the cheapest fuels available, be it electricity, gas, oil, kerosene, whatever. At some point, gasoline became the fuel of choice (why is a matter of debate but one of the reasons seemed to indeed be low cost) the other methods of power fell by the wayside. What happens between then and sometime around the '60s is a bit of a mystery to me, but there is something that definitely happened around the 60's or so. Greenies really started to push fuel efficient cars, going so far as to force governments to research alternative fuel engines. Here's the thing. If the increase in sales of fuel efficient cars is genuinely powered by the American Dollar, then why pass laws to require more fuel efficient cars when people are already buying them? (As evidenced by the massive increase in rice burners.) Then there's the decidedly painful law to forcibly change the engine/transmission designs in small/medium pickups and the repeated attempts to remove them from the market entirely? (I don't care what anyone says, Obama ---fouled up beyond all recognition--- up in this regard.) Seriously, why remove an insanely popular class of vehicle from the market entirely? Here the American Dollar is speaking and yet it's the damn Greenies that want to get rid of them and stuff us into a piece of ---steaming pile of meadow muffin--- Cannoli. (Five points if you get the reference.) Go ahead and offer a gas efficient pickup and see how well it sells. If the "new" truck is genuinely better, people will buy them. No need for the law. I'm not knocking gas efficient cars. They have their place and their success if clearly measured. All the way back to the original electric powered cars, the Gremlin, the insanely popular VW Bug and even the modern Smart all have their place. Just stop trying to pass silly environmental laws to force everyone to drive them when not everyone wants or needs them. |
| saurian333:
While we're on the topic, I'd like to point out that my '95 LeSabre (a beast of a car, if you're not familiar) gets better mileage than most current cars half its size (hybrids excluded). That little sportster that Saturn put out a few years ago (can't remember the name) had a rating of 23 HWY. That's pathetic for such a tiny vehicle. Anyway, while the "green" movement has been pushing for alternative fuel/fuel efficient cars for much longer, it wasn't until recently when consumers actually wanted them (to save $$ at the pump) that manufactures responded, so I'm inclined to agree with DJ_Izumi. As for the "greenies," the whole concept only works if and when the vast majority of vehicles on the road are more efficient. Until then, it's just a sort of badge of honor for them. On that note, I'd like to paraphrase Jay Leno on that subject: In this country, we like to advertise our charitable deeds. In this case, a person can buy a Prius and drive around saying, "Look at me, I drive the ugliest car on Earth...look at the sacrifice I make to protect the environment." |
| Navigation |
| Message Index |
| Next page |
| Previous page |