[RegulatorCountry]

If it’s reliable and the cost of owning and operating it make sense, sure. But the environmentalist crowd will eventually realize that water vapor is by far the most prevalent source of “greenhouse gas.” I don’t much care but they will, and they’re going to be the early adopters while the numbers don’t make economic sense. They may shoot it down before economies of scale can kick in.

[reg45]

Water is also a combustion product of existing fuels.

[SunkenCiv]

/bingo

It’s not about the environment, it’s about A) scrambling for power and B) trying to avoid holding a job.

[Hardastarboard]

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again, since you brought it up. It wouldn’t matter what energy source you came up with, completely free, non-carbon based, limitless, and non-polluting in any way. Liberals will come up their usual delusional rants about why it’s evil / destructive / good for the rich & bad for the poor, yada, yada, yada, unto infinity.

[logic101.net]

I think the eco-nuts will be opposed to it right from the start because it is not a “solution” that comes from govt.

[American Constitutionalist]

I know I am not a scientist but logic would tell us that the water vapor would be the same even if we had these cars or not.
Actually it would help the environment by helping the plants and trees stay watered.
Be sides when we breath out every day we breath out water vapor in our breath not counting the sweat that evaporates.