[Willie Green]

If anyone wants to dent Diesel or soot emmissions, go kick Linda Daschles pet airlines for a reality check. At most carriers running at 40% capacity average, we could kill 50% of all air traffic and save the world. But that's not good, our gubmint sells those routes to feed the beast. The airlines might want their money back and they would find good cause to stop servicing cities like Pierre and Sioux City. But think how much clearer the skies will be?

IMHO, a sensible alternative would be to construct electrically powered mass-transit (such as high-speed rail and Maglev) in our nation's most densely populated regions and urban areas. Such infrastructure would be competitive for trips roughly between 100~450, reducing both inefficient short-hop air travel as well as some automobile travel.

It's not a panacea, but would be a sensible step towards reducing our transportation infrastructures dependency on petroleum. Of course, such a solution would require an increase in our electrical generating capacity. Nuclear power would be a suitable source.

[U S Army EOD]

That makes to much sense they will never go for it.

[76834]

Great idea and very practical, but:
The envirowhackos wont let you build nuke plants, cant drill for oil, cant drill for gas, now they are raising hell about wind energy birds sometimes fly into them. etc etc.
They wont be happy until we are all living in old cars or cardboard boxes.