Posted on 02/19/2002 12:31:26 PM PST by jilley
EBUCK
You might also want to ask what the real cost of the car is, as opposed to the subsidized price you get at the dealer.
The Conservative answer, IMNSHO, is if the market pushes to make such vehicles a success, great. But it should be a market push, and not a bureaucratic fiat. . .
A non-issue.
A device to allow some people the delusion that they are serving a useful purpose on the planet.
But bring lots of money.
Unfortunately the price of "saving" the planet is very high, and only the very rich can enjoy.
All those consultants promoters and other parasites need incomes too.
Me? I believe that the free market can provide the solution if there is one. I would buy a reponsive car that gave me 60 miles per gallon in an instant, provided it did not cost more than my house.
What would be really neat.. Totally cool is if we could make enough hydrogen to power a car on demand, as you drive.. As opposed to having a pressurised tank onboard that turns your car into a moving bomb.
You certainly shouldn't make a decision to buy (or not to buy) a product or service you want because the result would appear to undercut or support a particular position or because the government told you to or not to. That would be counter to the conservative philosophy.
Publius is correct: let the free market handle it.
That said, it is the case that such vehicles are fragile and easily damaged. In a collision with an SUV it would be a paint smear on the pavement. So safety is compromised. What is the dollar equivalent of safety?
--Boris With ample nuclear power, one can synthesize any fuel you like. The U.S. has vast supplies of coal, shale oil, and other hydrocarbons that could be easily converted into fuel.
Furthermore, I invite you to go to google and search for "methane hydrate" or "methane clathrates". You will find that there is a wonderful fuel on the bottom of the ocean, which will provide more energy than ALL of the proven oil and gas reserves put together.
--Boris
I'm one.
--Boris
He loves his, if that's any help.
(signed)A Bimmer driver in Chicago (they'll take my BMW when they pry the steering wheel from my cold dead fingers)
82MPH sounds great but is the alternative power aspect more of an energy drain? The extremists forced us to use that grain alcohol stuff and then found there was a contaminate in it that made it far worse for the environment that gasoline. Don't worry about the labels; collect information and make your own conclusion.
To answer your question, there is nothing wrong or un-conservative about reducing demand on resources -- heck, the word 'conservative' should tell you that -- 'conserve' what's good. At the same time, high-fuel-economy vehicles are lighter and therefore less safe, so that's another consideration... anyway, when in doubt, go with freedom.
But you should realize that the costs associated with a vehicle like this are going to be very high.
A $2000.00 fender bender for me might be double or triple that for you. (because I can use readily avaliable used or aftermarket parts that aren't avaliable for your vehicle)
Also, count on the dealer having to do any and all repairs at an inflated cost and long waits for parts that must be ordered through or by the dealer (once again, Auto Zone can't help you because they won't stock third party hybrid autoparts due to lack of demand)
Safety is also a consideration.. You should look into this aspect especially because every hybrid I ever say was the size of a spam can with wheels.
First the answer to nuclear waste is found in an article in Popular Mechanics in June 1998 by Jim Wilson called "Putting Nuclear Waste to Work". In the article it describes an invention by Dr. Claudio Fillione called a "Nuclear Powered Turbo-Reciprocating Engine" basically a piston engine designed to extract heat from a process used to "cool" nuclear waste. From the article "...the NPTRE will achieve a thermal efficiency of 56% (in comparison to normal efficiency around 30%)". Also, it could extend the life of the fuel rods by 4 to 7 times as long before replacement.
But to find out how our nuclear power should really be set-up do a search on google for "americium-242m". You will find articles titled "Two Weeks to Mars". About a year ago this month two scientist in Israel discovered that americium 242m is about 100 times as powerful as plutonium. If you continue to search, you will find that some scientists have already begun theoretical designs of power plants in which the nuclear waste will be about half americium 242 and half americum 242m. So instead of shipping our nuclear waste into space, we should configure our nuclear power plants so that they produce americium 242m - the most powerful rocket fuel this side of fusion or anti-matter. I actually posted a thread called "The American Drive" because I thought such a rocket engine should be called that
As to the relative merits of the hybrid in terms of either national security (i.e., reducing our dependence on imported oil) or environmental impact, its a mixed bag. While it is true that if anyone wants to do anything that will have the greatest impact on reduction of the total use of petroleum-based fuels, doing something to displace oil in the transport sector would probably be it. So, to the extent that your hybrid actually avoids the use of gasoline by some incremental amount, that will impact the bottom line there. It won't knock it down to zero, even if everyone went with the hybrid, because, well, its a hybrid, and that IC part of it needs fuel to burn.
On the environment side, its a little more dicey. I assume its an electric hybrid, so the electricity has to come from somewhere, Chances are, if you're like the average consumer, the majority of your electricity comes from burning coal, and that certainly has an environmental impact. So it may be a bit of a wash on that score. If your electricity source is not combustion of carbon-based fuels, then you might come out ahead (although all electricity sources have some environmental impact), but you'll pay a price, both in dollars, and, depending on your source, reliability and availability.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.