In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Mon, 25 Feb 2008 18:00:47 -0500: Hi, [snip] >OrionWorks wrote: > >>Mr. Lutz appears to say in his blog that GM is going full steam >>ahead in their work on environmental issues like E85, hybrids, >>hydrogen and fuel cells, the electrification of the car (the >>Chevrolet Volt), which hopefully will be out on showrooms in a >>couple of years. ...all because it's the "...right thing to do." >> >>If so, I wouldn't put much stock in his personal opinions, like >>global warming being a crock of kaka. > >The problem is, that is a contradictory set of opinions, and his >statements are unconvincing. If global warming is not real, then the >only reason anyone would work on things like fuel cells and electric >cars would be for the PR value.
He also mentioned energy independence, which for many in the US is more important than global warming, particularly in GOP circles. >As far as I can tell that is in fact >the only reason GM is spending any money on these things: it is all a >public relations stunt, and they have no intention of manufacturing >anything. Ten years after Toyota introduced the Prius, GM does not >sell a single hybrid car as far as I know. They can't be serious. >They are NOT going full steam ahead! That's absurd. > >The thing is, apart from global warming there is no perilous >environmental threat from cars. Air pollution, which I think we would all rather do without. > The amount of pollution they cause in >the first world is declining. But not by much. >Of course oil is running out, but this >will happen gradually. ...yes, but as it does so, the price of gas will rise rapidly, because while supply is decreasing, demand will increase, so that the difference between the two grows even faster. >If oil did not cause global warming and >terrorism there would be no reason to transition away from it >abruptly. It would make sense to make the transition gradual, over 30 >to 50 years. We might as well use it up as long as it remains >reasonably cheap. That is just what the oil companies and GM want us >to do. They would only want us to do that if they themselves did not >believe oil, coal and other fossil fuel is causing catastrophic and >irreversible climate change. They want us to do that because the oil still in the ground is worth far more than the oil already extracted (precisely because the price of a barrel is going up). They know that it's running out, and don't really care. They're making hay while the sun shines. >Lutz says he does not believe that and >I take him at his word. That explains his decisions and actions. I agree. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk The shrub is a plant.
