BF2S Forums Hummers are less polluting than a Prius.

so how is a H2 (1mpg) worse.

I don't get it.

ReTox wrote:

Hydrogen is the future... if the oil companies ever let it happen.

Not at the moment unfortunatly.

Lack of proper investment leaves it pretty wasteful (in terms of extraction/manufacture etc) - And the only filling station i've publically seen is in Berlin.

FatherTed wrote:

so how is a H2 (1mpg) worse.

I don't get it.

The nickel mining needed for the motors is a very very polluting process.
More polluting than a hummer ever could be

I also dont know how hydrogen could work if it emits water vapor wouldnt that rise humitidy which rises global warming?

Last edited by SealXo (2008-06-06 16:31:03)

ReTox wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

ReTox wrote:

Hydrogen is the future... if the oil companies ever let it happen.

Not at the moment unfortunatly.

Lack of proper investment leaves it pretty wasteful (in terms of extraction/manufacture etc) - And the only filling station i've publically seen is in Berlin.

True but it isn't because of a lack of technology, it's there it just needs serious refinements and widespread acceptance. 

Oil is a finite resource, thus the less we have the more it will cost, which only benefits big oil.  Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe.  I mean EVERYTHING is made from hydrogen.  It wouldn't shock me to find out big oil actively and aggressively "dissuades" hydrogen fuel cell advancement.

Like I said above if hydrogen emits only "cool clean water vapor" then wouldnt that raise humidity?

The idea that owning a Prius somehow makes you environmentally conscious is absurd to me. As a financial decision, it makes sense. I think you might save quite a bit of money in the long run... but thinking you're doing your part - or even part of your part to save the environment is just plain silly.

Kmarion wrote:

ReTox wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

Not at the moment unfortunatly.

Lack of proper investment leaves it pretty wasteful (in terms of extraction/manufacture etc) - And the only filling station i've publically seen is in Berlin.

True but it isn't because of a lack of technology, it's there it just needs serious refinements and widespread acceptance. 

Oil is a finite resource, thus the less we have the more it will cost, which only benefits big oil.  Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe.  I mean EVERYTHING is made from hydrogen.  It wouldn't shock me to find out big oil actively and aggressively "dissuades" hydrogen fuel cell advancement.

Stop and think about your logic for a minute. If big oil energy companies are dependent on a finite resource, wouldn't it make sense for them to research other energy sources in order to guarantee their future? There is money to be made in the conversion of hydrogen into usable energy. Just like the majority of big oils profit comes from the refining process. I think you are forgetting what dictates the cost per barrel.

True...  for the most part, Big Oil has funded alternative energy methods to plan for the future, but it's also so that they can control when we actually switch to the next energy source.  Many oil alternatives are finite resources themselves or require expensive energy harnessing methods.

ghettoperson wrote:

Shame you look like even more of a cunt in a Hummer than a Prius really. And I thought it'd been known for quite a while that Prius's Pious's weren't anywhere near as environmentally friendly as they claimed.

Fixed.

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

ReTox wrote:

True but it isn't because of a lack of technology, it's there it just needs serious refinements and widespread acceptance. 

Oil is a finite resource, thus the less we have the more it will cost, which only benefits big oil.  Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe.  I mean EVERYTHING is made from hydrogen.  It wouldn't shock me to find out big oil actively and aggressively "dissuades" hydrogen fuel cell advancement.

Stop and think about your logic for a minute. If big oil energy companies are dependent on a finite resource, wouldn't it make sense for them to research other energy sources in order to guarantee their future? There is money to be made in the conversion of hydrogen into usable energy. Just like the majority of big oils profit comes from the refining process. I think you are forgetting what dictates the cost per barrel.

True...  for the most part, Big Oil has funded alternative energy methods to plan for the future, but it's also so that they can control when we actually switch to the next energy source.  Many oil alternatives are finite resources themselves or require expensive energy harnessing methods.

Consider this. If the energy companies had more control it might actually benefit the consumer. Right now the biggest influence of cost is subject to a foreign conglomerate. Here in the states OPEC's practices would be punishable by law. There is little room for competitive pricing under the current system (the backbone of the free market). If US based companies had greater control over the supply of energy then each company would be subject to the Anti-trust/Pricing fixing laws currently in place.

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Stop and think about your logic for a minute. If big oil energy companies are dependent on a finite resource, wouldn't it make sense for them to research other energy sources in order to guarantee their future? There is money to be made in the conversion of hydrogen into usable energy. Just like the majority of big oils profit comes from the refining process. I think you are forgetting what dictates the cost per barrel.

True...  for the most part, Big Oil has funded alternative energy methods to plan for the future, but it's also so that they can control when we actually switch to the next energy source.  Many oil alternatives are finite resources themselves or require expensive energy harnessing methods.

Consider this. If the energy companies had more control it might actually benefit the consumer. Right now the biggest influence of cost is subject to a foreign conglomerate. Here in the states OPEC's practices would be punishable by law. There is little room for competitive pricing under the current system (the backbone of the free market). If US based companies had greater control over the supply of energy then each company would be subject to the Anti-trust/Pricing fixing laws currently in place.

If we're specifically talking about OPEC's effects, then the fix is 2-fold.  Drill more here and build more refineries.  It's not about giving companies more control -- it's about opening up certain aspects of the market.  I figure you agree with those 2 initiatives anyway though.

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

True...  for the most part, Big Oil has funded alternative energy methods to plan for the future, but it's also so that they can control when we actually switch to the next energy source.  Many oil alternatives are finite resources themselves or require expensive energy harnessing methods.

Consider this. If the energy companies had more control it might actually benefit the consumer. Right now the biggest influence of cost is subject to a foreign conglomerate. Here in the states OPEC's practices would be punishable by law. There is little room for competitive pricing under the current system (the backbone of the free market). If US based companies had greater control over the supply of energy then each company would be subject to the Anti-trust/Pricing fixing laws currently in place.

If we're specifically talking about OPEC's effects, then the fix is 2-fold.  Drill more here and build more refineries.  It's not about giving companies more control -- it's about opening up certain aspects of the market.  I figure you agree with those 2 initiatives anyway though.

There is a reason the market isn't opening up. Do you think they don't want more supply? It also cost billions to build a refinery. Given the current political atmosphere and attitude towards oil why would an energy company invest that kind of money into a limited future? Nothing impacts the cost of fuel as much as the decisions of OPEC. This is a fact. To be competitive a company needs to be able to control it's expenses. Cheaper fuel will only come when the energy industry can compete amongst itself. Right now there is no competition. These are the basic rules of economics. The fundamental reasons for current price is fixed by foreign entities. Like I said, under current anti-trust laws this would not be possible in the states. I don't think I can write it out any simpler. I know the thought of giving a company more control is scary for you. But understand they will be waging a price war against each other to attract customers. This always benefits the market.

The#1Spot wrote:

SealXo wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

so how is a H2 (1mpg) worse.

I don't get it.

The nickel mining needed for the motors is a very very polluting process.
More polluting than a hummer ever could be

I also dont know how hydrogen could work if it emits water vapor wouldnt that rise humitidy which rises global warming?

Wow another global warming loser.

Im intellectual.

I actually drive a 396 68 Camaross.

I go to ontario every summer and its the most beautiful place i have ever been. Its the only place I can get away. And sudbury is just a few hours away. So the last thing i want is ottawa valley to get fucked.

I mostly want to save some money because my car sure isnt gettin the job done.
edit: oh and if  i dont save money i wont be able to spend a grand on a airfare.

Last edited by SealXo (2008-06-06 17:45:52)

The#1Spot wrote:

SealXo wrote:

FatherTed wrote:

so how is a H2 (1mpg) worse.

I don't get it.

The nickel mining needed for the motors is a very very polluting process.
More polluting than a hummer ever could be

I also dont know how hydrogen could work if it emits water vapor wouldnt that rise humitidy which rises global warming?

Wow another global warming loser.

Wow, another person willing to stick his head in the sand about something most of the scientific community is concerned about.