The Green Movement... Opinions?

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

Basically, what do you think of the whole green thing? What policies or changes do you support and which do you oppose? What ultimate direction do you see us going in as a society or "Global Village"?

As for me, I oppose government intervention in most of these things, but support the development of cleaner and more efficient technologies with private funds. When the green tech becomes cost effective versus the old tech, it will see mass implementation because it simply makes more sense. I also see dual use technologies and spaces becoming the norm in the future with solar farms moving from the dedicated single use facilities they are now to instead utilizing rooftops, etc. to house them. As for cars, Hydrogen is NOT the future, but electric may be, as may some form of internal combustion engine that can run on a fuel made from reprocessed garbage and agricultural waste. I would also like to see a biodegradable replacement for the plastics that litter our landfills. Most of the products we buy may have a useful life of 5-10 years, but they will be around for thousands of years in our garbage dumps. It is time to stop constantly manufacturing next year's garbage, and work on a solution that will provide both utility and clean waste management. We also need to find a better way to deal with the huge stream of E-Waste that is generated every year. Shipping it to China is a horrible idea, but that is where much of it ends up. One of the most polluted places on Earth right now is Guiyu China where people do nothing but deal with E-Waste. The quantity of products being broken down by a peasant population is amazing, but sad. Sad because most of them will die of heavy metals poisoning their bloodstream. Clearly, something must be done.

The thing that scares me the most is the Global Warming extremists who wish to force us to implement technologies that we are not economically ready for. Given enough time, they will come to pass on their own as older goods wear out, and newer goods replace them. However, in order to maximize the life of any piece of technology, it must be easy to service by the end user. This must also be a part of the future or else we will simply generate an ever increasing pile of green garbage as we fast cycle through things like cars and technology items. This is where the current trends and regulations fail us and need to be worked on.

BTW, I am NOT an environmentalist, nor do I ever wish to be considered one. However, I am a realist about the world around me. I may not believe in Global Warming, but I do see a need to be responsible.

 

[Chevyman85]

I agree, I have a direct example of poor legislation, and green policys. I live in WA, and in Seattle our Mayor Nichols decided to pass legislation requiring all taxi's inside city limits to be hybrids, not only that but Toyota Prius's. This was a completly not cost efficent way to try and fix the "problem". The argument could be made that Ford Crown Vics (which make up most of the auto fleet used by taxi companies) are cheap to purchase and operate. They use generic domestic parts, that are easy to find, and cheap to purchase. And in addition, the majority of the vehicles are government, or ex-police crusiers. This in a way is recycling vehicles that would otherwise end up in a junk yard. The Prius's are much smaller and would actually require more trips to carry the same number of passengers and cargo. Not to mention the increased sale of Toyota's. In my opinion US Government vehicles purchased with tax dollars should be spent on American products, since our money is being used to back the automakers when the fail, why are we giving money to foreign companies? But thats another topic. These types of poor policy are what I think of when I think of "green". Thats just one example, but it shows how public opinion favors any thing related to green.

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

The sad thing about the current green movement is that it is based on fad and fashion, and not sound policy. Most who purport to be green , have never taken the time to critically examine the evidence for and against their cause. They just say what they are told to say because they want to fit in and be socially accepted. It is, after all fashion or sex and not logic or reason that drives most human beings.

Sadly, many people will have their lives ruined by politicians wanting re-election who only care about themselves. I feel like I am one of the few voices of reason trying to stop a crowd of thousands from sweeping me along with them to their doom. Fear and panic over Global Warming seem to rule the day when the natural technological evolution of society will render the less efficient technologies obsolete within 10-15 years, even if government does nothing to bring it about. Gradual implementation is the natural order of things, but it takes a while before a new technology trickles down the economic ladder to those on the bottom. If the poor are quickly cut off from the technologies they can currently afford, it will create a much larger gulf between the haves and have nots in our society than exists today. After all, these heavy taxes and higher prices that are being proposed do not just affect the middle and upper classes, but the lower ones as well. As the lower classes depend on older technologies to survive, removing them too soon will only serve to increase the desperation of their plight.

 

[Oldsmoletick]

What is "green" anyway, who is to say what is and is not. Is it driving a new hybrid vehicle that in order to produce creates who knows how many tons of waste, or could it be driving an existing vehicle, scrounging around salvage yards for parts to fix it? The hybrid owner will say one thing and the scrounger will say another, who's right? I agree that as a whole we have to reduce our consuming ways in order to reduce the amount of waste we produce, but is the general public ready to do that? I think not. I beleive I read somewhere that we are the number one producer.........Of Garbage. Yes some have jumped on the band wagon of "going green", but at what cost. What has all the hype of this "idea" proved? Just think of all the ads, media, campaigning and other B.S. that goes along with it, it all costs money, creates more waste, promotes consuming different products packaged in an eco friendly container, which in turn creates a whole different type of waste to produce such a product. It's a circle that can't be solved by buying our way out of it. (What ever happened to going to your local farmers market, buying vegetables and other goods that don't even have a packaged container?) Why waste the time and money of campaigning through the media about what can be done, DO IT.

Here's an example, an upstate NY mall is epanding to what they call Destiny USA, they have this whole production on how "green" it will be. Well, I guess painting every handrail in the place (existing mall) green must have cost some serious cash, where'd the waste from that go? How about all the advertising, banners, posters, big screen TV's, models (plastic building type), Where will all this go, straight to dump. Just another pitch to generate income, attract tourrists, and sell usless junk that will adorn the garbage can in a few days, months or years.

On the other end of the spectrum, a man built his home almost entirly from other's waste. I'm not talking about a little garbage shanty hole in the wall either, 3000+ sq ft solar/generator powered home. His estimate of the cost to build was around $10,000, not bad.....If interested here's the link to the story,
http://www.syracuse.com/green/index.ssf/2008/10/king_of_scrounge_north_country.html
I'm no environmentalist, I'm a consumer wh*re, just like everyone else is in one way or another, that's what we've been molded into. Where I scrounge for this or that, I splurge for something else, whether it be groceries, tires, gas, etc, etc, etc. In short it's not up to the government/media to get us out this mess, they're just making money, it's up to each individual to do what ever they can to make the situation better, consume less, fix the old, reuse the existing. Oh yeah and without getting paid to do it.

 

[1evilregal]

I agree wholeheartedly with you guys....I'm no dirtworshiper, and I may hug a tree from time-to-time, but most of the "ecoists" are just shy of being radicals with their ideas.... they believe so fully, that we need to do something now, that they're not thinking of future issues...ie, hybrids may get better fuel mileage, but not as huge of savings as they would like to believe...my 84 civic w/411k miles was getting 38mpg city when I sold it... electric cars? as someone in here said, they're good for the environment until you have to plug them into a coal fired power grid... what happens when those hybrid batteries go bad? where's the cost savings there? woman with a prius came in to the store the other day and needed the batteries for it...we couldnt get them and she said she was quoted over $800 for them like 85 brougham said, those who cant afford to upgrade to begin with REALLY get hit hard on something like that...

as far as hydrogen? I belive it'll work, if the average person can have access to the availibility of self service.like the propane fueled vehicles that was offered to the public back in the 80's, there were no facilities readily available to the general pulic for self fueling, or many places that weren't out of the way for the avarage joe....same thing is happeneing with the hydrogen car, as I seem to remember a news clip on a release in CA and there was only,IIRC, 4 or 5 places in the state available to be able to refuel it.....make it easy to fuel, and readily availible to the general public, and I believe it could be a feasible technology....

as a scrounger, I think that we're also being green....by not buying new, we're not adding to the pollution involved with the building of it, we're reducing the amount of pollutants by re-using old parts(isnt re-use one of the 3 r's?, and re-build another? )...sure by doing things on the cheap, we're not fueling the capatalist machine by spending $$$ we don't have, but then again, some of use the god's given sense we were given and don't live way beyond our means(which also creates more waste and garbage....). I.e., I drive a 30 yr old truck, so the wife can afford her new mustang(v-6....dont go booooing me, it's HER car...long as she's happy there's quiet in the house!), and I can rest at ease knowing her car has a higher probability of not breaking down, leaving her vulnerable...we may have gone from a hamburger diet to peanut butter and jelly to afford it, but good sense sometimes means sacrifices(85 brougham, I salute you, as you've sacrificed more of what people take for granted, just to survive...)

that's my $.02...think I may have de-railed off the topic for a moment, but you got the idea...

great topic 85!

Darin

 

[85 Cutlass Brougham]

Well, my problems with hydrogen come from doing a bit of research on it. I do not see it becoming viable because of how hard it is to generate, and that it takes much more energy to make than it provides. Essentially, most hydrogen solutions use electricity to produce the hydrogen making the hydrogen fuel cell and tank system equivalent to a battery pack. Both store electrical energy to power an electric motor. If you deconstruct it, you can see it as being the difference between Dollars and Euros: Both are stores of value and both can be exchanged one for another. However, the hydrogen cycle is less efficient as a store of energy as it takes more energy to produce the electricity it provides versus just using the electricity as a direct source. Likewise, compressed air can also be used as a store of electrical energy as it takes electricity to compress the air (MDI is a vaporware company that is working on compressed air as a automotive power source). So, if you look at it, the most efficient way to go about building an electric car is to just find the most efficient way to store electricity. Charging time also must be taken into consideration, but there are solutions to be had there as well. Theoretically, an electric car can be 100% solar powered and therefore contribute very little air pollution when the whole vehicle life cycle is taken into account. Charging stations can be built in various parking lots and the use of them given to business patrons as an added value for shopping at an establishment. Likewise, charging stations could be built at home by standardizing battery design and making it easy to hot swap battery packs when you get home. That way, there is no waiting period for a charge so long as you are using the vehicle for reasonable commuting distances. I also predict that solar will become the power source of the future as the price has fallen through the floor in the last few years. It should reach a significant tipping point in the next few years where it will become much cheaper than grid power, thus causing it to be adopted rapidly by the public.

As for hydrogen, there are ways in which it can be efficiently harvested such as using algae generation on the roof tops and sides of buildings. This is another form of solar power as it is sunlight that the algae convert into biomass which is then convertible into hydrogen. There are a variety of "green" technologies being worked on right now that make a lot of sense. I am enthusiastic about them for the future, but I do not want any government intervention to force them to be adopted. I am, after all, a Republican voting Libertarian.

As for my finances, I am an opportunistic scavenger for most of the technologies I use. I have several iPods I use to store music that I bought broken ($3.25 ea.) and figured out how to fix rather than buying a new one that I could not afford. I garbage pic almost all of my lawn equipment and fix what the mass consumers replace and do not repair. I also try to get very durable goods that do not need to be replaced all of the time so that I can spend my limited resources where it counts. It's why I have a Nissan truck and a Kirby vacuum. Nissan trucks last forever and so do Kirbys. The truck has 332,000 miles, and the vacuum is from 1981. Is it the way I want to live? No. It's the way I have to live to survive. Though even if I did have a job that actually pays money, I would still work to spend as little as possible. I would get a 50 inch plasma TV and cable again though, because that stuff is cool! However, if you take away the garbage as it exists now, my life will be much harder to live. I depend on older cars, gas powered mowers, etc. to live my life. I also can't afford the power bill increases Obama wants in Cap and Trade. Green? The only thing Green about the proposed legislation is the extra money we will all be spending to assuage the white guilt of liberals.