Message Font: Serif | Sans-Serif
 
No. of Recommendations: 2
Therefore, they pulled out all stops to discredit the project. In particular they pointed out that the electricity would have to be generated using polluting processes. Hence, electric cars did not eliminate pollution. They merely moved it somewhere else. In effect a longer tail pipe.

I am perfectly happy with a longer tailpipe. If electricty is generated using oil at a plant and 110% of the amount of oil needs to be burned to fuel 100% of our cars it's still better than what we have now.

It doesn't lower our reliance on oil (in fact it would increase it) BUT it does allow us a point source for pollution which could, through proper engineering, be control, curtail and potentially eliminate the pollution.

It's a good first step. THEN they need to come up with another way to generate the electricity.

Simon
Print the post  

Announcements

What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Community Home
Speak Your Mind, Start Your Blog, Rate Your Stocks

Community Team Fools - who are those TMF's?
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.
Advertisement