Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
6987 messages, Last post on Dec 07, 2009 at 9:03 AM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
|
|---|---|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Oct 11, 2008 7:19 pm) You don't get it do you? Global warming is now "Climate Change". So no matter what the weather, it is still the fault of us evil car owners.  Didn't you watch the end of "The Day After" where global warming causes an ice age, destroys the US and kills millions of Americans? At the end they have a scene where some astronauts are looking down on the frozen, destroyed US and remarking: "Looks beautiful, doesn't it?" So drive if you will but be prepared to get the blame for everything from early snow to toenail fungus. 
|
|
|
So Warm !!! Gary, every time you post something about coldness, I'm going to post something about warmness to show people that local weather is not global climate. Hit the Beach It sure didn't feel like fall on much of the Central Coast Monday, especially at some local beaches. Local residents couldn't believe how warm it was, but they said they will take it, because this unusually warm weather gave them a gorgeous beach day. Temperatures climbed anywhere from 80 to 85 degrees near the coast Monday, bringing a lot of foot traffic out, especially near the waters. Folks who live here on the Central Coast said they planned the day around the warm conditions.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Oct 12, 2008 7:00 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Oct 12, 2008 7:00 am) Yesterday it was a perfect 70 degree day here in the northeast. As a result I walked where I would normally have taken the car. So you could say that global warming caused less use of cars than if it were normal temps. I bet those folks out in Idaho weren't walking...unless their SUV got stuck in a snow drift. 
|
|
|
Replying to: oldfarmer50 (Oct 13, 2008 3:20 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: gagrice (Oct 13, 2008 5:11 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: ruking1 (Oct 13, 2008 7:59 am) What half baked theories are you referring to? The following quote is interesting. "... "People have simply no idea how serious this issue is." It's so serious, he said, that unless we reach a point where we stop emitting greenhouse gases entirely, 80 per cent of the world's species will become extinct, and human civilization as we know it will be destroyed, by the end of this century." http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=919ae159-35e1-4106-804f-c- 0a4d486a3c8 The intensity of the scientist's comment is worth considering. We need to understand this issue and fairly soon. If we do not understand the issue or cannot make a reasonable prediction finding a solution will prove difficult. And, if we find that change is not possible, we would at least understand the issue well enough to be able to adapt. The irony of all this is that high oil prices will likely have a bigger impact in the near term on transportation than any Global Warming. The change taking place in the auto industry is truly amazing. We are in the middle of some amazing changes (hybrids, electric cars, ULSD, E10, E85, hydrogen....). |
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 14, 2008 3:34 am) Reading further we find this quote from Weaver. "Yes, it does bother me to be put in this position, but I've been so incensed by what has happened in Ottawa, by the war on science in Ottawa, that this has driven me and others to say, 'Enough is enough.'" This immediately strengthens my skepticism. I wonder if his strong sentiment is motivated by a genuine concern over a serious environmental threat, or if he is motivated by a desire to fight back against a perceived threat to science. Is it science or politics? Balance all that with the very real situation of others with impeccable credentials, background, and positions who express less extreme possibilities, and the whole thing just gets more muddy. Back and forth bickering ensues, and reasonableness goes right out the window. Mr. Weaver probably should have trusted his first inclination and stayed out of the fray. I am not sure his strong sentiment really helps.
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 14, 2008 3:34 am) ..."The following quote is interesting. "... "People have simply no idea how serious this issue is." It's so serious, he said, that unless we reach a point where we stop emitting greenhouse gases entirely, 80 per cent of the world's species will become extinct, and human civilization as we know it will be destroyed, by the end of this century." ... This is not interesting at all! It is really an indicator of continuing the status quo. It is just one of many narcotizing statements made by well meaning (or not well meaning as the case may be) folks. So for example, Al Gore speaks well about the subject, but he and his lifestyle/s are all about carbon and co2 EXCESS among other excesses !!!! If I had half a brain, I would do well to emulate Al Gore!  And as I have said in past posts it goes on and on. So for example what do you think would happen to the soda water industry if they stop putting C02 in the product? Do we stop brewing beer because it produces C02? Do we shoot fat folks for it has been confirmed they generate more C02?(this is obviously not PC but might make the point clearer).......Not to mention they are literally taking the food out of starving folks mouths (in whatever 3rd world country you would care to cite).
|
|
|
Replying to: avalon02wh (Oct 14, 2008 3:34 am) Well that's interesting but no one knows now how many species there are, and ones thought extinct continually pop up as still around. And I think that statement is a little misleading as it ignores that new species are always being created, while others go extinct. Human civilization will undergo change. To improve the old must be relegated to the garbage can (destroyed). So hopefully we can destroy this current civilization of inequities and intolerance. The irony of all this is that high oil prices will likely have a bigger impact in the near term on transportation than any Global Warming. While demand may go up or down slightly, it is fairly constant 90M or 87M bbd is not a big difference. Whether the oil is $50/barrel or $140/barrel, there still is going to be 87M barrels pumped per day. If in 20 years most of the U.S. has converted to electric cars, this really just reduces the cost of oil and frees it up for the other 5.7B people in the world to use. Until you get the WHOLE world on bikes or electric cars, high amounts of oil will be burned. How long will it take to make the batteries and the 1 billion electric cars? When do you address the needs of growing desperate populations like the Nigerian villages who will do anything - including chopping open pipes - to get oil? |
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Are automobiles a major cause of global warming?
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
