* Posts by ideas

4 publicly visible posts • joined 6 Aug 2012

Climate change behind extreme weather, says NASA

ideas

In comparing the efficiencies of petrol engines to engines from electric vehicles, I may have overlooked noticing any factoring in of costs of huffing/smoking the exhausts of the two types of vehicles. (Obviously some choose to efficiently use petrol exhausts for suicide.) Years ago TV news programs were regularly providing the smog indexes for various cities on a daily basis. I drew the possible false conclusion that my lungs might be healthier (and my life possibly longer) in an area with less smog.

A possible significant corollary is that (though fought tooth and nail by the tobacco profiteers and other deniers for years), people have finally generally concluded that the use of tobacco, which is an addictive legal drug, (even second hand {since we are really talking about polluting fluids [i.e., air] around those in the household, job site, motor vehicle, etc.}) probably causes cancer. Many areas have trampled the "rights" of tobacco polluters by banning their use in establishments. We are probably better off for such. To evaluate tobacco on a cost benefit analysis, it seems appropriate to consider not just

"Worldwide, tobacco use causes more than 5 million deaths per year, and current trends show that tobacco use will cause more than 8 million deaths annually by 2030.3

In the United States, tobacco use is responsible for about one in five deaths annually (i.e., about 443,000 deaths per year, and an estimated 49,000 of these smoking-related deaths are the result of secondhand smoke exposure).1

On average, smokers die 13 to 14 years earlier than nonsmokers"

http://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/

but the direct costs of health care treatment for the slow, expensive deaths, but the direct costs of health care costs for those various other diseases.

Cause and effect has constantly been the argument of the deniers/doubters.

You cannot have millions of heat producing (that is dangerous to the plants needed for food we directly consume and for food we indirectly consume from the consumption of meat [http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100107132543.htm]), carbon dioxide producing [http://epa.gov/climatechange/science/causes.html], toxin releasing petrol engines running in exponentially increasing numbers without damaging the fluids (needed for our minute by minute survival) they are blowing their wastes into.

When you want to get muddled about efficiency of electric vehicles to petrol engines, consider these additional costs in making a choice as to what you support.

ideas

I envision solar cells on all south facing roofs and south sides of buildings in the northern hemisphere with such initially wired to the vehicle(s) being charge first; this is to lessen line length loss as much as possible to increase the amount of electricity to charge the electric vehicle and to meet other problems of reducing heat generated from gas explosions occurring in petrol vehicles, eliminating production of carbon dioxide (http://epa.gov/climatechange/science/causes.html), eliminating all the other deadly/toxic substances coming out the exhausts of petrol vehicles; any excess electricity can then be used in the building the solar cells are attached to or wherever else it might be efficiently used; I also envision smaller, more efficient windmills that would generate electricity with less wind than the big windmills now require; I also envision parking lots with light posts and charging pods equipped with both solar cells and small efficient windmills; this obviously will not work in all places, but most people are concentrated at their jobs or home or shopping areas where it can possibly work; I also realize this may not be the best answer, but it is a place to start trying to implement a change for humans so they can survive in the future as long as they have already been here.

ideas

Re: @ ideas -

would test clean on any test given; see a problem (millions of engines running off exploding gasoline [and gas an oil on 2 cycle engines]); starting to share thoughts for possible solution to at least a part of the problem (how do petrol motor vehicles operate without generating lots of heat? ever change oil by hand from a hot engine? ever touch a lawnmower engine?); collaboration without thoughts of personal profits; if you aren't part of the solution, well . . .

ideas

1. if you were in a small room and started lighting a candle at a time, the room would become increasing hotter, besides creating some nasty stuff to breathe;

2. when you burn fossil fuel, you are taking something that has the temperature of its surroundings and converting it to heat with carbon dioxide being released and releasing some contaminants that increases the risk of COPD, lung Ca, heart problems, etc.;

3. when humans started the industrial revolution, they increased the use of fossil fuels exponentially over time for factories, for developing other fossil fueled powered devices like motor vehicles, planes, power stations, drones, etc., and moved from an agrarian society to large cities to suburbs;

4. if you will glance at world growth charts on "motor vehicle" in wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle), it provides a possible basis to believe the world has quickly grown extremely dependent on motor vehicles, which have motors that produce lots of heat from when they are started to when they cool off after running;

5. I believe the Germans originally mass produced the VW as a people's car;

6. I recently noticed that in India they are working hard on a car to run on compressed air that needs an electrical charge (http://www.fastcoexist.com/1679969/an-ultra-cheap-compressed-air-car-moves-closer-to-reality?partner=pob), alternatively I noticedan expensive electric one with a range of 373 miles (http://www.tgdaily.com/sustainability-features/64919-one-electric-car-to-rule-them-all), and there are probably a lot more ideas out there for elctrical vehicles;

7. with the world/national economic slowdown and the need for another stimulus, which Republicans and Democrates had no trouble quickly doing in the middle of the last Presidential election with socialism for the 1%, when faced with housing bubble burst, banks ready to go belly up, and AIG on the verge of melting (all as a result of a massive, insured real estate fraud) and kick starting the auto industry through buying clunkers to stimulate the purchase of new primarily gasoline motor vehicles, change can come to possibly save this planet (http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/global-warmings-terrifying-new-math-20120719?link=mostpopular1) with this: (inter)nationalize the production of an inexpensive/free electrical vehicles with a replaceable battery pack to be charged by (inter)nationally produced solar cells installed on the south sides of roofs and/or sides of suitable buildings and parking lots (with community shared vehicles available for congested metropolitan areas); and

8. this might show a concern for our neighbors and better stewardship of the planet.