The other day, I ranted about why I feel biofuels are not the answer to “global warming”, “climate change” or the name du jour about this change in weather and climate affecting our planet.
That’s right: air. That stuff we breathe and live on.
So if it runs on air, Scott, I can hear you say, it must be slow. Or produce some harmful toxin as a side-effect. Or even cost a lot of money to buy.
Wrong on all three accounts. According to TV One News, it can reach 80 miles per hour. It produces air as a side-effect. And it only cost around $8,000NZ.
Sure, there are downsides, according to the Wikipedia article, but wouldn’t this be a better route to be going on at present than the biofuel route?
And it appears someone has been behind the electric car disappearing as well. In 2006, a documentary was released entitled, Who Killed the Electric Car? I haven’t seen it but have been told by several sources that it is an interesting insight into how the car manufacturers, certain governments, the oil industry and others into the death of what appeared to be another viable alternative to biofuels and oil.
Of course, if you are like me, you need to read up on all the pros and cons before making an informed choice. And, I think, there are downsides to all the different alternative technologies out there.
The best we can do is try, even if we do it in a small amount, to impact the car manufacturers and oil industry (who, let’s face it, are raping us at the pump) to steer them to roll with the changes.
One interesting point I want to raise: If it’s found that car pollution is partially responsible for “climate change”, and we all suffer as a result, does that mean we can take a class action suit out on car manufacturers and oil companies as a result, much like smokers can sue tobacco companies? An interesting thought to ponder…