Criticism of the government, Duty or Treason?

[Mistress of Darkness]

We are working toward the hybrid cars. Probably mostly due to money, but it is happening. Phasing fuel out entirely is difficult, but I think you're got the right idea.

[JP Dogberry]

MobilExxon, which if I am correct, is the largest American oil petrol business thingo, is also the only oil/petrol business thingo to not have looked into alternate, renewable fuel sources. Why? Because it might cut into their profits!

I'm going to have to side with the Mad Doctor on this one for the most part. That being said, I don't think you can really call the criticism duty, and I think most westernised governments would prefer it were treason. As I've heard it put before "You have the right to have your protest ignored."

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

Yeah, but "working on hybrid cars" is treated like its some sort of fiction, while a missle defense sheild and going to mars seem to be the priority of our government.

Did you know that conservative estimates say that there are 55 thousand home built electric cars in the US alone?

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

actually, I see a corporate manufactured hybrid car on my way to work each day. I've seen at least three different ones in the area. That measn that they're being at least tested in real world situations (like rush hour commuting). That seems more than "fiction"

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

yeah, but bring up the idea of 50%-75% of our society driving hybrids in the next five years and people will consider it fiction.
Im just saying, if we can offer susidies to get people to stop growing wheat or tobacco we can give them subsidies to get a new hybrid or electric car.
its better for the environment, our children and our oil expenditures.

Think about it, in the DC area I spend about 20 bucks a week on gas to drive my car just going to work.
Thats pretty light for some people here. I try not to drive around to a lot of places I dont need to go try to save up chores untill the last minute and try not to take many road trips. This means that for gas alone I spend about 1040 bucks a year on gasoline. Now lets say I only have to fill up my car once a month like my friend with a honda insight does... I pollute less, save more money (only spend about 275 bucks a year on gas) and hurt the terrorists.
Imagine if we put a trucking hybrid engine in our tractor trailor fleet, what kind of a dent in Diesel sales there would be. Or if all minivans made after 2005 had to have hybrid engines sold in them. Or all SUV's. But thats fiction to a lot of people. Bring up electric cars and you get mocked.
But there are a lot of costs associated with oil that people dont get to see.
federally funded cleanups of oil spills siphon off millions of dollars from our budget annually. In the gulf and texas there are regular daily spills, and air releases of hydrocarbons as they are burned off because we dont use them for anything else.
Cause sulphur dioxide is good for the environment, in the same way that arsenic is (two of the materials allowed to be released from a flare stack in not so limited quantities)
Ugh, we're like petrolium junkies here.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

I'm not arguing that they're not better in terms of environment and such.

I'm just arguing that the facts contradict this perception that they're an unrealistic fiction. I don't drive around that much, and I don't go downtown. But I still see the hybrids without looking for them. They're starting to get to the public in general.

[House of Mustard]

And, the fact of the matter is that the government does support them.  While it's not a subsidy, you do get a one-time tax write-off for buying a fuel efficient car, or for upgrading a vehicle to electric/natural gas.

My personal feeling, however, is that money needs to be poured into mass transit systems, not into the pockets of those who buy hybrids.

[Mad Dr Jeffe]

Im not debating that the government doesn't fund those things, what I am debating is that the government spent more money on the now cancelled commanche helicopter program annually than its committed to put into researching alternative fuels and transportation for the next ten years.

And public transit. I used to think that too... except lots and lots of studies have shown that people dont like mass transit systems.
A lot of that has to do with how much the automobile has changed the way we live people now live farther from population centers than mass transit will allow, (for instance people commute to DC from as far away as Pennsylvania [2-3 hours away by car]) While the transition from rural farm to a suburban car driven society was easy the transition from suburban independent driver to responisble mass transit driver is more difficult. I used to ride the subway to work all the time, but standing out at a bus stop in crummy weather is definately less fun than getting in a car.
The costs of public transportation are also more evident than the hidden costs of owning a a car... $ bucks a day in DC or more to get to your location vs/ 20 bucks a week. Granted when a train breaks down you dont have to shell out 400 bucks to fix it either, or pay extra money every couple of years for new tires. But its the inconvience of paying 5 bucks a day that gets people. Length of commute is also a problem, it can take me twice as long to get to work because of public transportation than it would if I drove a car, while I could be more productive during those hours than I could be driving, I still have to factor my extra commute time in. Plus depending on where I live around here I may have to drive to a public transportation hub, or catch a bus and tack on another hour because we stop every five minutes and inevitably miss our train into the city.

No, fuel cells and electricty are the way to go.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

just so you know, comparisons to military spending never convince me of anything. The military is inherently more expensive than most other governmental undertakings with a more direct, tangible result.

[House of Mustard]

I can see your argument, which is why I drive to work instead of taking the bus.  Still, I don't think the argument "people don't like it" matters very much.  People don't like electric cars right now either (because they don't have a lot of power, and because they don't hold a charge very long).  If you spend the money on making electric cars work better, then your only outcome is fuel efficient cars.  However, if you spent money to fix the mass transit system (making people like it more) then you've also solved the fuel problem--but you've also cleared up the traffic problem, which, in turn frees up green space etc...

As for cost, increased efficiency of the system should lower cost.  Besides, buying passes can lower those costs -- the new york transit system sells a 30 day unlimited pass for $70.  Not cheap, but cheaper than $20 a week.

[The Holy Saint, Grand High Poobah, Master of Monkeys, Ehlers]

you can also make electric/natural gas/hybrid mass transit vehicles. Combining the two.

[House of Mustard]

Right.  Salt Lake's light rail system (and every subway everywhere) are already electric.  It's not something that requires more research dollars.

[Mistress of Darkness]

Here are some links to the latest news on hybrids.

http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contentid=4020586&src=News

http://autos.msn.com/advice/article.aspx?contentid=4022466&src=Home&pos=Edit1

I've also heard that car companies are looking to move their most popular models to hybrids. I believe the Toyota Camry will be available as a hybrid within the next 5 years or so. Maybe not 50%-75% in the next 5 years,  but people will see that an extra $5k upfront will be saved over time in gas costs and I think we'll see many more hybrids on the road.

[stacer]

I've been so busy at work this week I haven't been able to get to this thread. I agree with all that you're all saying about mass transit and hybrids--I think any or all of the above work. Also, though, I think that for those of us who do live close enough to work, getting there on your own power is a nice eco-friendly option that won't use any of the hidden costs of auto or public transportation. I live 4 miles from work, and in nice weather (like last week, but now it's been raining this week) I ride my bike. I think if more people did that, weather and distance permitting of course, then we wouldn't need as much of either of the other two options, and the daily commute would be a lot less frustrating.

Of course, there's the question of how much you can carry on a bike. I like to take my laptop to work and write, and I don't like to chance taking it on my bike. So there are complications. But it is a good thing for my body, getting the exercise, and a good thing for the environment, in that I don't own a car anymore. (And a good thing for my budget, in that I don't have to pay for gas, car payments, insurance, etc.)

All the trains and trolleys here in Boston are electric, and many of the buses.

[Maxwell]

somebody told me that for the past four years we have NOT been on the united nations list of democratic countries, because technically we were taken over by a bunch of wrinkly white guys...