Ridiculous cars.

I understand that Pontiac's GTO may be discontinued after this (or next) year. GM's subsidiary Holden in Australia will be cancelling the Monaro, which the GTO is based upon.

As far as SUVs are concerned, I think that diesel engines should be widely available in these machines and should not be an astronomical extra-cost option as they are today.

 

I have at least two problems with hybrids. First, with the complex technology that these cars have, how expensive will repairs be once the vehicle is out of warranty? Second, when it comes time to junk the car, what steps will be taken to see to it that the batteries are either recycled or disposed of so that they don't wreak havoc on the environment?

I beg to differ! When Diesel fuel is made particularly from plant sources, the carbon-dioxide that is emitted from the engine is absorbed by the plants. Particularly with hemp, because you can have several harvests per year, more pollutants can be absorbed by these plants thereby drastically reducing the effect that greeenhouse gases might have.

Rather than repeat myself, I'll post some earlier posts where I discuss points which will contribute greately to the reduction of resource waste:
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1958053&postcount=144
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/showpost.php?p=448534&postcount=20

 

the only problem is that a car with 450 horse power will be a gas guzzling vehicule

 

I don't see how a car that runs off of biodiesel's co2 will be any more likely to be absorded and converted by plants.

 

I think the Camaro is coming back next year too. When gas was under 2.00 a gallon a couple of years ago, I had actually looked at a GTO....they were like 30,000 dollars, and on top of that in the US they tacked on an extra 1,000 dollars gas guzzling tax. So...not having the money for 500.00 a month payments, I chose an older Chevy Cavalier instead. I still can't afford the gas to be out driving all over the place this summer, so I am walking to work and the store when I can. I see my next door neighbors who have a Ford Excursion, a Tahoe and the neighbors on the other side who have a Suburban...think to myself.....yep.....500.00 a month payments and gas 3.00 a gallon.......it definitely sucks to be you!

 

you know what i've been thinking...there is an argument against legalization that if pot is made legal, there will be more accidents. steve hager made a joke on thursday, when feds vs. heads was at my campus that if a stoner got into an accident, they'd only be going about four miles an hour. but seriously, the problem isn't weed, its the car. those things kill so many people regardless, not to mention wars for oil and the health and environmental problems. why not outlaw them? well, not really but at least provide more public transport, bike lanes, maybe even lower speed limits. i know people might not want to hear that, but why do we need to go 70 mph? setting the limit lower would decrease deaths and its still a whole lot faster than a horse and buggy.

 

The more you lower the speed limit, the more people will speed. Most people will go as fast as they want regardless of what the speed limit says.

 

Well, pot and other vices should be made legal! The thing is that you should use discretion when getting behind the wheel of a car, know what your limits are and not drive if you are under the influence.

It's like anything else. Used in the right hands, a car provides is a means of getting around that otherwise would take a great deal longer. Used improperly, they can be a danger! As far as fuel is concerned, why should we be dependent on the oil cartels and imported oil to provide for our energy needs when we can provide clean fuel made from vegetable oil or hemp?

Since the national maximum speed limit was repealed over a decade ago, the highway death rate has actually decreased. This is despite the fact that over half of the states have speed limits of 70 miles-per-hour or higher! Vehicles today are much safer than they were in the past, and they are much better able to handle higher speeds than cars of the past. Granted, many safety nazis will claim that when the national maximum speed limit was imposed in the mid-1970s due to the gas crunch which occurred at that time, there was an initail drop in fatalities. The reason behind this was not due to the lower speed limits, however. It was because fewer people were travelling due to the relatively high cost of fuel, fuel scarcity and fuel rationing.

In the link to the post below, I've outlined how we can reduce the need for resource use and perhaps waste while at the same time improving our local economy and providing for a cleaner world.
http://www.hipforums.com/forums/sho...3&postcount=144

I couldn't agree more! The double-nickel proved that!

 

A diesel engine running off bio-diesel emits about 80 to 100 per-cent less carbon-dioxide than a diesel running on petrol-based diesel fuel. With the limited CO2 emissions, plants and trees which ingest CO2 and emits oxygen can absorb more of the emissions that a bio-fuel diesel engine may produce. In the case of industrial hemp, because several harvests can be made per year, the amount of CO2 will be greater. Also with bio-diesel fuel, emissions of sulfur-dioxide are virtually eliminated, hydrocarbons are drastically reduced, and Carbon-monoxide is cut in half.
http://www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/emissions.pdf
http://www.hempcar.org/biofacts.shtml

 

I'm sorry to say this, but I'm pretty sure that site just lied to you. If it produced 100% less that would be no carbon monoxide, that's what they want it to produce, its better than CO. It may produce slightly less CO2, but it isn't to the point that it will be noticeably better for the environment.

 

i like cars, not like hummers and those gas killers, my family uses fairly fuel efficient cars, but i live on this busy street and im seeing like these people with these hugeass cars that have no mileage, and meanwhile regular has gone up to $3.09 a couple blocks down. dont these people see a connecton?

 

If these sites that I provided have lied, then explain why I'm getting similar information from other sources as well? Here are some more:
http://www.jackherer.com/chapter09.html
http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_future.html

Something else to remember is that hemp can help replenish the atmosphere as well as the soil and may be able to absorb CO as well, though I'm not totally sure on this.

Also check these sites out:
http://biodieselamerica.org/
http://www.biodieselsolutions.com
http://www.wnbiodiesel.com/products.html

 

Ok, so the chemical composition of biodiesel has carbon in it right? So therefore, when it burns, it will combine with oxygen, creating CO2, or am i missing something significant?

 

I'll jump in here. It's called 'zero total carbon'. The carbon that you are emitting by burning the fuel, was just sucked out of the atmosphere by the plants that were grown to produce the bio-d. You are no longer adding to the problem, and if you emit less than 100% of the carbon in the fuel, you are actually putting less carbon into the air than in the previous cycle.

 

This will be a slight hijack, please bear with me...

The big SUVs and motorized gas gizzling motorized egos are just part of the problem. The thing is- even these behemouths can be retrofitted to burn renewable fuel that will not pollute. The problem includes people who are unwilling to change their lifestyle and driving habits to burn less fuel and worse (from my standpoint, anyway) is that so many people refuse to be bothered by the fact that not only are we getting bilked by Big Oil's price gouging, but the U.S. government is aiding and abetting this with their ebergy policy that hands the mother of all sweetheart deals to Big Oil and subsidizes them with billions in taxpayer money.

Meanwhile, alternative fuels as chronicled here and here get little notice by lawmakers who are more content in limiting debate to punishing Big Oil with fines and winfall taxes- and temporarily repealing gas taxes. While this "feel good" debate would have little effect on the outrageous profits being enjoyed by the gluttonous oil giants, they would (if passed) result in budget shortfalls necessitating raising taxes elsewhere, and giving the likes of Exxon Mobil rationale to raise prices even more. The rhetoric is intended create the illusion that lawmakers are doing something when in fact they are doing nothing... a path they will continue to follow until they are forced to do differently. This is where the difficult fight comes into play.

Apathy is rampant- people just don't care that they are being mugged- government is holding us down with laws designed to maintain Oil's monopoly while the petroleum giants rip off every hard working man and woman who must go to the pump. The fact is that we shouldn't even need to use gasoline- people need to be educated with the fact that they are being ripped off. The voting public needs to become very visibly pissed off and those in power have to be pointed in the direction of alternative fuels.

I live for the day when Exxon-Mobil, Shell, Texaco, Getty, Hess, Sunoco, and the other petroleum pushers are things of the past. This will not happen as long as people continue to feel trapped. Our power is with our voice- we need to educate.

 

I just got a new car. It's not so ridiculous though, gets good gas mileage. It's a 2006 scion xb limited edition. The box, as I call it. It's sweet, the 'limited' edition means it came with a different front end different grill different lights sweet paintjob rims etc, but best of all, dvd screens in the headrests. So I can't complain about new cars. I'm lovin it lol

I was gonna get a civic hybrid but getting my scion LE even after the gap insurance and 6 year/100k was not even base price for a civic hybrid. It's like a scam that keeps you from buying more efficient cars. And biodiesel costs even more than reg gas! wtf is that shit. Well, here at least it's 5 bucks a gallon!!! Such a scam. It costs way less to manufacture and you get less mileage I thought. America is the land of the scam.

 

It is... thank you for having a clue. Thank you for paying attention.

The government is holding us down so the Oil Pigs can pick our pockets.

What gets me is so many people refuse to get genuionely pissed about it- like it's somehow ok that our government is a major party in one of the biggest swindles in modern times. I've come to the conclusion over the past couple months that the only solution to our energy situation is to completely free ourselves from using gas- and that all of Big Oil become absent from the marketplace. The alternatives are there. The technologies are there (Ford and GM both manufacture it for export to Brazil).

President Bush will undoubtedly propose that we should increase domestic refinement capacity as well as drill more oil wells in Florida and Alaska to end our dependence on foreign oil. We need to end our dependence on all oil- foreign AND domestic.

In January during his state of the union address, George Bush speachified our dependence on oil but his energy policies have acted as the chief pusher- effectively keeping viable alternative off the market. In any other business this would be considered a crime and all parties would be hauled into court on conspiracy and racketeering charges. There is now talk of high gas prices and rhetoric about imposing excess profit taxes on Big Oil and eliminating a portion of the Federal gas tax when the price per gallon reaches a certain threshold. At best this is only band-ail style legislation designed to treat the symptom. Most likely it's campaign rhetoric intended to created the illusion that something is being done.

You can't effectively deter a 50 billion dollar annual profit industry with fines and extra taxes. The best way to rein in energy costs in a free market system is competition. Renewable sources can be that competition... which can give us not only a way out of our oil addiction but alkso a means of transportation that is environmentally friendly.

Every voting taxpayer needs to know how they are being bilked of their hard-earned savings in a racket that would make 1920's mafia gangsters blush. The voting taxpayer owes it to him and herself to get pissed about this. We need to get involved.... in numbers that will force those who represent us to take notice. We need a government that cares about more than big business' and Big Oil's interest

 

What is wrong with driving a small car. Even small cars aren not as small as they used to be especially in power and cc. To give an example the Mini now has a 1500cc but when it was first released it came with an 850cc engine. I owned one with a 998cc engine that had more than enough performance, so why the need for a bigger engine?

 

the big 3 auto corp. idea of an efficient car is maybe 3o mpg and that is under ideal conditions that we would never be able to duplicate

check out Smart Cars--can't wait until the car is available in USA

 

By smart car do you mean a full hybrid, one that runs the engine on electricity at lower revs, but uses gas when you kick it up a notch?