droo <03dakotacc4.7_4x4@comcast.net> wrote:
: Diesel might be more efficient but it's also much dirtier. Until they get
: the cleaner technologies into the cars, diesel isn't all that great for
: the enviroment. It's also not so easy to come buy if you are more than 1
: mile from a major highway.
That's assuming of course that you can believe anything
anybody says in this area. Clean cars vs. dirty cars, global
warming, the environment, etc. Personally, I think the whole
thing is a complete crock. Most of what you hear is based
on politics as opposed to science, and even those in the
"environmentalist" camp who DO seem to be approaching the whole
thing from a scientific standpoint quite obviously don't have
a clue. I mean, when you see studies saying that animals
create more "greenhouse gasses" than vehicles ever have, and
the fact that a single volcanic eruption spews more so called
"pollution" into the air than man could ever hope to do in a
million years, its pretty hard to take someone complaining
about "dirty" vehicles seriously. The sooner man realizes
that he's just an impotent speck who couldn't destroy the
environment if he tried, the better off we'll all be. (We
can create isolated, local problems sure, but global climactic
change? Not a chance. ...and even the local problems seem
to get cleaned up in relativey short order by nature.) Don't
get me wrong, I'm not advocating trying to destroy the environment
- I'm into conservation - I think at some level, everybody is;
nobody WANTS dirty air and water; its just that the people who
call themselves environmentalists have blown things so far out
of proportion that it'd be comical if the consequences of their
actions weren't so dire. (i.e. to name just one, the nearly 100
million people who are dead and the millions who die every year
thanks to the banning of DDT - a harmless pesticide.)
The "environmentalists" have cried wolf over so many things
that have since been proven to be wrong, lies, or both, that
on the rare occasion that they DO raise a legitimate concern,
they have a huge credibility gap to overcome. At this point,
the "environmentalists" are almost certainly doing more harm
to the environment than good, and they are definitely doing
more harm than good to the well being of the earth's population
in general. Speaking just for myself, I have personally reached
to the point where I automatically assume that anything coming
out of the "environmentalist" camp is a lie until I can verify
otherwise.
Anyway, this is getting a bit off topic, :-) but in a roundabout
way, I guess what I'm saying is that the so called "environmental
impact" a vehicle has doesn't even register on my radar. This is
because I could drive an oil tanker to work every day and it wouldn't
have the slightest environmental impact. When buying a vehicle,
pick the one that will work the best for you; wether you need towing
capability, cargo space, good gas mileage, whatever. If diesel
fits the bill, then by all means, go for it! IMHO, diesel engines
have been vastly underutilized in the USA, which is a shame because
they have many positive qualities. The push to get diesel to be
more widely adopted seems to be building steam lately, and I wish
it well. The average diesel engine is an excellent combination of
power and efficiency, and I would urge everyone to give a diesel
thorough consideration when it comes time to purchase a vehicle.
--
-Jon-
.- Jon Steiger -- jon@dakota-truck.net or jon@jonsteiger.com -.
| '96 Kolb Firefly, '96 Suzuki Intruder, Miscellaneous Mopars |
`-------------------------------- http://www.jonsteiger.com --'
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Feb 18 2008 - 18:47:20 EST