More on the "controversy"

[Synthesizer Patel]

I did point out a few pages ago that the majority of a cars carbon footprint comes from its production (it must have got lost in the frenetic posting activity). So; again, if a real impact on the environment is to occur, this is the point at which things need to be changed, and not with the mileage a car gets or whether it's electric or not; as this makes next to no difference if the car companies are burning fossil fuels like mad people.

 

So, any list of "eco-friendly" cars shows next to nothing in regard to it's impact on the environment, and the same is true in regard to non-friendly lists.

[Good Old Neon]

(holds nose whilst jumping in again....)

 

Blame your fellow americans for demanding larger vehicles that get generally poor mileage, along with OPEC and other oil sources for not raising prices high enough soon enough that would effect the effeciency changes that would better satisfy your standards.

 

The car companies are doing what they need to to survive in a highly competitive environment. Competition drives niche marketing (horrors -- that ugly word again) which allowed that Echo you drive to have been made in the first place. Otherwise, we would live in a totalitarian society that drives model Ts -- assuming that the innovation was made in the first place.

 

I personally am highly anticipating the decline and fall of the internal combustion engine. Innovation, understanding the market and competition will again be the drivers there. You should run out and trade in that Echo for a Tesla. They are a little pricey for now, but hey, the principles you want are intact. Maybe you would be OK with Wilco doing an ad for them. No Nazi history there (that we know of)!

 

 

For the most part, I agree with you

[caliber66]

For the most part, I agree with you

[JUDE]

[Good Old Neon]

But they are marketing cars in America based on Americans' desires. Here are the cars VW offers in the UK, many of which are much more fuel efficient than their US models. Try finding a VW Fox (45.6 compbined mpg) or Polo (42.8 to as high as 48.7 combined mpg) here.

 

True enough, but, the government should, could and would step in if the auto manufacturer's lobby did not have a stranglehold on Congress. Our elected officials should step in and make some hard decisions at times, decisions that we may not always like, but, are in our interest - whether the general public is aware or not - they need to start being Leaders.

[embiggen]

[quote name='JUDE

[caliber66]

that little brown dude isn't being very "eco-friendly."

He's obviously not using the air conditioning, so that's something...

[Good Old Neon]

I did point out a few pages ago that the majority of a cars carbon footprint comes from its production (it must have got lost in the frenetic posting activity). So; again, if a real impact on the environment is to occur, this is the point at which things need to be changed, and not with the mileage a car gets or whether it's electric or not; as this makes next to no difference if the car companies are burning fossil fuels like mad people.

 

So, any list of "eco-friendly" cars shows next to nothing in regard to it's impact on the environment, and the same is true in regard to non-friendly lists.

 

Sorry, looking back I missed your post the first time around.

 

Excellent point, it

[Duck-Billed Catechist]

I did point out a few pages ago that the majority of a cars carbon footprint comes from its production (it must have got lost in the frenetic posting activity). So; again, if a real impact on the environment is to occur, this is the point at which things need to be changed, and not with the mileage a car gets or whether it's electric or not; as this makes next to no difference if the car companies are burning fossil fuels like mad people.

I have also read that the bolded is flat-out wrong. I don't know what to think!

[Good Old Neon]

I have also read that the bolded is flat-out wrong. I don't know what to think!

 

I sympathize with you

[LouieB]

Well, The Pogues are now schilling for Cadillac

[Atticus]

I sympathize with you

[Sir Stewart]

That sounds like me, too.

[Good Old Neon]

Clearly Shane McGowen needs the extra dough for his pub bills....

 

Edit- Where will it end.....the answer...never...

 

LouieB

 

Yeah, I get the impression that Shane is the sort of fella who, well, the less cash on hand the better

[Lammycat]

Plus, record royalties and concert revenues don't go as far with them as with most bands being that there's like 70 guys in The Pogues.

[caliber66]

Plus, record and concert royalties don't go as far with them as with most bands being that there's like 70 guys in The Pogues.

Yeah, but how much do you really need to pay the guy who whacks himself in the head with a tea tray?

[Sir Stewart]

Yeah, but how much do you really need to pay the guy who whacks himself in the head with a tea tray?

$650,000

[darkstar]

Clearly Shane McGowen needs the extra dough for his pub bills....

 

Edit- Where will it end.....the answer...never...

 

LouieB

 

 

pub bills hell...he needs the $$$ for his dentist and his teeth (tooth)

[plasticeyeball]

Yeah, but how much do you really need to pay the guy who whacks himself in the head with a tea tray?

 

he plays the tin whistle too, wise ass. and sings badly on some tunes too.

 

spider stacy is literally everyone's second favorite pogue.

 

swear.to.god

[Synthesizer Patel]

I have also read that the bolded is flat-out wrong. I don't know what to think!

 

Who said that then? The only way I can back up what I said, cos it's hard finding information on this (although I did watch a BBC documentary which was questioning whether people should be buying electric cars, rather than sticking with what they already own, which is where I got this view point from), is to look at China and see that those Chinese aren't the consumers, yet are responsible for the most pollution, so it is at the point of production on things where the carbon footprint is the greatest. Does that make sense? I'm certainly not saying this is 100% right, but it makes sense to me. The point about the car thing was more about how it's actually better to keep old cars on the road rather than make new ones, so this is where people should get over their snobbery, rather than thinking they are doing a great thing for buying a fuel efficient car, when in actual fact this probably isn't a valid reason for buying it. Instead, my cynical mind sees it as a concern based on fashion rather than a genuine (or at least, well thought through) reason - otherwise, as I've said, they'd be buying second hand.

[caliber66]

Who said that then? The only way I can back up what I said, cos it's hard finding information on this (although I did watch a BBC documentary which was questioning whether people should be buying electric cars, rather than sticking with what they already own, which is where I got this view point from), is to look at China and see that those Chinese aren't the consumers, yet are responsible for the most pollution, so it is at the point of production on things where the carbon footprint is the greatest. Does that make sense?

Wouldn't that have a lot to do with the emissions standards (or lack thereof) the Chinese have for their factories?

[Synthesizer Patel]

Wouldn't that have a lot to do with the emissions standards (or lack thereof) the Chinese have for their factories?

 

Are you refering to targets, laid down, that very few Western countries are actually likely to achieve, even though they were seen as inadequatly low by certain countries (Britain for one), when you speak of emissions standards? Or there's also the proposal to have countries buy "carbon credits" from other less industrial countries so as to offset their higher than allowed carbon emissions. Obviously China has poor standards, but it is as much about the sheer amount of production as the way in which they do it - even if they were to clean things up to current Western standards, it would still be a huge thorn in the side of environmentalists whichever way you look at it, and still the largest cause of carbon emissions in the world.

[EL the Famous]

for the record, i think that anything that 'joss ackland's spunky backpack' posts should be deemed irrefutable based on the screen name and avatar alone.

[Sir Stewart]

Thirded

[caliber66]

Are you refering to targets, laid down, that very few Western countries are actually likely to achieve, even though they were seen as inadequatly low by certain countries (Britain for one), when you speak of emissions standards? Or there's also the proposal to have countries buy "carbon credits" from other less industrial countries so as to offset their higher than allowed carbon emissions. Obviously China has poor standards, but it is as much about the sheer amount of production as the way in which they do it - even if they were to clean things up to current Western standards, it would still be a huge thorn in the side of environmentalists whichever way you look at it, and still the largest cause of carbon emissions in the world.

There absolutely need to be better standards across the board. I'm just saying that the Chinese carbon emissions due to industrial production is not necessarily directly correlatable to the amount of carbon emissions that go into producing your average car. Although I suppose if most of the parts in today's cars are made in developing countries with little or no emissions standards, the point is moot.