Gas Prices -- What would it take to get you out of your SUV?

[Vic]

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic
It's always some freakin' stupid left-wing vs. right-wing rhetoric with you, isn't it, marin? :roll:

Take your propaganda elsewhere. Black and white extremism is for morons who lack the ability to think for themselves. The real world is analog. And the fact is that manufacturing the Prius (or any current production hybrid) requires significant amount of nickel, and nickel smelting is bad for the environment.
Consider this analogy. Ford doesn't own the Chevron oil rigs off the Nigerian coast, do they? Yet that doesn't stop you from condemning Ford (and other automakers) for contributing to that kind of environmental impact, now does it? Nor does it stop me from doing the same. So why then do you pick up the partisan extremist's blinders to apology for Toyota?

Probably because you hate children.

My propoganda? Do you truly believe a hummer is better for the environment than a Prius? The fact is manufacturing ANY car is bad for the environment. And every car uses some nickel as an alloying element in steel and in stainless steel. The Prius uses less fuel, and less steel than a Hummer.
This is not a left versus right issue.
I like Toyota, get it. They make very fuel efficient and reliable vehicles, Hummer doesn't.
Take your ignorance elsewhere.

I'm sorry, where did Hummer enter into this, except as a straw man that you brought up from some media propaganda?
Don't lecture me about ignorance when this kind of sh!t is the best you can argue with. You can't bring something up on your own and then pretend that that's my argument. I merely brought up a legitimate environmental concern that surrounds Prius manufacturing. I've never owned an SUV, not even a Hummer, and never will. I'm the Subaru owner who's looking to buy a Honda motorcycle, remember? F an A.

 

[DealMonkey]

Prius batteries are recycled and have been since the first EV back in '98.

Is there a recycling plan in place for nickel-metal hydride batteries?

Toyota has a comprehensive battery recycling program in place and has been recycling nickel-metal hydride batteries since the RAV4 Electric Vehicle was introduced in 1998. Every part of the battery, from the precious metals to the plastic, plates, steel case and the wiring, is recycled. To ensure that batteries come back to Toyota, each battery has a phone number on it to call for recycling information and dealers are paid a $200 "bounty" for each battery.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
Prius batteries are recycled and have been since the first EV back in '98.

Is there a recycling plan in place for nickel-metal hydride batteries?

Toyota has a comprehensive battery recycling program in place and has been recycling nickel-metal hydride batteries since the RAV4 Electric Vehicle was introduced in 1998. Every part of the battery, from the precious metals to the plastic, plates, steel case and the wiring, is recycled. To ensure that batteries come back to Toyota, each battery has a phone number on it to call for recycling information and dealers are paid a $200 "bounty" for each battery.

As they should be. That doesn't change the legitimate environmental controversy that surrounds them. Sorry, I would have embraced electric cars a long time ago myself if it wasn't for the battery problems that have plagued them since day one. In fact, I've said many times that the world does not have an energy problem (for energy is abundant) we have an energy storage problem. I look forward to the day when hydrogen fuel cell technology finally matures enough that we don't need toxic and heavy lead-acid or NiMH batteries. And who's leading fuel-cell development, I wonder? Oh sh!t, marin will now demand that we stop development on that technology for reasons of partisan political extemism.

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic
It's always some freakin' stupid left-wing vs. right-wing rhetoric with you, isn't it, marin? :roll:

Take your propaganda elsewhere. Black and white extremism is for morons who lack the ability to think for themselves. The real world is analog. And the fact is that manufacturing the Prius (or any current production hybrid) requires significant amount of nickel, and nickel smelting is bad for the environment.
Consider this analogy. Ford doesn't own the Chevron oil rigs off the Nigerian coast, do they? Yet that doesn't stop you from condemning Ford (and other automakers) for contributing to that kind of environmental impact, now does it? Nor does it stop me from doing the same. So why then do you pick up the partisan extremist's blinders to apology for Toyota?

Probably because you hate children.

My propoganda? Do you truly believe a hummer is better for the environment than a Prius? The fact is manufacturing ANY car is bad for the environment. And every car uses some nickel as an alloying element in steel and in stainless steel. The Prius uses less fuel, and less steel than a Hummer.
This is not a left versus right issue.
I like Toyota, get it. They make very fuel efficient and reliable vehicles, Hummer doesn't.
Take your ignorance elsewhere.

I'm sorry, where did Hummer enter into this, except as a straw man that you brought up from some media propaganda?
Don't lecture me about ignorance when this kind of sh!t is the best you can argue with. You can't bring something up on your own and then pretend that that's my argument. I merely brought up a legitimate environmental concern that surrounds Prius manufacturing. I've never owned an SUV, not even a Hummer, and never will. I'm the Subaru owner who's looking to buy a Honda motorcycle, remember? F an A.

You brought up the Sudbury nickel mine issue,including the Apollo astronaut reference, which I assume is from the Hummer is better than the prius discussion. And this issue has been thoroughly debunked on the net.
You claim the Prius gets 35mpg, and I gave you links to people who say they get 48 mpg.
You claim that you want people to consume less, but you are hostile to anyone that drives a fuel-saving hybrid.
This is not a legitimate environmental concern, this is junk science.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic
It's always some freakin' stupid left-wing vs. right-wing rhetoric with you, isn't it, marin? :roll:

Take your propaganda elsewhere. Black and white extremism is for morons who lack the ability to think for themselves. The real world is analog. And the fact is that manufacturing the Prius (or any current production hybrid) requires significant amount of nickel, and nickel smelting is bad for the environment.
Consider this analogy. Ford doesn't own the Chevron oil rigs off the Nigerian coast, do they? Yet that doesn't stop you from condemning Ford (and other automakers) for contributing to that kind of environmental impact, now does it? Nor does it stop me from doing the same. So why then do you pick up the partisan extremist's blinders to apology for Toyota?

Probably because you hate children.

My propoganda? Do you truly believe a hummer is better for the environment than a Prius? The fact is manufacturing ANY car is bad for the environment. And every car uses some nickel as an alloying element in steel and in stainless steel. The Prius uses less fuel, and less steel than a Hummer.
This is not a left versus right issue.
I like Toyota, get it. They make very fuel efficient and reliable vehicles, Hummer doesn't.
Take your ignorance elsewhere.

I'm sorry, where did Hummer enter into this, except as a straw man that you brought up from some media propaganda?
Don't lecture me about ignorance when this kind of sh!t is the best you can argue with. You can't bring something up on your own and then pretend that that's my argument. I merely brought up a legitimate environmental concern that surrounds Prius manufacturing. I've never owned an SUV, not even a Hummer, and never will. I'm the Subaru owner who's looking to buy a Honda motorcycle, remember? F an A.

You brought up the Sudbury nickel mine issue,including the Apollo astronaut reference, which I assume is from the Hummer is better than the prius discussion. And this issue has been thoroughly debunked on the net.
You claim the Prius gets 35mpg, and I gave you links to people who say they get 48 mpg.
You claim that you want people to consume less, but you are hostile to anyone that drives a fuel-saving hybrid.
This is not a legitimate environmental concern, this is junk science.

You assumed wrong. But hey, you got to straw man the drawbacks of owning a Hummer to a Subaru owner! Aren't you cool! :roll:

On the fuel mileage issue, you insist on using city mileage. Hmm... why do you suppose that is?

The only issue I've ever had with you, marin, is that you're a blind and stupid partisan who only believes what the herd tells you to believe and thinks that everyone else does the same. Sorry, sheep-boy, some of us have that horribly threatening ability to think for ourselves. I'm surprised you're not running out to pass a law...

The sulfur emissions at the Sudbury nickel smelter are a legitimate environmental concern, particularly if everyone started running out and buying hybrids by tens of millions. Or are you going to tell us that the sulfur emissions from this 1,247 foot superstack are junk science?

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic
It's always some freakin' stupid left-wing vs. right-wing rhetoric with you, isn't it, marin? :roll:

Take your propaganda elsewhere. Black and white extremism is for morons who lack the ability to think for themselves. The real world is analog. And the fact is that manufacturing the Prius (or any current production hybrid) requires significant amount of nickel, and nickel smelting is bad for the environment.
Consider this analogy. Ford doesn't own the Chevron oil rigs off the Nigerian coast, do they? Yet that doesn't stop you from condemning Ford (and other automakers) for contributing to that kind of environmental impact, now does it? Nor does it stop me from doing the same. So why then do you pick up the partisan extremist's blinders to apology for Toyota?

Probably because you hate children.

My propoganda? Do you truly believe a hummer is better for the environment than a Prius? The fact is manufacturing ANY car is bad for the environment. And every car uses some nickel as an alloying element in steel and in stainless steel. The Prius uses less fuel, and less steel than a Hummer.
This is not a left versus right issue.
I like Toyota, get it. They make very fuel efficient and reliable vehicles, Hummer doesn't.
Take your ignorance elsewhere.

I'm sorry, where did Hummer enter into this, except as a straw man that you brought up from some media propaganda?
Don't lecture me about ignorance when this kind of sh!t is the best you can argue with. You can't bring something up on your own and then pretend that that's my argument. I merely brought up a legitimate environmental concern that surrounds Prius manufacturing. I've never owned an SUV, not even a Hummer, and never will. I'm the Subaru owner who's looking to buy a Honda motorcycle, remember? F an A.

You brought up the Sudbury nickel mine issue,including the Apollo astronaut reference, which I assume is from the Hummer is better than the prius discussion. And this issue has been thoroughly debunked on the net.
You claim the Prius gets 35mpg, and I gave you links to people who say they get 48 mpg.
You claim that you want people to consume less, but you are hostile to anyone that drives a fuel-saving hybrid.
This is not a legitimate environmental concern, this is junk science.

You assumed wrong. But hey, you got to straw man the drawbacks of owning a Hummer to a Subaru owner! Aren't you cool! :roll:

On the fuel mileage issue, you insist on using city mileage. Hmm... why do you suppose that is?
The only issue I've ever had with you, marin, is that you're a blind and stupid partisan who only believes what the herd tells you to believe and thinks that everyone else does the same. Sorry, sheep-boy, some of us have that horribly threatening ability to think for ourselves. I'm surprised you're not running out to pass a law...

The sulfur emissions at the Sudbury nickel smelter are a legitimate environmental concern, particularly if everyone started running out and buying hybrids by tens of millions. Or are you going to tell us that the sulfur emissions from this 1,247 foot superstack are junk science?

On the fuel mileage, I gave you a link to a site where the guy claims he got 51 mpg on the HIGHWAY, and other owners report overall mileage of 48 mpg, so your 35 mpg real world is bull.
The sulfur emissions are legitimate, but I pointed out that most nickel is NOT USED FOR BATTERIES, but for steel and stainless steel.
The problem I have with you Vic, is that you are a rude and obnoxious partisan that cannot stand to be proven wrong, and will argue incessantly when you have been completely pwned.
That's great you can think for yourself, unfortunately for you some of us actually have studied science and can understand it.

 

[Vic]

I'm a partisan? Really? Which party is that? Whichever one you disagree with I assume, right? :roll:

Rude and obnoxious? Tell me, why I should be nice to you (or your moronic commie-buddy Steeplerot, for example) when you make up my arguments for me and then claim you "completely pwned" me? Oooh...

Thank you for admitting that the sulfur emissions are legitimate. Now imagine, everyone drives a hybrid. Tens of millions of them. Just like there are currently hundreds of millions of gasoline-burning cars on the roads today. And obviously, we can't recycle all the old batteries to make all these new ones, we're gonna need more nickel, now aren't we? Just like current NiMH production already requires more nickel than is recycled. So nickel production is going to have to increase as consumption of hybrid vehicles increases, which will increase sulfur emissions, now won't it? Is this your environmental nirvana?
You may have studied science (on the internet, I'll wager, probably on something like the left-wing version of free republic) but you most certainly didn't understand it.

Here's a question for you to test your scientific understanding. Let's suppose, hypothetically, that suddenly every car on earth gets 50 mpg, with no other consequence. Nothing else. Pure positive. 50 mpg for everyone, just like that, purely hypothetical. Now... will overall gasoline consumption increase or decrease? I await your answer.

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: Vic
I'm a partisan? Really? Which party is that? Whichever one you disagree with I assume, right? :roll:

Rude and obnoxious? Tell me, why I should be nice to you (or your moronic commie-buddy Steeplerot, for example) when you make up my arguments for me and then claim you "completely pwned" me? Oooh...

Thank you for admitting that the sulfur emissions are legitimate. Now imagine, everyone drives a hybrid. Tens of millions of them. Just like there are currently hundreds of millions of gasoline-burning cars on the roads today. And obviously, we can't recycle all the old batteries to make all these new ones, we're gonna need more nickel, now aren't we? Just like current NiMH production already requires more nickel than is recycled. So nickel production is going to have to increase as consumption of hybrid vehicles increases, which will increase sulfur emissions, now won't it? Is this your environmental nirvana?
You may have studied science (on the internet, I'll wager, probably on something like the left-wing version of free republic) but you most certainly didn't understand it.

Here's a question for you to test your scientific understanding. Let's suppose, hypothetically, that suddenly every car on earth gets 50 mpg, with no other consequence. Nothing else. Pure positive. 50 mpg for everyone, just like that, purely hypothetical. Now... will overall gasoline consumption increase or decrease? I await your answer.

You brought up the phony argument "Just because you might get good gas mileage (and not every Prius owner does) does not change the fact that the nickel for the batteries comes from the Sudbury deposits in Ontario, Canada, where the ore has high concentrations of sulfur. As such the acid rain from the smelting in the region is so bad, and the vegetation of the region so devastated by it, that the Apollo astronauts trained there. But nah, that 1250 foot high super smokestack fixed that problem, right? "
Where did you get this misinformation? Could it have been the article about the Hummer versus the Prius?
This has been thoroughly debunked. The trees were cut down to rebuild Chicago, the reason astronauts trained there (many years before the Prius) was because of its moon like geography. The superstack has been retrofitted to reduce emissions .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inco_Superstack
Starting in the early 1990s, a major construction effort started to dramatically clean the waste gases before pumping them up the Superstack, removing around 90% of the sulphur dioxide. The upgrades were completed in 1994, and emissions from then on are much reduced.[1] Further reductions in emissions are planned
The 2009 Toyota Prius is expected to use Lithium-Ion batteries, so there goes that argument.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prius
The third generation Hybrid Synergy Drive from Toyota is expected to debut in the 2009 Toyota Prius, due out in late 2008 or early 2009. It will use lithium-ion batteries for greater energy density, resulting in better performance and less weight. It should also give the new Prius more cabin or trunk space.

Oh, and I studied science at one of the finest universities in the world, and where did you get your science degree again?
Your question: "Here's a question for you to test your scientific understanding. Let's suppose, hypothetically, that suddenly every car on earth gets 50 mpg, with no other consequence. Nothing else. Pure positive. 50 mpg for everyone, just like that, purely hypothetical. Now... will overall gasoline consumption increase or decrease? I await your answer"
I don't have time to search out the information for you, but I will guess that if every car got 50 mpg we would use less gasoline. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.
Now you tell me this, if everyone drove a Toyota Prius in this country, would we use less oil or more?

http://www.hybridcars.com/newsletter/hybrid-cars-news-025.html.html
The average fuel economy for 47 drivers of 2004-05 Priuses was 49.95 mpg, or 9.2 percent less than EPA's combined estimates.

Where did you get your 35 mpg real world anyway?

ARE HYBRID BATTERIES TOXIC?

The need for more robust battery technologies to power vehicles and their accessories prompted Environmental Defense to conduct a three-month study in 2005 to examine environmental impacts related to the extraction, manufacture, use, and disposal of nickel metal hydride batteries, as well as lithium ion?which many believe will be the battery of choice in the next five years. Environmental Defense then compared those impacts to lead acid. "Our initial conclusion is that lead is the worst, nickel is next, and lithium is the least harmful," said Karen Thomas, state policy manager at Environmental Defense.


So lead batteries are the most toxic, and are used in 99% of cars and trucks, and you are getting exercised about the recyclable Nickel batteries in a hybrid? When was the last time you saw a discarded hybrid battery by the side of the road? And when was the last time you saw a discarded lead-acid battery?
What is your problem with the Prius? Did someone in a Prius steal your woman? Did a Prius dust your Subaru pulling away from a light? I don't even like the Prius, I think it's ugly, but I do like their fuel mileage. We need to quit importing so much oil, and conservation is a great help.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: marincounty
I don't have time to search out the information for you, but I will guess that if every car got 50 mpg we would use less gasoline. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.

Wrong. It's Econ 101 that consumption increases as efficiency improves. If you're as educated as you claimed to be, you shouldn't have to search to know that.

As for the rest of your tirade, thanks for proving my point that your got your degree in science from Internet University. Keep googling furiously!

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty
I don't have time to search out the information for you, but I will guess that if every car got 50 mpg we would use less gasoline. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.

Wrong. It's Econ 101 that consumption increases as efficiency improves. If you're as educated as you claimed to be, you shouldn't have to search to know that.

As for the rest of your tirade, thanks for proving my point that your got your degree in science from Internet University. Keep googling furiously!

Nice that you took econ 101, but you're saying that if every car got 50 mpg that consumption would increase more because everyone would just drive more?
Complete bull. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.
And answer my question about if everyone drove a Prius would we use more gasoline in the U.S. or less? And what is your problem specifically with the Prius?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty
I don't have time to search out the information for you, but I will guess that if every car got 50 mpg we would use less gasoline. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.

Wrong. It's Econ 101 that consumption increases as efficiency improves. If you're as educated as you claimed to be, you shouldn't have to search to know that.

As for the rest of your tirade, thanks for proving my point that your got your degree in science from Internet University. Keep googling furiously!

Nice that you took econ 101, but you're saying that if every car got 50 mpg that consumption would increase more because everyone would just drive more?
Complete bull. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.
And answer my question about if everyone drove a Prius would we use more gasoline in the U.S. or less? And what is your problem specifically with the Prius?

The brilliant scientific analysis is the modern real world right before your eyes. Blame Henry Ford for making cars cheap enough for the masses, most people do. Others blame Rockefeller for cheap oil, and that's probably justified too.
If everyone owned a Prius, gasoline consumption in the US would increase. I didn't see the point in answering your challenge, as it's just my own challenge to you flipped back to me with symbols exchanged in order to make it easier for you to deny the scientific facts.

I don't have any specific problem with the Prius and never said so, beyond my opinion that it is overhyped, an inadequate solution to oil problem (as it still relies exclusively on oil for its operation), and the high smug emissions of its owners/fanbois as you have demonstrated here. All I did was cast doubt on its vaunted gas mileage and you exploded into personal attacks and furious googling for owner opinions stating high mileage. I'm genuinely not worried about a 110bhp Prius dusting my modded WRX from a light, thank you. What I am worried about is a genuine solution to the oil problem, not a continued reliance on oil, coupled with the added problem of sulfur pollution/acid rain inherent to nickel smelting, dressed up as an alternative fuel vehicle. "It's better than an SUV" isn't enough here. We've had economic alternatives to SUVs and other gas-guzzlers for decades now. I had a CRX back in the 90s that could get 50 mpg on the highway. A decade later and more-or-less the same thing sells for more than twice as much and comes with added environmental baggage? (But hey, affluent Prius owners get to look cool to their SUV-driving friends).

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty
I don't have time to search out the information for you, but I will guess that if every car got 50 mpg we would use less gasoline. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.

Wrong. It's Econ 101 that consumption increases as efficiency improves. If you're as educated as you claimed to be, you shouldn't have to search to know that.

As for the rest of your tirade, thanks for proving my point that your got your degree in science from Internet University. Keep googling furiously!

Nice that you took econ 101, but you're saying that if every car got 50 mpg that consumption would increase more because everyone would just drive more?
Complete bull. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.
And answer my question about if everyone drove a Prius would we use more gasoline in the U.S. or less? And what is your problem specifically with the Prius?

The brilliant scientific analysis is the modern real world right before your eyes. Blame Henry Ford for making cars cheap enough for the masses, most people do. Others blame Rockefeller for cheap oil, and that's probably justified too.
If everyone owned a Prius, gasoline consumption in the US would increase. I didn't see the point in answering your challenge, as it's just my own challenge to you flipped back to me with symbols exchanged in order to make it easier for you to deny the scientific facts.

I don't have any specific problem with the Prius and never said so, beyond my opinion that it is overhyped, an inadequate solution to oil problem (as it still relies exclusively on oil for its operation), and the high smug emissions of its owners/fanbois as you have demonstrated here. All I did was cast doubt on its vaunted gas mileage and you exploded into personal attacks and furious googling for owner opinions stating high mileage. I'm genuinely not worried about a 110bhp Prius dusting my modded WRX from a light, thank you. What I am worried about is a genuine solution to the oil problem, not a continued reliance on oil, coupled with the added problem of sulfur pollution/acid rain inherent to nickel smelting, dressed up as an alternative fuel vehicle. "It's better than an SUV" isn't enough here. We've had economic alternatives to SUVs and other gas-guzzlers for decades now. I had a CRX back in the 90s that could get 50 mpg on the highway. A decade later and more-or-less the same thing sells for more than twice as much and comes with added environmental baggage? (But hey, affluent Prius owners get to look cool to their SUV-driving friends).

I've got it Vic, you're a scientist all right, a creation scientist. Show me your scientific analysis of why if everyone drove a Prius that we would use more fuel. Not your econ 101 analysis, but a scientific analysis.
You claim to want a genuine solution to the oil problem, but dismiss an interim step that uses less oil. Should we do nothing until nuclear fusion/ hydrogen fueled cars is a reality, or should we try and conserve oil now?
That's great that you had a Honda CRX, why would you disparage a Prius which gets very similar mileage, and can carry more people and goods?
I've pointed out that sulfur emissions related to battery production are a tiny fraction of the total, with far more used to produce steel and stainless steel. Not only that, Toyota is planning a switch to Lithium-Ion batteries. And lead, used in almost all car batteries, is considered a worse polluter than nickel.
I'm not googling furiously to find links about the Toyota Prius mileage. It's very easy, actually. And every link I find states that the Prius gets 48-51 mpg. Show me where you got your information about "real world" Prius mileage of 35 mpg.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: marincounty
I don't have time to search out the information for you, but I will guess that if every car got 50 mpg we would use less gasoline. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.

Wrong. It's Econ 101 that consumption increases as efficiency improves. If you're as educated as you claimed to be, you shouldn't have to search to know that.

As for the rest of your tirade, thanks for proving my point that your got your degree in science from Internet University. Keep googling furiously!

Nice that you took econ 101, but you're saying that if every car got 50 mpg that consumption would increase more because everyone would just drive more?
Complete bull. I'm awaiting your brilliant scientific analysis.
And answer my question about if everyone drove a Prius would we use more gasoline in the U.S. or less? And what is your problem specifically with the Prius?

The brilliant scientific analysis is the modern real world right before your eyes. Blame Henry Ford for making cars cheap enough for the masses, most people do. Others blame Rockefeller for cheap oil, and that's probably justified too.
If everyone owned a Prius, gasoline consumption in the US would increase. I didn't see the point in answering your challenge, as it's just my own challenge to you flipped back to me with symbols exchanged in order to make it easier for you to deny the scientific facts.

I don't have any specific problem with the Prius and never said so, beyond my opinion that it is overhyped, an inadequate solution to oil problem (as it still relies exclusively on oil for its operation), and the high smug emissions of its owners/fanbois as you have demonstrated here. All I did was cast doubt on its vaunted gas mileage and you exploded into personal attacks and furious googling for owner opinions stating high mileage. I'm genuinely not worried about a 110bhp Prius dusting my modded WRX from a light, thank you. What I am worried about is a genuine solution to the oil problem, not a continued reliance on oil, coupled with the added problem of sulfur pollution/acid rain inherent to nickel smelting, dressed up as an alternative fuel vehicle. "It's better than an SUV" isn't enough here. We've had economic alternatives to SUVs and other gas-guzzlers for decades now. I had a CRX back in the 90s that could get 50 mpg on the highway. A decade later and more-or-less the same thing sells for more than twice as much and comes with added environmental baggage? (But hey, affluent Prius owners get to look cool to their SUV-driving friends).

I've got it Vic, you're a scientist all right, a creation scientist. Show me your scientific analysis of why if everyone drove a Prius that we would use more fuel. Not your econ 101 analysis, but a scientific analysis.
You claim to want a genuine solution to the oil problem, but dismiss an interim step that uses less oil. Should we do nothing until nuclear fusion/ hydrogen fueled cars is a reality, or should we try and conserve oil now?
That's great that you had a Honda CRX, why would you disparage a Prius which gets very similar mileage, and can carry more people and goods?
I've pointed out that sulfur emissions related to battery production are a tiny fraction of the total, with far more used to produce steel and stainless steel. Not only that, Toyota is planning a switch to Lithium-Ion batteries. And lead, used in almost all car batteries, is considered a worse polluter than nickel.
I'm not googling furiously to find links about the Toyota Prius mileage. It's very easy, actually. And every link I find states that the Prius gets 48-51 mpg. Show me where you got your information about "real world" Prius mileage of 35 mpg.

Oh FFS. I already explained to you how improved efficiency will not decrease consumption. And you call me a "creation scientist" while arguing against scientific fact.
Kindly shove it up your straw man stuffed ass, you ideologically-blinded fool. I have literally never seen such a blind moron, and I thought I'd already seen it all here. :roll: <^>

 

[BoberFett]

Just out of curiosity, what degree do you have from "studying science at one of the finest universities in the world?" Is that where you learned about scientific things like "extremely sensitive machines to detect cocaine?" Do they have an Extremely Sensitive Machine correspondence course I could take? I'd have to question the authenticity of anybody who refers to something such as a mass spectrometer as an "extremely sensitive machine."

Hello McFly, COCA-COLA, they've been selling it for decades. AFAIK they are still using coca leaves for flavoring , with the cocaine removed (supposedly). I would like to see an extremely sensitive machine used to detect cocaine test some coca cola and see if any cocaine could be detected.

 

[TheSlamma]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey
My main complaint concerning large trucks/SUVs goes beyond gas mileage however. What really irks me is that these vehicles are often chosen because the driver perceives them as "safe" (despite increased roll-over rates sans vehicle-stability control). Problem is, they're a far bigger danger to everyone else on the road. I find it incredibly selfish of people to try and protect themselves while increasing the risk to everyone around them.

I agree

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Just out of curiosity, what degree do you have from "studying science at one of the finest universities in the world?" Is that where you learned about scientific things like "extremely sensitive machines to detect cocaine?" Do they have an Extremely Sensitive Machine correspondence course I could take? I'd have to question the authenticity of anybody who refers to something such as a mass spectrometer as an "extremely sensitive machine."

Hello McFly, COCA-COLA, they've been selling it for decades. AFAIK they are still using coca leaves for flavoring , with the cocaine removed (supposedly). I would like to see an extremely sensitive machine used to detect cocaine test some coca cola and see if any cocaine could be detected.

Just for your information, I have a Bachelor of Science in Mechanical Engineering. The reason I used the phrase "extremely sensitive machines" is that I am not expert in the detection of drugs, and while familiar with mass spectrometers, I have never used one and it's possible technology has changed and different machines are used now.
And what is your area of expertise? Why don't you tell me all about the use of nickel as an alloying element in steel, or perhaps enlighten me on the different types and characteristics of stainless steels?
I question the sanity of anyone who questions the use of "extremely sensitive machine"
to describe the mass spectrometer.
And the correspondence course you wanted, it's available at Liberty University. Good Luck with that.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Just out of curiosity, what degree do you have from "studying science at one of the finest universities in the world?" Is that where you learned about scientific things like "extremely sensitive machines to detect cocaine?" Do they have an Extremely Sensitive Machine correspondence course I could take? I'd have to question the authenticity of anybody who refers to something such as a mass spectrometer as an "extremely sensitive machine."

Hello McFly, COCA-COLA, they've been selling it for decades. AFAIK they are still using coca leaves for flavoring , with the cocaine removed (supposedly). I would like to see an extremely sensitive machine used to detect cocaine test some coca cola and see if any cocaine could be detected.

OMG WTF! :laugh:

I won't ever drink Coca-Cola except to add to my liquor, but I can definitely say that they do not add coca leaves to it (and haven't since 1929 according to Snopes, while we're furiously googling and all that).

Oooh.... but I bet it's all an evil right-wing imperialist capitalist corporatist lie!! BoberFett, you evil wingnut you! Snopes doesn't tell us the truth because the evil fascist imperialists are trying to secretly poison us against communism. Luckily for marin, his tinfoil beanie allowed him to see through the lies. Like how he and his buddy Craig234 knew it was Pepsico that ordered the hit on Allende.
What would we do without them to protect us!

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Just out of curiosity, what degree do you have from "studying science at one of the finest universities in the world?" Is that where you learned about scientific things like "extremely sensitive machines to detect cocaine?" Do they have an Extremely Sensitive Machine correspondence course I could take? I'd have to question the authenticity of anybody who refers to something such as a mass spectrometer as an "extremely sensitive machine."

Hello McFly, COCA-COLA, they've been selling it for decades. AFAIK they are still using coca leaves for flavoring , with the cocaine removed (supposedly). I would like to see an extremely sensitive machine used to detect cocaine test some coca cola and see if any cocaine could be detected.

OMG WTF! :laugh:

I won't ever drink Coca-Cola except to add to my liquor, but I can definitely say that they do not add coca leaves to it (and haven't since 1929 according to Snopes, while we're furiously googling and all that).

Oooh.... but I bet it's all an evil right-wing imperialist capitalist corporatist lie!! BoberFett, you evil wingnut you! Snopes doesn't tell us the truth because the evil fascist imperialists are trying to secretly poison us against communism. Luckily for marin, his tinfoil beanie allowed him to see through the lies. Like how he and his buddy Craig234 knew it was Pepsico that ordered the hit on Allende.
What would we do without them to protect us!

Of course you are wrong again. quote: "but I can definitely say that they do not add coca leaves to it (and haven't since 1929 according to Snopes, while we're furiously googling and all that)."
but after 1904 Coca-Cola started using, instead of fresh leaves, "spent" leaves - the leftovers of the cocaine-extraction process with cocaine trace levels left over at a molecular level.[5][6] However, as cocaine is one of numerous alkaloids present in the coca leaf, it was nevertheless present in the drink. Today, the flavoring is still done with kola nuts and the "spent" coca leaf. In the United States, there is only one plant (in New Jersey) authorized by the Federal Government to grow the coca plant for Coca-Cola syrup manufacture.[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca-Cola
http://www.uic.edu/classes/osci/osci590...l%20Importation%20of%20Coca%20Leaf.htm

Let's see, they still use coca leaf as flavoring and they also grow coca for Coca-Cola syrup manufacture. Completely pwned.
Maybe there is a googling school you guys can attend?

 

[BoberFett]

Meh, I wasn't even commenting on the possibility of coca leaves in Coke. It's unlikely, but since the recipe is a closely guarded secret, who knows.

I was merely pointing out that I find it odd that anybody who claims to be have studied science at one of the world's finest universities refers to a mass spectometer as an "extremely sensitive machine." Do you think Einstein referred to Fat Man and Little Boy as "those big metal blowy uppy things?"

Edit: BTW, we all known Coke used to contain cocaine but I see nothing more than speculation that it still contains coca leaves. None of your links say anything definitive.

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Meh, I wasn't even commenting on the possibility of coca leaves in Coke. It's unlikely, but since the recipe is a closely guarded secret, who knows.

I was merely pointing out that I find it odd that anybody who claims to be have studied science at one of the world's finest universities refers to a mass spectometer as an "extremely sensitive machine." Do you think Einstein referred to Fat Man and Little Boy as "those big metal blowy uppy things?"

Edit: BTW, we all known Coke used to contain cocaine but I see nothing more than speculation that it still contains coca leaves. None of your links say anything definitive.

I told you I was a mechanical engineer, who have nothing to do with mass spectrometers.
Do you suppose Einstein could tell me all about nickel as an alloying element? No, because it wasn't in his area of expertise. Just like I wouldn't expect to know as much about relativity as Einstein.
And since you brought it up, what exactly are your scientific qualifications?
The links about coca-cola state that coca leaves are used for flavoring, and even links to the wall street journal.

 

[BigPete]

I see people posting why others don't NEED a large SUV since you can transport the same number of people in a minivan.

Does anyone ever stop to think that besides taking the kids to soccer, the family might own a camper or trailer and REQUIRE more towing capacity and not necessarily room in the vehicle?

Really, what difference does it make to anyone here what someone else is driving? Why do you care if your neighbor is a single guy with nothing to tow but drives around in a Suburban? Last time I checked this is America where people can do pretty much whatever they want. If people can afford the car payment and they can afford to fill it up great for them.

It's ridiculous to complain about what someone else is driving because you can't afford the fuel.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: marincounty
Of course you are wrong again. quote: "but I can definitely say that they do not add coca leaves to it (and haven't since 1929 according to Snopes, while we're furiously googling and all that)."
but after 1904 Coca-Cola started using, instead of fresh leaves, "spent" leaves - the leftovers of the cocaine-extraction process with cocaine trace levels left over at a molecular level.[5][6] However, as cocaine is one of numerous alkaloids present in the coca leaf, it was nevertheless present in the drink. Today, the flavoring is still done with kola nuts and the "spent" coca leaf. In the United States, there is only one plant (in New Jersey) authorized by the Federal Government to grow the coca plant for Coca-Cola syrup manufacture.[7]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coca-Cola
http://www.uic.edu/classes/osci/osci590...l%20Importation%20of%20Coca%20Leaf.htm

Let's see, they still use coca leaf as flavoring and they also grow coca for Coca-Cola syrup manufacture. Completely pwned.
Maybe there is a googling school you guys can attend?

Oh noes! I've been completely pwned by Wikipedia and a single questionable internet source! :Q

This IS in fact interesting though. You can be made to believe anything you want to believe can't you?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Meh, I wasn't even commenting on the possibility of coca leaves in Coke. It's unlikely, but since the recipe is a closely guarded secret, who knows.

I was merely pointing out that I find it odd that anybody who claims to be have studied science at one of the world's finest universities refers to a mass spectometer as an "extremely sensitive machine." Do you think Einstein referred to Fat Man and Little Boy as "those big metal blowy uppy things?"

Edit: BTW, we all known Coke used to contain cocaine but I see nothing more than speculation that it still contains coca leaves. None of your links say anything definitive.

Don't apologize. The story that Coca-Cola gets their coca leaves from Stepan (which is approved by the DEA to supply coca to the pharmaceuticals) is a typical urban legend among the internet socialist crowd. Here's a typical example of their tinfoil beanie logic. Cliff notes: Daddy Bush is the Great Satan and Coca-Cola is the CIA's grand conspiracy to hook the world on cocaine. It's a great read!

The only thing that pisses me off about that kind of garbage is that the socialist tinfoil beanie babies that write it dare call themselves liberals, and try to trick the politically naive into believing that that kind of nonsense is actually liberalism!

And note that in the following post to yours, he insults you (through implication) by claiming that mass spectrometers aren't in his scientific field, but he had had absolutely no trouble at all countering proven economic theories to me earlier in this thread. :roll:

Here's a tip for marin: mechanical engineers aren't scientists.

 

[CyberDuck]

Originally posted by: BigPete

Really, what difference does it make to anyone here what someone else is driving? Why do you care if your neighbor is a single guy with nothing to tow but drives around in a Suburban? Last time I checked this is America where people can do pretty much whatever they want. If people can afford the car payment and they can afford to fill it up great for them.

It's ridiculous to complain about what someone else is driving because you can't afford the fuel.

Hi BigPete, im not an American, but i might be one of those who sometimes complain about some americans lack of decency. Its not about what one can afford and one cannot afford, its a question of moral. There is a limited ammount of resorces on the planet, and when someone single drive around in a suburban he is clearly wasting the common resources of the planet as a whole and should be in my view looked down upon. In my country he is taxed through his nose so the country gets back more than he squanders. He may stupidly continue his wasteful life if he so chooses, but at least fewer will misuse resources this way.

Regards

Jostein

 

[kurt454]

I love my 2007 Silverado. I don't work out of my truck, but I race a Drag Car for a hobby. It has to be towed to the track. I am not going to give up my lifestyle because someone else says I have to drive a Honda Civic.