From: bqueiser@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Brian J Queiser)
Subject: Re: Impact is DEAD [was: Electric Vehicles]
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 15:13:56 GMT

wallich@ncd.com (Ken Wallich) writes:

>>There are people that believe in EVs no matter what the price.  They are
>>the true "eco-freaks," blinded by some passionate fixation to save the
>>planet at any cost.  I'm sorry for being so inflammatory, but my comments
>>weren't necessarily aimed at this audience.

>So, what you're saying is we should only "save the planet" if it is
>convienient for us and if it doesn't cost us anything?

Did I say that?  Did I say that?  Did I say that?  Are you looking at me?

>                                                          Yeah, that'll
>work.  I'm sure we can clean up our water supplies and clear our
>particulate infested air while still allowing everyone to drive their
>very own fossil-fueled machine 70mph in air-conditioned comfort.  We
>don't need reduce our use of mass-produced power, even if most of us
>*could* install a solar system for less than $5000 that would meet our
>needs, since that would not be convienient, and would cause me to
>change my carefully constructed habits.  Nope, much better to stick
>with what you know, stay in that routine, after all, the government
>won't let it get *much* worse.

You see, to me, if you're going to save the planet, you're going to have
to do it one small step at a time.  A journey of a thousand steps begins
with just one.  EVs are a nice idea, but a strong majority of the people
are not yet willing to give up what they have for something that would
essentially lower their standard of living.  Plus, these vehicles don't
necessarily have a margin of benefit over their internal combustion
engine counterparts; if they do, it is highly debatable.
It's fairly obvious that the technology is lacking, the market is lacking,
the efficiency is lacking, and the benefit is lacking.  These issues are
hardly ever addressed by the environmental elite.  They focus like a
laser beam (shudder) on something, like spotted owls and EVs, and refuse
to listen to talk about the overall efficiency, the overall practicality,
the overall benefits and pitfalls.

Electric vehicles don't have the range and performance that a majority of
the buyers want.  They don't compete as well with internal combustion engines
when it comes to overall efficiency as some people think.  They don't
save our planet from much, if any, additional pollution; in fact, some think
they could aggravate the situation.  They don't provide comparable comfort
and safety.  They don't solve the problem.

Maybe in a few days, months, years, or decades, that'll all change.

>I was just floored at the implication behind this statement.  Only
>'freaks' feel passionately about wanting to save the planet? And I
>suppose "normal people" will "do what they can", saying things like:
>
>"I don't have to go extremely out of my way or sacrifice some luxury.
>They don't cost me anything; in fact, usually I save money."

You edit quite well.  I didn't say "only 'freaks' feel passionately about
wanting to save the planet."  Are you the perfect example of someone who
blindly sees only what he wants to see?  Blindly follows his feelings,
however misguided?  Blindly reads what he wants to?  Do you not just have
a soapbox...do you have a mission?  I doubt it.  Just read it again.

I don't feel especially proud when I recycle an aluminum can.  I know
that it'll save a lot of time, money, and energy because it's ore won't
have to extracted from bauxite.  It won't go to a landfill where it will
sit for centuries.  It won't cost me a red cent to save it and put it into
a separate bin.  I think it's an idea that works.

Yes, I am a normal person.  Yes, I do what I can.  Yes, I do what makes
sense to me.  Yes, I think I've earned my luxuries (if you can call them
that).  No, the weight of the world doesn't fall on me.

>                                                   I personally feel
>it is all of our responsibility to do *something* to reduce our
>consumption, and when we've gotten comfortable with that, to reduce
>something else.

I agree.

>But I guess that's just me...

Not necessarily.  Don't be so cynical.

Regards,

Brian

bqueiser@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am the engineer, I can choose K.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Department of Engineering Mechanics
Ohio State University
Columbus, OH
Newsgroups: talk.environment