Axeon electric vehicle
By Bob Difley
On Wednesday, 18 scientific organizations wrote Congress to reaffirm that there was a consensus among scientists on the validity of global warming. They cited melting ice caps and the world’s oceans this past summer hitting their highest monthly recorded temperatures.
On Thursday the Pew Research center for the People & the Press released a poll of 1,500 adults that found that 57% believe there is strong scientific evidence that the Earth is warming up, and has been over the past few decades. But that majority figure was not seen as a positive moment to global warming believers. Why?
The reason is that the percentage of people—according to the poll–believing in global warming has dropped from 77% just since 2006. That’s a 20-point drop in believers.
“The priority that people give to pollution and environmental concerns and a whole host of other issues is down because of the economy and because of the focus on other things,” said Andrew Kohut, the director of the research center, which conducted the poll from Sept. 30 to Oct. 4. “When the focus is on other things, people forget and see these issues as less grave.”
However, half of all the respondents said they supported establishing limits on the emission of greenhouse gasses—even if it meant higher energy prices. Three-quarters of Democrats believe the evidence of a warming planet is solid, and nearly half believe the problem is serious. But, far fewer Republican and conservative Democrats see the problem as grave as they did last year.
It’s interesting how an issue like global warming can become a political one. Progressives pushing for action against CO2 emissions, conservatives questioning its scientific validity. One hundred years ago, the shoes were on different feet. Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican, campaigned vigorously for protection of the nation’s forests, establishing and protecting the first national forests—and was fought all the way by mining, ranching, business, and railroad interests—and Democrats.
The same week this Pew report comes out, Bill Ford, speaking on behalf of his auto company—definitely a member of “big business”—said in a speech to “The Business of Plugging In” conference: “We stand at the threshold of a revolution. This isn’t just an R&D experiment for us. We have real vehicles. We’ve placed big bets. And they start coming off the line next year.” And this from a car company–along with most of the others–that fought electric vehicles until they knew they couldn’t win. After all, nearly 40% of a car manufacturer’s profits came from maintenance and repairs, of which electric vehicles require little, not to mention that they are quicker, cleaner, quieter, cheaper to run, and don’t require shoveling money into OPECs pockets.
In addition to announcing that Ford’s first electric battery-powered commercial vehicle—a movement to the size vehicle needed for RVs–would go on sale to fleet customers next year, he also stressed that the automobile industry cannot make the shift to a reduced carbon emissions technology alone and called for a concerted effort for government to build and offer incentives to private industry to build the infrastructure these vehicles will require.
So here is big business touting green tech, lowering CO2 emissions, and reducing fossil fuel usage, while the general public is backing away from those issues. I wonder if, in reality, the cash strapped, unemployed or under employed, hanging-on-by-their-fingertips masses are more concerned with initially paying higher prices for green vehicles, paying more or higher energy taxes, or making even more sacrifices that may be necessary to bring EVs into the mainstream, than in what may happen to the planet a decade or so from now by clinging to the fossil fuel economy of the last century.
Pingback: my url
Bob Reising
Whenever I see articles rebutting climate change they are authored by old white men who will soon be dead. Yes, I believe you don’t really want anything done because you will only see the down-side and no up-side. If your children plan on having children then you should feel a bit of concern. If not, you are in the clear. My RV gets 6MPG. Every dollar I spend on fuel is not spent on whatever your company made before you retired and got fat. My health insurance is 15K a year. I don’t buy a new RV very often because all the money going out the door for other things. Would I like to see my dollars go towards something I would enjoy, like a “green” RV? You bet. Ain’t going to happen. Nothing, nothing will change while greedy people run this country. And why did you let yourself get that way?
GMAs
Ahhh the bottom line …. on global warming…. its not about the money but control…
If you doubt the arrogance, you haven’t seen that Newsweek cover story that declared the global warming debate over. Consider: If Newton’s laws of motion could, after 200 years of unfailing experimental and experiential confirmation, be overthrown, it requires religious fervor to believe that global warming — infinitely more untested, complex and speculative — is a closed issue.
But declaring it closed has its rewards. It not only dismisses skeptics as the running dogs of reaction, i.e., of Exxon, Cheney and now Klaus. By fiat, it also hugely re-empowers the intellectual left.
For a century, an ambitious, arrogant, unscrupulous knowledge class — social planners, scientists, intellectuals, experts and their left-wing political allies — arrogated to themselves the right to rule either in the name of the oppressed working class (communism) or, in its more benign form, by virtue of their superior expertise in achieving the highest social progress by means of state planning (socialism).
Two decades ago, however, socialism and communism died rudely, then were buried forever by the empirical demonstration of the superiority of market capitalism everywhere from Thatcher’s England to Deng’s China, where just the partial abolition of socialism lifted more people out of poverty more rapidly than ever in human history.
Just as the ash heap of history beckoned, the intellectual left was handed the ultimate salvation: environmentalism. Now the experts will regulate your life not in the name of the proletariat or Fabian socialism but — even better — in the name of Earth itself.
Environmentalism is not about the environment. If the hoaxers really believed that CO2 is harmful, they would be pushing nuclear energy. Profiteers like Al Gore are in it for the money. As for bureaucrats and their lieutenants in the media: the global warming lie promises to deliver absolute power, just as communism did for Stalin and Mao
GMAS
Ahhhh now bob.. now the real question is… where does the heat come from… you talk of global warming.. well wooo you like to illuminate us as to where the heat comes from??? If you think its man made.. ahhhhh best think again… here is a clue.. go out on a 125 deg day.. stand their and try to detect where the heat is coming from.. oh you mean that big ball of fire in the sky… welllll…noooooowwwww…
If ‘n we wanted to get real scientific we could ask the people who know.. just how much heat were getting today (more so) than we got last year… ahhhhh no fair using the NASA probes on mars to say… hey they used to be like us.. … when we had our ice age… (sun was not so big) but, now that its getting bigger (yep 6 miles bigger today than it was LAST YEAR) Mars was like earth they recoonnnn… 😀
So… now lets see.. did man cause the sun to get bigger.. did man cause the solar flairs to become sun spots… etc etc.. etc… Yep… I’d say the big yellow ball is the source of global warming.. and then environmental nazi’s should be out getting the government to do something about it… after all its destroying THEIR enviornment… and probably want NASA to put a big umbrilla up their so that in the day time we can have shade and keep old sol from cooking their brains out… 🙂
Would you care to comment on that section of the global warming… oh ya and while your at it… please show figures of how much CO a eruption normally provides .. but, wait a min.. if you go to the bug and bunny group they will tell you that TERMITES.. yep them little buggers… actually contrubitue more co to the atmo than man or any other source does… YEARLY… ops… well now to go stamp out termites… huh… look out they may be lurking in your RV their bob… and awaiting the signal from the big cheeze to attack … ohhhhh revenge of the termites… 😀 I am sure that will keep you up and buring the keyboard all night long…
By the way how is the “I am off the grid article coming… can we expect to see pictures of your system also… but, remember winter is coming.. and no fair using the propane… 😉 😉
Joe Spann
You lost me when you quoted the UN as a reliable source. YOU made this political. MIT recently published a paper debunking Global Warming. The Southern Ice Cap is increasing approximately the same as the Northern is shrinking.
I wanted practical RV info here. I will be canceling my subscription.
Bob Difley
Thanks Tom. An interesting and, as it appears to me, a fair appraisal of what the numbers actually mean, and how statistics can be bent to whatever position you want to take. It will be interesting to see how those who reject global warming and instead accept global cooling will respond. Nothing of the magnitude of this issue can be an easy decision, or 100% sure. If only everybody would look at all the data and studies available, examine it themselves, read the peer reviews, etc. we might be better able to deal with events such as global warming without politicizing it.
How about this idea. All of you that have above expressed contempt for anyone that thinks that the global warming issue is valid, take the time to read the article Tom Hargreaves mentions in his comment. Here is the link again, reduced to a Tiny URL: http://tinyurl.com/yjta28v. Then log back in again and offer your honest, thought out, reasoned response or rebuttal. Thanks.
And thanks to Tom for offering this.
A. William Walker
Tom Hargreaves,
So what’s your point? Do you have the usual cause/effect relationship explanation that we would expect? We are looking for an adult discussion here.
You know, like what is your hypothesis, and what is your conclusion and what is your proof? Or are you just trying out your new internet connection?
Please don’t cop out of a grown-up conversation by sending us off to some URL to read stuff. That’s just… lazy. We expect you to read it, digest it, paraphrase it, critique it cite it, but just don’t throw the URL over the wall like a grenade and leave. Geez!
Tom Hargreaves
Regarding the recent “global cooling” hoax, this just in:
AP IMPACT: Statisticians reject global cooling
By SETH BORENSTEIN
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON — Have you heard that the world is now cooling instead of warming? You may have seen some news reports on the Internet or heard about it from a provocative new book.
Only one problem: It’s not true, according to an analysis of the numbers done by several independent statisticians for The Associated Press.
[See the rest of the article at www dot ajc dot com/news/nation-world/ap-impact-statisticians-reject-174088 dot html]
Rich D.
Let me get this right: So now the electric company (the one that tells us to shut off our air conditioning on hot days) will be responsible for fueling our cars. Will they tell us when to drive and when we can’t? All the while the green nuts keep having them make electricity with fossil fuels because we are not as smart as the French who produce 90% of their electricity with nuclear energy.
You can get 18 “scientific” agencies to agree on anything. Man made global warming is the biggest hoax ever portrayed on the public. All to line someones pockets. Don’t you remember the late 70’s and early 80’s when the same nuts were pushing global cooling.
William Walker
GMAS, I think you may have a great suggestion. What Difley needs is to get some practical experience in support of what he writes about in order to dramatically improve the quality of this blog. He writes about theories that have as many detractors as supporters, but he does not acknowledge both. Therefore, he has very little credibility with most of us. His hypothetical future-of-energy predictions are often unsupported by acceptable facts, and sometimes have dubious references, and that contributes to all this negative energy that we are seeing on this blog. Generally speaking, he’s merely bloviating, and creating animosity in a most amateur way, without considering the opinions, ideas and experience of others. His way, his conclusions, his pet issues in his pet perspective, and no other! Difley is tone deaf to other opinions and conclusions.
So let’s band together to help Bob improve his blog. We suspect he has a relationship of some sort with Brian Brawdy, since Brian has interviewed Bob in an official capacity of some sort. Now, Brawdy is not only entertaining, but he has practical experience with actually using technology, and therefore, he’s credible. Bob is not. We see that every time he puts out his blathering on his blog. Look at the bulk of responses. He’s losing people with his intolerant, unyeilding position. You can’t function effectively with other people that way. Yet, he can construct sentences, punctuate accurately and spell correctly. Let’s not waste that. I propose we ask that Brawdy take Bob under his wing, maybe take the lead position. Brawdy could do the research that we all respect, and Difley could be the behind the scenes editor and counterpoint sounding board to Brawdy’s lead. It could make for a productive blog in contrast to what we’ve seen here. Plus, Brawdy knows how to include video, so that would be a net improvement here.
Are you guys with me?
GMAs
Hey Bob…
If your so gun ho about solar and save the earth… then how come…….
You don’t change your 5th wheel over to SOLAR ONLY .. and report back to us in a year … remember you can’t tap into the public power… generate power by genarator or any other means that is considered NORMAL….
I would like you to do a running article on that while your out boondocking… remember no propane.. only SOLAR to heat, cool and power your dwelling for the whole year… if it gets to freezing… you only can depend on solar… if its sweltering out.. only solar… and if you want to keep the stores cool..ahhhh solar only their bob… computers , TV, etc… powered only by solar…
I will be looking forward to hearing about the adventures you have during the year… and the leadership you provide in showing us all how solar power is the way of the future…
Ok so we will let you have two batteries to keep things going… but only two… 600 amp hour ones… for night time useage… thats it…
So you up to it Bob??? or should we send you your chicken wings… 🙂
GMAs
HERE WE GO AGAIN… MORE ELECTRIC DRIBBLE AND TRIPE
Bob.. come on .. Geeeeezzzzzz we have been though this .. the horse is dead.. .and you lost… big time… so can we get back to RV’n… or boondocking… or something that is more useable than just taking up space with needless trolling for heated emails…. you still need to answer the orginal ones… or are you ignoring them my friend… dosxx
Ya all 18 come from the land fo fuits and nuts too… Just remember its all about the money.. and they will be un-employed if congress doesn’t tickel them with more…
Al got his NO-BELL .. (reminds me of the chicken/rooster joke) so he is done… making a impression… but its these other leaches that are still on the payroll that we should kick off… who are still wanting theirs… while their buddys sink in the economic mire… 😀
Lowell
Hello Bob.
I see that you are still drinking the Al Gore coolade!.
Global warming would be a good thing here in the NW so we can actually grow grapes. My records show a cooling since around 1998 for the Olympic Penninsula of Washington and the Univ. of WA at Mount vernon confirms same.
Even if we had global warming there is little or no evidence that it is caused by CO2 generated by humanity.
Check out the people who benifit from this hair brained idea….. Al Gore, and some scientist that get federal grants plus all of the nut cases in the UN that was the USA to be just another Third World Country!!!
Drill for oil and gas and develope more Nuc power plants and hydro plants
The nuts in the NW want to take down our dams for the salmon instead of adding fish ladders. You greenies have got it all wrong!
Nick
The thinking of these “believers” is the epitome of closed mindedness on this matter. There is no conclusive proof that warming is happening or caused by man. The planet has been in a cooling mode for at least 10 years and of course this info is simply ignored by those willing to surrender their freedom to the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on a gullible public. Follow the money (Algore, et. al.) and the grab for power (most politicians) and you might discover the truth about warming. Some of you are willing to surrender your freedom to folks that can’t even predict tomorrow’s weather or computer models that are fixed – what bilge.
Al William Walker
Tom Hargreaves,
Such sarcasm! You claim that those who disagree with your conclusions must certainly not be open minded? Your position on that is the very definition of closed-minded!
I’m getting pretty sick of intolerant guys like you and young Bob Difley jumping to conclusions that guys like me and others somehow haven’t thought through your pet issues.
How dare you then accuse any of us of being not open-minded!
Further, you’ve assumed that some of us have somehow overlooked the obvious facts that there are changes to the global climate, including melting of ice caps and glaciers, and some increase in average global air and water temperatures. Or that we somehow missed the possibility of rising levels in the oceans. We don’t all dispute those conditions. What we dispute is what all the possible causes are, and what the solutions should be, and mostly your claims that we should just blindly adopt your conclusions.
That’s what the debate is all about, if you care to open up your mind and listen
Joeseph
Tom –
You might be shocked. I can only speak for myself, but I’m a mid-30’s guy with 3 young kids who just got back from a 10 day RV trip. I also have a pretty strong background in hard science including a couple of published papers.
Arguing that everyone here is an old fogey who ignores the need to do something ‘for the children’ gave me a nice chuckle. Thanks.
Howard
G. Shea may be correct. It is easy enough to make a difference right now with our diesel RVs by putting “Bio-Willy” or other plant based bio-diesel fuel in the tanks. It costs a bit more and isn’t available everywhere (and you can even make your own if you have a source of used fryer grease.) A young man proved this a few years ago by driving his motor home coast to coast using fuel processed from donated restaurant waste.
However, in the long run, we may not be able to grow enough fuel. Natural gas and electric vehicles charged by wind and solar farms and brand new nuclear plants are probably the best way to get ourselves employed again and independent of traditional fossil fuels purchased with hard earned treasure from folks who simply don’t like us.
Tom Hargreaves
Such open minded people! It appears to me that the naysayers either don’t have kids or don’t care what their children’s children will probably be facing, and what that means for the continued viability of RVing in 10 to 20 years. ‘Course, since a lot of us RV types are older, we may not be alive in 10 or 20 years, so we can safely ignore all these scientifically obtained facts concerning melting glaciers in Greenland, Chile, and even Glacier National Park, and ignore the melting of the Arctic sea ice and Antarctic ice shelves. I DO want as much information as I can get so I can start planning for how I am going to continue doing what I love on into 2030 and beyond if I am physically able. Y’all can whine about this all being political if you wish, but it is only political because a few people make a lot of money instilling fear and terror in their listeners as they push their agitational propaganda out over the airwaves.
I applaud you, Bob Difley, what you are doing takes a lot of courage. Hang in there!
Nick
Ol’ Bob used the correct word, “believer”, when writing about global warming or climate change or whatever they choose to call it today since to guys like Difley this is religion, based less upon fact than upon faith in their leftist religion.
Why do they allow you to contribute to an RV site.
J Jones
Congratulations! You have taken the greatest HOAX in world history and dropped it on a site that I actually enjoyed. Now we have watermelons (communists wrapped in the “green” movement) arguing with people who actually have a clue and don’t buy into the climate change crap (used to be global warming but now that the earth is in a cooling cycle they can’t call it that anymore)
I will continue to work toward earning enough for my 40’ DP but I won’t be researching here anymore. Once a site goes political it never recovers.
Its all just Bread and Circuses…..look it up
My subscription is cancelled
al ro
stick to RV issues or you will lose me
G Shea
For large vehicles, CNG is the way to go to reduce pollutants as proved by Transit, truck and even taxi companies making the switch. While it is not emmision free, it is far better than gas or diesel, is abundant right here in the good ol US (over 200,000 trillion gallons!) and cars that use it get 70 mpg. What is the cost per gallon? Less than 1.00 per gallon. So why hasn’t our wonderful enviromentaly hip president, congress or Al Gore endoresed CNG? Because they are crooks with an agenda, Al Gore will become a billionare if cap and tax passes. Watch Who killed the electric car and one will see why the adoption of alternative energy is going to be slowed at every turn by the corrupt crooks that run this contry. We need CNG and electric cars not for the Global warming myth, but to get us off foreign oil (which funds our enemies), but every president since Carter has promised to do so (including Obama) and none have delivered (even those who have been awarded Nobel Peace prizes for NOTHING). If we want these fuels for real reasons (cost and better air quality, we will have to demand them.) CNG cars are available right now, today. Fuel is available localy in most major cities, from the Transit, and Taxi companies who have wisley made the switch. Why don’t we all?
concerned
Eighteen scientific organizations writing to Congress reaffirming there was a consensus among scientists on the validity of global warming. Citing melting ice caps etc. Of course they contracted Congress that is where their paycheck comes from. About 70 billion dollars so far to support the current “religion” about people causing global warming. If your paycheck depended on getting more money for “research” on global warming isn’t that where you would write? With all that money and all that “research” you would think that there would be some some data that they could point to that shows the connection between people and “global warming”. Unfortunately they can’t as from what I have read there is none to date. It is interesting that 3,000 scientists recently objected to the idea that people have anything to do with global warming. And they were painted as kooks even though they are well trained in the sciences, but do not accept the current mantra. Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring gas that is required for plants to grow.
Anyone who disagrees with the current administration and the path that they are taking is considered a “nut case” and are no longer able to receive public funds to do research on the other side. There appears to be no peer review process when the data does not fit the current accepted thought. Those who do peer review are independent persons who offer their time and service free. Recently much of the current data was reviewed by an individual who is on the inside and found that the data did not fit the conclusions and he was told to keep it quiet and not to mention it outside the organization. That is not honest or scientific.
On a recent trip to Alaska we talked to a Park Ranger to took us to the toe of a glacier and explained that it was in about the same position as it was about 400,000 years ago. It had also been in that same spot at least one time prior to that. So much for people causing the ice cap to melt. So much for SUVs being a global problem. The ice caps have been studied for many years and they cycle in both directions and have been doing that for many years even in this case 400,000 years and will still be doing it 400,000 years from now.
The drop in the “religion of global warming” apparently has to do with the fact that people are seeing through the “scientific” data that is being presented and it has been clear enough to more and more people that it is a hoax of the worst kind driven by money. The impending ice age did not generate enough “research” funds so now many have jumped on the band wagon of “global warming”. In order to think that there is something to all the hype and the fact that the temperatures have been falling for the last decade a panic change to “climate change” was necessary. I have a difficult time accepting the idea that scientists tell us that they can predict the weather far into the future when they can’t even get the evening weather report accurately. As for the numbers of doubters you can surf the net and come up with almost any number that you want to. The old adage about statistics lying comes to mind. As for the respondents supporting establishing limits on green house gases it sounds like more of the “picking the data” that fits your argument. With many billions of dollars used to hire scientists to research and convince us all that there is a relationship between “global warming” and people what data do you suppose they would use. Certainly not any data that shows the opposite effect. It appears that much of the data is so bad that our ex-vice president had his little show banned in England because of the glaring lies included in it. Recently the “hockey stick” data was shown to be incorrect also. Time after time those who volunteer to peer review the data are finding that the data does not support the conclusions.
I feel that Teddy Roosevelt preserving public lands for all of us has nothing to do with the “global warming” argument and was just good planning on his part. Nothing to do with his political persuasion.
As for the automobile business it is very clear that they have attempted to design and build cars as demanded by the government, cars that people don’t want, and as a result they have had serious problems with selling them. The government needs to back out of the automobile business except in areas of safety and let the free enterprise system do what it does best. The market should be the bottom line. As for electric cars I feel that they are nothing but a passing fancy except for short trips around town. In addition to that the power grid cannot handle the additional loads that would be required if they ever were demanded by government. The problem of running additional power lines is already a huge problem with a “not in my back yard” mentality.
As for electric heavy duty vehicles it is apparent that they could only be used in very limited ways because of battery technology. I don’t see lots of progress being made in that direction because of the extreme power requirements needed for such vehicles. It is as though people do no understand the amount of power contained in gasoline and diesel and think all you have to do is throw a few batteries and presto you have a heavy duty vehicle. I personally do not think that you will ever see a battery operated vehicle carrying 85,000 lbs over the mountains regardless of the technology used. As for RVs they fall is the same position as others have pointed out.
It is evident to me that this has become a religious issue as most of what is being pawned off as science is done in “faith” and is another way for leaders to control the lives of their citizens. It is time to wake up to what is happening and let our leaders know that they are going the wrong direction.
In my opinion people are backing away from all the “green” changes because they have had time to look at what we have buying with all our billions of tax dollars and realize they have been duped. Is conservation important, of course. Because most of us are relatively poor we have been doing that all our lives. There seems to be a movement afoot to make us even poorer with no visible benefit that I can see. It is very apparent that the government needs to get out of the way and let the system continue to work in ways that have made the United States of America the strongest and most desirable place to live on the planet. Are there some problems, of course but I have still to see a government solution that is really effective in solving problems.
“We are from the government and we are here to help” comes to mind.
Darthvagrant
Bob:
Geez! More factoids! QUOTE:”After all, nearly 40% of a car manufacturer’s profits came from maintenance and repairs,”
.
Could you reveal a legitimate, authoritative, source of such a statement?
.
Let’s then hear it for the cost of the myriad of electronics circuitry maintenance, battery replacement, upkeep of traction motors, etc. and allied costs of maintaining an “electric vehicle”.
Jon A Anderson
Whoops! Transposed the letters, sorry Bob Difley.
Jon A Anderson
I rise to the defense of Bob Dilfey. I am an RV wannabe (soontobe) who subscribes to and reads all of the RV stuff I can find, the better to learn about the lifestyle and equipment. And I found Bob’s article interesting. RVs need to become more fuel efficient, we need to wean ourselves away from traditional fossil fuels in this country, and any research into the development of larger vehicles that can be plugged in is interesting and, I think, positive. Thanks, Bob. Keep exploring the new frontiers.
Best regards.
Al William Walker
Bob, Bob, Bob. Slow down son. Your arguments are clearly not persuasive to those reading this piece. You should have paid more attention in school, young man. I’ve told you this at least twice before, and you still persist in taking a political position here, when that is not what readers appreciate or want from this blog. How many times do we have to tell you?!
Now, since you’re so willing to give unsolicited advice on what WE all should think and believe, let me tell you a few things that YOU should believe in and live by.
First, you should never live on, around, or within 500 miles of a geologic fault line. You will undoubtedly become a casualty at some point that I will be asked to pay for. If you currently live in such an area, you should immediately move to an area that I approve of. You should also never live within two hundred miles of any known wildfire zone for the same reason. Also, a great looming danger is the probability of an asteroid strike, predicted by many astronomers, so you should spend much more time worrying what YOU are going to do to avoid it and what YOU are going to do to assist those affected by it.
Next, you should never grow facial hair, as that is a known breeding ground for bacteria, and it tends to catch food particles and atmospheric debris that will spread to others. This is an immediate danger!
You should not wear a ball cap, since that tends to encourage greasy hair which captures airborne detritis, and spreads uncontrollably whenever the ball cap is moved. Always wear a collared shirt, as that is the socially accepted casual torso attire for men where I come from, rather than cheap old T-shirts.
As well, you should only own a Class A RV, since those are known by many to move many more pounds per horsepower, and thus reduce the carbon footprint. You should receive only over-the-air television signals, since cable and satellite use valuable resources to manufacture and generate signal receiving and transmitting equipment.
Do not EVER buy bottled water, since you would be wasting valuable natural resources in not only the manufacture of it, but also in its disposal. Don’t buy any prepackaged grocery items for the same reason. Buy only bulk produce that has been shipped by mule train.
I have a littany of other things I want to tell you about that you should believe in and techniques on how you should live. But at the moment, I don’t want to waste the time of others who have better things to do with their time.
Joeseph
On the subject and science of global warming –
There is an interesting chapter emerging in the debate as a group of scientists who do not debate the cause or concern about global warming do think that focusing on CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions is absolutely the wrong way to go about solving the problem.
Their idea is that we need to engineer global cooling by simulating the eruption of a large volcano, a natural process well know to cool the earth.
http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/AheadoftheCurve/simple-solutions-fix-global-problems-hurricanes-global-warming/Story?id=8890846&page=2
Sounds crazy? I think so too, but not as crazy as convincing the world to abandon all of their primary energy sources within a few years time.
Joeseph
Bob-
The only time you mention the word RV is in a paragraph about Ford’s 2010 electric commercial vehicle. You go on to say that it shows a movement towards the size vehicle needed for RV’s.
The magic all electric vehicle that Ford is introducing has a range of 100 miles and can carry 1750lbs. While I guess that’s bigger than a Prius, even you have to admit that it’s not even close to the size of even the smallest RV. A traditional gas minivan can carry more.
The best electric chassis I know about that could serve as a base for any RV is the Smith Electric Vehicles Newton (this is the company partnering with Ford for their electric commercial vehicle). That has a top speed of 50mph, a top range of 150 miles, and carries around 16,000lbs. Good luck selling an RV with those specs.
It’s not uncaring people, corporate greed, or denials about global warming that’s stopping large electric vehicles from hitting the market. It’s the laws of physics.
One has to wonder if you’re not so desperate to manufacture some sort of link to RV’s that your zeal over runs the actual details.
Bob Difley
And George, are you ever going to stop asking me the question about water vapor on all my posts? I’ve answered you twice (why I didn’t stop after once, I don’t know) and that should be enough.
Bob Difley
mcep – In the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report scientists conclude that “warming of the climate system is unequivocal, as is now evident from observations of increases in global average air and ocean temperatures, widespread melting of snow and ice, and rising global average sea level” and, furthermore, they conclude with “very high confidence (at least a 9 out of 10 chance of being correct) that the globally averaged net effect of human activities since 1750 has been one of warming” of the Earth’s climate system. You can choose not to place any credence on the United Nation’s IPCC study, but I would tend to believe that study more than the rantings of global warming deniers. But as I’ve said over and over. There is not 100% proof that global warming is caused by man or that we can do anything about it. That is the way science works. It is all but impossible to make such statements as “100% positive” when dealing with subjects such as this. But if you, and the other deniers, intend to wait for such proof, instead of taking steps that could help to reduce C02 emissions now–JUST IN CASE IT IS THE TRUTH–you are taking a chance that I do not care to take. And all the steps, except that it will cost to take these steps, all will benefit the earth, from reducing our fossil fuel demand, cleaning the air and water, and keeping our energy expenditures at home. It baffles me that you would want anything else.
Darthvagrant
Let’s get waaaaayy off subject, and observe something that concerns me 10X more than global warming. In December 1999 gold was spot at $283.41 per oz. As of this month, 2009, it is $1056.00.
.
Lesson to learn: Gold hasn’t so much increased as the dollar has shrunk in buying power. NO ONE wants the USD any more! It’s actually becoming difficult to find gold (to buy) even at today’s inflated prices!
.
Yeah-I said this was off-subject. Personally, this really scares me. There are issues other than “global warming” that should be getting at least equal attention.
George Miller
Bob, Do you dispute that 95% of global warming is caused by water vapor? George Miller
mcep
Bob,
You sound like a true believer! The basis of your beliefs however, might be in question. The champions on global warming may very well have ulterior motives in mind! Al Gore for one – made something like $100 million of his investments following his questionable movie. As one reader commented, the cyclical warming stopped in 1998, with the highest recorded temps. After that point, the earth has been cooling – per scientific FACT. Not based on a collection of consensus from various so-called scientists, as the global warming myth seems to be. The scientists that study nothing but weather, climate, land mass temperature and water thermal temperature changes over time, ie. cycles, have noted nothing out of the ordinary. Perhaps there is less interest because people are wising up!
Bob Difley
Ron says “you still need fossil fuels to make the electricity for these cars, RV’s etc.”
You’ve missed the point. You DON’T need fossil fuels for cars and RVs. Solar, wind, hydro and wave generated energy, geo thermal, there are all kinds of ways–even including natural gas, which IS a fossil fuel, but is plentiful domestically–to get us off foreign oil and to greatly reduce our need for fossil fuels. But as long as people think that global warming is not a serious issue, and don’t support a government that will produce incentives and mandates to rapidly develop these alternative energy sources, we will continue muddle along accomplishing nothing towards alternative energy gaining scale enough to go mainstream.
Darthvagrant
QUOTE:”Since most motor homes,trailers and 5th wheels have large roofs, is it possible to put solar collectors on them to keep an unending source of recharge current to batteries to operate the vehicle?”
.
Absolutely possible! Spend a mere 200K on solar panels…uh-oh…not that much room on top of an RV. OK, fill the entire roof area with what WILL fit, potential scenario- RV sits in the sun for 30 days, generates enough “electricity” to make it for the next 500 yards. Repeat. Repeat. From Detroit to Chicago in a measly 2.5 years.
Sue
I happen to accept the scientic evidence that global warming is a fact. But whether you accept it or not, why would you want to continue contributing to the unnatural gases that undeniably pollute our air? To say nothing of paying for gasoline if there is a viable alternative available?
Since most motor homes,trailers and 5th wheels have large roofs, is it possible to put solar collectors on them to keep an unending source of recharge current to batteries to operate the vehicle? Is anyone working on those kinds of batteries/technologies?
Ron
You really need to stick to RVing.
We’ll probably live thru this dilemma too and you still need fossil fuels to make the electricity for these cars, RV’s etc.
John Ahrens
Let me qualify my comment above by pointing out that the jury is still out on how much, if any of the climate change of the past 40 years (remember the “Coming Ice Age” panic of the mid-70’s?).
Also, there was the “Silent Spring” of the 60’s and the Club of Rome and the “Population Bomb” of the 70’s. None of those dire warnings came true. Not to say that dire things don’t happen. Extinction events have happened in the past, and will happen again.
Because of the coincidence of the temperature increase from about 1975-1998 with normal temperature cycles, we can say that a significant part of that global warming was normal. Some may not be, but we can’t say for sure how much.
Let’s not panic, and destroy our way of life, so we can “save” it.
Bob Difley
John – John, to cherry pick individual items here and there in order to discredit the educated opinions and study of climate experts on the possibility of man-made global warming is a sign of ignorance of the scientific method. No one knows for sure, or can prove, that climate change is or is not a product of man’s activities, not even the experts. It is all a process of ongoing scientific study, peer review, and computer modeling–and making intelligent hypotheses about the most likely scenario, and the possibilities or odds of those scenarios happening. If you want to wait until ALL scientists agree one way or the other, or until you are convinced, you will be waiting until the opportunitiy to do something and take preventative steps–all of which will benefit the earth, whether or not the scenarios prove out–are long gone. For you to suggest that YOU know that global warming is nonsense is not worthy of you.
Bob Difley
Joseph and Walt – If the development of electric vehicles large enough and powerful enough to build RVs on, eliminating the worst attribute of RVs–their gas guzzling feature–doesn’t apply to RVing, than it might be hard to convince both of you that anything other than your own particular interests might interest other RVers.
John Ahrens
Global temperatures peaked in 1998, and have been declining ever since, something that the Climate Changer’s models failed to predict. Leif Erikson’s camp is still under the Greenland ice cap. Must’ve been global warming in the first millenium. Oh, wait, the polar bears survived that one too.
Not to mention, take a look at this http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2009/05/surfacestationsreport_spring09.pdf to see the questionable quality of U.S. surface temperature measurements.
walt
Joseph, I’ll be right behind you. When I was in grade school it was ” we are going thru another ice age” now less then 50 years later we are going thru a warming phase, naw, see you at the post, or dailykos.
Joeseph
My apologies. I must be in the wrong place.
I thought this website was about RV’s.
I’ll wander over the dailykos or huffingtonpost and see if they have any articles about RVing or RVers over there.