[FNKNSTN]

Originally Posted by theholycow

15 guys driving old trucks through the woods vs. 150,000 people stuck in traffic...totally different. The trees literally clean the air, which is why the air is fresher in rural states despite the nasty polluters that don't have any emissions standards.

I agree. Every car will get 0mpg idling in traffic... except Hybrids and electric cars, they just pick up where they left off. But you're mis-informed about trees 'litterally cleaning the air'. They merely convert CO2 to O2. The reason the air is fresher in rural states is because they're full of farm lands and forests, rather than cities and roads full of millions of people. Not to mention all the storms that blow through middle America.

Does this mean that people in rural areas should be allowed burn tires in their backyards and pour paint thinner into local streams because they're the only ones polluting air and water for hundreds of miles around?

Just add up the population of small towns in rural states and see how much CO2 they produce as a whole.

This isn't about air quality anyway. This is about the mythical 'Global Warming' and and dependence on oil from the Middle East.

That's the "All of the US should become The People's Republik Of Kalifornia" attitude, and there's 49 states that have a different idea. What's the point of having states if they're all going to be ruled by one? IMO the federal government is too big and powerful already, and we resent having a second federal-like government that's not even supposed to have any power over us.

Last I checked, Washington DC was closer to you than me. And last I checked, it was a dude from Chicago who officially made this decision, not a KALIFORNIAN. ICH KOMME AUS KALIFORNIAN, NICHT BARACK OBAMA.

I agree. The federal government has gotten really big over the past 8 years.

Do you think that the fed's would step in if the all-powerful and influencial California wanted to lower the age of consent to 12? Because a 12 year old girl with D-cups and a baby face should be legal, right?

The big problem with hydrogen is not the danger, but the fact that it's not an energy source; it's merely an energy storage medium. You can't mine hydrogen, you can't capture it; you have to make it by using more energy than it will deliver. There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but if you're going to do that anyway you might as well make something more like the fuels we currently use, without any special handling requirements (now the danger issue comes into play). If you're going to make all the energy some other way and store it in the car fuel you might as well make ethanol and biodiesel from non-food materials.

Since when is hydrogen not an energy source? Buy a small tank of hydrogen, open the valve and take a match to it.... tell me what happens. It's not a viable answer to our 'problem' because it currently takes more energy to break off hydrogen molecules from naturally occuring compounds, such as water.

No danger? I'm sure you remember hearing about the Hindenberg when is went up in flames. Or maybe the first detonation of the Hydrogen bomb. Hydrogen is not just flammable, it's explosive when compressed and liquified. Add enriched radioactive materials and you've got the greatest car bomb ever known in the trunk of your car.

Can't be mined? Yes it can. From extraterrestrial sources where it occurs naturally as a liquid, or in hydrogen rich compounds that could later be refined on Earth.