Pragmatic green and hybrid cars and other things

[davefreer]

I'm a biologist. I am a supporter of sustainable self-sufficiency. I suppose in that sense you could call me 'green'. It's not for everyone and I hold no brief nor have any interest in pointing fingers at anyone else's choices. That said I often look at self-proclaimed 'green' people and want take their heads and push them into the bowl and give

Comments

[davefreer]

To extend my example - if the people who want you penalised for owning a vehicle that gets you in to x-ray their emergency, then fair enough, they must bear the cost of having you penalised for the vehicle. Funny, I bet that'll go down real well with them. I've noticed, for instance, that politicians -- with because of demographics a principally city-based electorate commonly pass laws that penalise country dwellers. To use some current Australian examples - a friend tells me you need a plumber to install a rain-water tank in Melbourne Victoria. This is a minor expense and inconvenience if you live in Melbourne. Firstly the plumber is right at hand, and secondly you have piped water as an alternative, and thirdly you probably have no idea how to do this, and would have got someone else to do it anyway. The same law to the fellow living 50km due east from Mount Beauty is fricking disaster and major inconvenience and huge totally purposelss cost.

[groblek]

Well said. I'm with you on all of that, but then I grew up earning some pocket money by washing the 4x4s my Dad used to get around out in the woods where he was a forester. What gets me are the people who drive them as a status symbol, or worse yet, the ones which are sold without 4-wheel drive. I had a friend who was embarrassed to go home to visit because after she got hers wrecked, the insurance company would only get her one with 2-wheel drive.
And I thoroughly agree on the wood issue - a real wood piece of furniture, especially hardwood will last for generations if well-taken care of. I remember listening to my Dad comment on the "environmentalists" who wanted to do away with building houses out of wood because they didn't want the trees cut down. His response was "So, you're in favor of open-pit mining, then?" since that's how one gets stone/concrete/steel for alternate construction methods. Some people literally can't see the forest for the trees.

[davefreer]

Wood -and possibly straw - have always struck me as being first choice building and furniture materials for exactly that reason.

[wyjoe]

I want to see pictures of the Egyptian architect's buildings who uses straw and recycled materials to make low cost yet attactive housing for the poor. He has had some resistance from people who can't see the forest for the trees.

[davefreer]

It sounds like something I should see pictures of too

[reverancepavane]

Then again, a great majority of SUV in Australia don't manage to get anywhere near a dirt track (unless, of course, the dirt track comes to the city in the form of a dust cloud). I think the majority of people buy them because of the mistaken belief that they are safer, when, as "commercial" vehicles, the safety standards are much more lax. And to see over the top of other cars (hence the innate moral superiority of the seagull).
And the original complaint was that kids are getting injured (fortunately not seriously) because drivers can't actually see the kids around these hulking monsters. Which is why they wanted them removed from the area immediately in front of the schools (but that might of meant that the drivers might have had to actually get out of their cars and walk a little bit in order to pick up their kids...).
Besides, the increased tax proposal (which has been around a long time [one mustn't forget that the state of journalism in Oz is rather deplorable and sensationalist (a problem when you don't really have much news

[davefreer]

The trouble is the caveats need to be upfront, and are emasculating of the purpose. In the UK for eg, an elderly landrover from the back end of nowhere gets hit with the same extra charge as a chelsea tractor. I'm no friend of the 4x4 - would you call it a van? without a bin, Pajero's are a typical local eg, that live in towns and cities (without snow) that are a status symbol and not 'needed' or even used for bad/offroad conditions (I'm extremely ambivalent about off-road driving on public property. Not convinced it is necessary or a good idea). But there is a big baby with the bathwater problem. Firstly you need to clearly define your terms: what is a 4x4? A suzuki vitara or subaru Forester? Hardly high or even fuel thirsty in relative terms - but 4x4. Secondly: for country/farming use. Where does country start and where does farming start? Is a small-holder who works in town a farmer? And what is 'use'? Is it better for the environment to have the person who fishes in remote places on weekends or goes on an Annual Australian

[jpfuel]

More sillyness

[davefreer]

Well, I have some interest in space to earth microwave transmission, and wave power. I've always wondered about the water-vapour issue.
The EcoHole is my point. Not that it can't be solved, or shouldn't be solved, but that it exists, and we need to think about when replacement is actually worse.

[eneit]

I wish more people looked at both sides of the equation. I'm convinced there is room for sensible enviromentalism.

The postcode method should be applied to dealers. And a cheaper, less options as standards, more suited to work than play vehicle should be available to farmers. I don't think I've ever seen a local farmer actually use the cup holders now routinely in the design. When it's a 100 km round trip to the nearest McDonalds, you are far more likely have a thermos full of coffee instead - and you know, those dinky little cup holders just break if you try to put the thermos in there *g*

[davefreer]

"I'm convinced there is room for sensible enviromentalism."

That's precisely my take on it. And usually -if handled the right way, you can get the bulk of people to fit in. It is when it becomes adversarial that it doesn't work.

[qbzzt]

The problem is the "one man, one vote" concept which rules politics. I'm not saying that your interests are any more important than Joan Tofu's are, but you're closer to the situation and more competent to make decisions.

[davefreer]

which is why I support a high degree of decentralisation/fedralism. Or a 'you want the law, you bear the cost' principle. That's one that needs more computing power and more civic involvement, but I like.

[qbzzt]

"You want the law, you bear the cost" sounds good, but it's often impossible to calculate the cost.

Decentralisation is mostly good, except when the locals have really bad ideas (slavery, for example). I wish we'd have more of it. It also lets different systems compete within the same country, to find what works best.