I have a question for you folks. How does our air and water pollution compare to other countries? As I understand it, there are some that are far worse, such as Russia and Eastern Europe.
Good question, Larc.
It seems to me that since the economies and lifestyles of Western countries rely more heavily on gasoline-powered vehicles and tons of manufacturing that the pollution here in the U.S. would be worse than in under-developed countries.
A site I checked that touted electric cars over gas-powered ones had these figures:
- About two thirds of our air pollutants come from automobiles. According to the Electric Power Research Institute, electric vehicles are considered to be 97% cleaner than gasoline powered cars.
"The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) states that internal combustion engine vehicle emissions accounted for 24% of the hydrocarbons, 34% of the nitrogen oxides and 54% of the carbon monoxides released in the United States in 1987."1
Gas-powered vehicles contribute to air pollution, which collects in the atmosphere. When it rains, this acid rain damages the land, contaminates the water supply, and causes other various environmental problems. Much of the pollution in our rivers, bays and ground water is due to automobile waste fluids being dumped or spilled into storm drains.
Driving an EV instead of a conventional car for a year reduces the amount of air pollutants released by:
* 17 pounds of hydrocarbons
* 14 pounds of nitrogen oxides
* 200 pounds of carbon monoxide
* 12,000 pounds of carbon dioxide
These "Greenhouse Gases" are known to absorb infrared radiation, which affects the earth's climate. "Carbon dioxide is expected to be responsible for about half of future global warming because of the sheer volume of its emissions - the United States leads the world in the carbon dioxide released category with 5.8 tons per person per year."2
Vehicles used now require gasoline, made from oil, in which over 40% comes from overseas. We consume an average of 750 million gallons of gas each day, multiplied by 40%, which is about 300 million gallons of fuel per day. That is approximately how much oil is in route to us every day in the hull of a ship like the Exxon Valdez.
-- http://www.evchallenge.org/hs_webpages/2002/wakef/environmental.html
Maybe every one of the figures here is disputable but not the general idea.
How about the burning of the rain forests by the locals? I don't have any facts and figures, curious if someone else does.
I'm sure that deforestation by burning of felled trees followed by the runoff of topsoil into local streams and rivers isn't good for the local ecosystem but there's no way it can be worse than the tons of synthetic chemicals that are pumped into the air by our cars, trucks and factories as the above shows, not to mention the long shelf life of the byproducts of the goods we use everyday. With the Bush Administration lowering the standards (or rescinding proposed efforts to beef up this increasing problem here), the future just got worse for our kids and grandkids.
Check this out:
- A study by the University of Maryland found that a majority of Americans support a treaty even if developing countries do not agree to cut their emissions in the fight against global warming. That finding is at odds with the prevailing views among the Republican majority in the U.S. Senate, where any treaty resulting from the current negotiations must be ratified. Republicans have vowed to oppose the treaty, whose basic framework was negotiated last December in Kyoto, Japan, unless developing countries also accept cuts in their emissions.
''The U.S. Senate is out of step with the American public on the issue of treaty ratification,'' said Stephen Kull, who last month conducted the survey of 800 adults. ''The majority of Americans feel so strongly about the need for a global warming treaty that they are willing to go forward even if the developing countries do not join in.''
The poll also found that a majority (63 percent) of U.S. families are willing to accept increases of up to 25 dollars a month in household energy costs to comply with the Kyoto Treaty, which is roughly the amount at least one government study has estimated would be the actual costs.
Like I've said... Bush scares me. Since he's not a very deep thinker, he's shortchanging our kids for short-term (read: personal) gain. That's okay if you're an executive trying to answer to stockholders. It's NOT okay when you're the most powerful man/Leader of the free world. And especially not now when (because of the recent elections) he has (or thinks he has) virtual carte blanche to do whatever he wants for the sake of pleasing his buds in the oil and gas industry.