Wouldn't it accomplish the same thing, if automakers made elec/biofuel cars, instead of forcing cap and trade on corporations that will cost all households an extra $1,700 per year from now on? What's wrong with this idea?
by 
Phillis - Zacks little sister
ANSWERS: 3
-
the companies making the new autos would have no reason to keep emissions down neither would the producers of batteries and bio fuel. Huge areas of rain forest are being destroyed to plant palms for bio fuel. This is damaging to the environment too.
-
By far the best solution would be to make cars that burn hydrogen. It's cheap, easy to make, more efficient than gasoline, and produces NO emissions at all. The only emission is water. Contemporary cars could easily be converted to burn hydrogen by merely changing the orifices in the fuel injectors. The only difficulty is rigging a compartment to carry a hydrogen tank safely.
-
What you suggest would be the right direction to take. It is the electric cars that hold greater promise as with larger Lithium batteries the cars could cover upto 500 miles in one charge at speeds upto 80 miles an hour. If we were to go for bio-fuel cars then a lot of good agricultural land will be utilized for crops that would be the raw material for the manufacture of bio-fuel. Such land use change could eventually affect world food supply. It should be electric cars that must replace the current models using fossil fuel.
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC