…is not what’s good for America. Earlier this week, GM sent representatives to campus to attempt to sell their idea of a hydrogen car. The story is poorly written, but what do you expect, it’s a probably a communications major. By “poorly written” I don’t mean that it has poor spelling and grammar — there is plenty of that around here. No, I mean it sounds like a press release from GM.
McCormick started his quest to create a fuel-efficient vehicle as a UA student concerned about rising gas prices. He quickly realized then that his lifestyle of fuel consumption was no longer an option for him, or for car owners anywhere, he said.
Judging from the picture, I’d guess that gasoline prices when McCormick was a university student were around $0.25 per gallon. Nothing wrong with that. But then he “quickly” realized wasn’t an option. Wha? I don’t think so. But giving him the benefit of the doubt, why did it take 20-30 years (again, guessing) to make a prototype?
He goes on,
He explained that although most people tend to favor renewable energy like solar or wind, the hidden problem is the lack of an efficient way to store them, and the distribution ability is very limited.
Ethanol, McCormick explained, is a viable option, but only if it is not shortchanging the public of food. General Motors has invested in two companies - Coskata and Mascoma - that endorse ethanol use but only cellulosic, or non-edible products in order to make ethanol.
I’m not a fan of ethanol. It is a band-aid, not a solution. But casually dismissing solar and wind power like this not acceptable. It’s true that energy cannot be stored for very long or very efficiently right now. But in the time-line of everything that works, there was once a time when it didn’t work. It seems that a possible solution might be to use renewable non-polluting energy to make hydrogen, which can be stored.
“The next president and his policies are going to determine a lot of the future of these vehicles,” McCormick said. “We (GM) are willing to put in the money and the technology, but we really need favorable government policies. These cars are going to be more expensive, and tax breaks would encourage consumption by the public.”
True. But the difference between the candidates isn’t that large. If you’re looking for government handouts to corporations, then McCain would probably be a better choice. If you’re worried about the environmental impacts of pollution, then Obama would be a better choice.
But that pretty academic by now. When the pundits start describing Georgia as “too close to call”, it’s over. If Obama doesn’t get 350 electoral votes, I’d be surprised.
