BRBarian said:
Yanquetino said:
For example, in my area, the EPA estimates 150 grams GHG/mile for the Leaf. This means that charging it from the grid "upstream" would produce 33.07 lbs. of GHG per 100 miles driven. The Prius, in comparison, produces 49.00 lbs. of GHG per 100 miles from the tailpipe + "upstream."
I'm wondering if your upstream calculations are accurate.
Oil needs to be refined, but coal does not. Oil is generally transported further and at greater energy costs.
And finally, I'm guessing that you're missing a big chunk of the upstream cost.
If you calculate the energy costs of producing a nice steak, do you take a discount for the energy costs of producing leather? In other words is the energy cost of producing both steak and leather the same as either? If what truly drives oil production is the demand for gasoline, then why do you get a GHG credit for byproducts like asphalt and plastics that also add CO2 to the biosphere?
if i were you, i would do some fact checking on that. as far as "throwing some soap" on an oil spill. we have to realize that the chemical makeup of the oil is not changed.
it only allows the oil to form into teeny tiny balls so it is ummm, let me guess?
not toxic? wrong...about the only thing it does is allows it to be eaten by entities much lower on the food chain.
now, this is only done to make ourselves feel better about the pathetic way we treat our home and nothing more...not even a little bit more.
ya see, not that microorganisms are eating the oil right now as we speak, it will take years for the effects to hit us in reduced seafood, algae growth, altered bird migration and nesting patterns...ya, it will affect us for years, but it will be a long gradual process that we have become very adept at ignoring.
but the alternative would be to see ducks coated in oil. now that is too "in your face" and too disturbing, but its really too bad because killing 10,000 Ducks would have done much less damage than filtering all that oil up thru the food chain for the next decade