You don't know a thing about the combustion engine, do you?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Bill wrote:
>
> Translation: No it would not meet today's fuel economy\emissions
> standards..
>
> Summary: Ironic how he who complains about the emissions from
> a diesel, himself drives a vehicle that would not pass anywhere
> close to todays emission standards.. Kinda hypocritical...
>
> And no I don't have a problem with my Jeep.. It's in perfect
> mechanical condition, and in virtual mint condition other then
> a few rock chips in the windshield which will soon be replaced..
> It would very easily pass an emissions test.. if there actually was
> a requirment here..which isn't very likely to happen any time in
> the forseeable future..

 

You don't know a thing about the combustion engine, do you?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Bill wrote:
>
> Translation: No it would not meet today's fuel economy\emissions
> standards..
>
> Summary: Ironic how he who complains about the emissions from
> a diesel, himself drives a vehicle that would not pass anywhere
> close to todays emission standards.. Kinda hypocritical...
>
> And no I don't have a problem with my Jeep.. It's in perfect
> mechanical condition, and in virtual mint condition other then
> a few rock chips in the windshield which will soon be replaced..
> It would very easily pass an emissions test.. if there actually was
> a requirment here..which isn't very likely to happen any time in
> the forseeable future..

 

You don't know a thing about the combustion engine, do you?
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Bill wrote:
>
> Translation: No it would not meet today's fuel economy\emissions
> standards..
>
> Summary: Ironic how he who complains about the emissions from
> a diesel, himself drives a vehicle that would not pass anywhere
> close to todays emission standards.. Kinda hypocritical...
>
> And no I don't have a problem with my Jeep.. It's in perfect
> mechanical condition, and in virtual mint condition other then
> a few rock chips in the windshield which will soon be replaced..
> It would very easily pass an emissions test.. if there actually was
> a requirment here..which isn't very likely to happen any time in
> the forseeable future..

 

Initially? how about every two years a new set of batteries costing
upwards of four thousand dollar. Plus there's a very big danger of
battery exposition, listen to the news.
You bleeding heart liberal greenie, at least let us have Amwa.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Bill wrote:
>
> Actually on a cost per kwh, hydro electric is by far the cheepest
> method over time, it does however have draw backs such as
> huge initial costs, environment concerns, and the availiblity of
> a suitable location..
>
> Ahh yes the nuclear option.. cheap, relativley safe.. can have
> disasterous outcomes, allthough it's highyly unlikely that the
> reactors that would be built will be of a design that is not dual
> use..after all who can really be trusted?... Then there is the down
> side on what to do with waste that will last for very likely the
> entire life span of our speices.. waste that will only continue to
> build up.. waste we can't do anything about ... And what about
> cleaning up contaiminted sites from old plants....? And what
> about accidents..they will happen again... Personally I'd rather
> have the area that I live continue to remain nuclear free.

 

Initially? how about every two years a new set of batteries costing
upwards of four thousand dollar. Plus there's a very big danger of
battery exposition, listen to the news.
You bleeding heart liberal greenie, at least let us have Amwa.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Bill wrote:
>
> Actually on a cost per kwh, hydro electric is by far the cheepest
> method over time, it does however have draw backs such as
> huge initial costs, environment concerns, and the availiblity of
> a suitable location..
>
> Ahh yes the nuclear option.. cheap, relativley safe.. can have
> disasterous outcomes, allthough it's highyly unlikely that the
> reactors that would be built will be of a design that is not dual
> use..after all who can really be trusted?... Then there is the down
> side on what to do with waste that will last for very likely the
> entire life span of our speices.. waste that will only continue to
> build up.. waste we can't do anything about ... And what about
> cleaning up contaiminted sites from old plants....? And what
> about accidents..they will happen again... Personally I'd rather
> have the area that I live continue to remain nuclear free.

 

Initially? how about every two years a new set of batteries costing
upwards of four thousand dollar. Plus there's a very big danger of
battery exposition, listen to the news.
You bleeding heart liberal greenie, at least let us have Amwa.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Bill wrote:
>
> Actually on a cost per kwh, hydro electric is by far the cheepest
> method over time, it does however have draw backs such as
> huge initial costs, environment concerns, and the availiblity of
> a suitable location..
>
> Ahh yes the nuclear option.. cheap, relativley safe.. can have
> disasterous outcomes, allthough it's highyly unlikely that the
> reactors that would be built will be of a design that is not dual
> use..after all who can really be trusted?... Then there is the down
> side on what to do with waste that will last for very likely the
> entire life span of our speices.. waste that will only continue to
> build up.. waste we can't do anything about ... And what about
> cleaning up contaiminted sites from old plants....? And what
> about accidents..they will happen again... Personally I'd rather
> have the area that I live continue to remain nuclear free.

 

Initially? how about every two years a new set of batteries costing
upwards of four thousand dollar. Plus there's a very big danger of
battery exposition, listen to the news.
You bleeding heart liberal greenie, at least let us have Amwa.
God Bless America, ßill O|||||||O
mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

Bill wrote:
>
> Actually on a cost per kwh, hydro electric is by far the cheepest
> method over time, it does however have draw backs such as
> huge initial costs, environment concerns, and the availiblity of
> a suitable location..
>
> Ahh yes the nuclear option.. cheap, relativley safe.. can have
> disasterous outcomes, allthough it's highyly unlikely that the
> reactors that would be built will be of a design that is not dual
> use..after all who can really be trusted?... Then there is the down
> side on what to do with waste that will last for very likely the
> entire life span of our speices.. waste that will only continue to
> build up.. waste we can't do anything about ... And what about
> cleaning up contaiminted sites from old plants....? And what
> about accidents..they will happen again... Personally I'd rather
> have the area that I live continue to remain nuclear free.

 

> Initially? how about every two years a new set of batteries costing
>upwards of four thousand dollar.

I have some doubts on that cost you claim..as well as the time
span.. Wasn't it you demanding proof on emissions, yet you base
your claims here on what exactly?

>Plus there's a very big danger of battery exposition, listen to the news.

The risk is not as big as you claim.. There are thousands of battery
powered vehicles, lifts, forklifts etc in use today and battery
explosion is not a common occurance.

> You bleeding heart liberal greenie, at least let us have Amwa.

How do you figure I'm a "bleeding heart liberal greenie" are you
putting that foot somewhere again? Let's see I live in an area
where the largest industries are oil\gas, forestry and minning..
I have been directly involved in design and construction of several
multi-billion dollar oil sands projects.. I've been an active
member of an organization that has sucessfully fought environmental
groups on back-country access..

Bill, like your "real jeep" --------, your just babbling and
talking crap.. Don't be an *** bill and start casting labels on
people you don't know.. You should really start with yourself..

 

> Initially? how about every two years a new set of batteries costing
>upwards of four thousand dollar.

I have some doubts on that cost you claim..as well as the time
span.. Wasn't it you demanding proof on emissions, yet you base
your claims here on what exactly?

>Plus there's a very big danger of battery exposition, listen to the news.

The risk is not as big as you claim.. There are thousands of battery
powered vehicles, lifts, forklifts etc in use today and battery
explosion is not a common occurance.

> You bleeding heart liberal greenie, at least let us have Amwa.

How do you figure I'm a "bleeding heart liberal greenie" are you
putting that foot somewhere again? Let's see I live in an area
where the largest industries are oil\gas, forestry and minning..
I have been directly involved in design and construction of several
multi-billion dollar oil sands projects.. I've been an active
member of an organization that has sucessfully fought environmental
groups on back-country access..

Bill, like your "real jeep" --------, your just babbling and
talking crap.. Don't be an *** bill and start casting labels on
people you don't know.. You should really start with yourself..

 

> Initially? how about every two years a new set of batteries costing
>upwards of four thousand dollar.

I have some doubts on that cost you claim..as well as the time
span.. Wasn't it you demanding proof on emissions, yet you base
your claims here on what exactly?

>Plus there's a very big danger of battery exposition, listen to the news.

The risk is not as big as you claim.. There are thousands of battery
powered vehicles, lifts, forklifts etc in use today and battery
explosion is not a common occurance.

> You bleeding heart liberal greenie, at least let us have Amwa.

How do you figure I'm a "bleeding heart liberal greenie" are you
putting that foot somewhere again? Let's see I live in an area
where the largest industries are oil\gas, forestry and minning..
I have been directly involved in design and construction of several
multi-billion dollar oil sands projects.. I've been an active
member of an organization that has sucessfully fought environmental
groups on back-country access..

Bill, like your "real jeep" --------, your just babbling and
talking crap.. Don't be an *** bill and start casting labels on
people you don't know.. You should really start with yourself..