zlacker

You're wrong on the emissions point - even a contemporary, luxury electric car like the Model S causes less CO2 emissions from a well-to-wheels perspective than an effiient gasoline car, even if run exclusively on coal-generated electricity. The crucial part of the calculation is to also take into consideration the energy required to produce the fuel, which is often skipped when analyzing the CO2 emissions of fossil-powered cars. The drivetrain (batteries) is somewhat more energy-intensive to produce, but the difference is made up after 20,000 miles or so. There's a lot of FUD from the established automobile and energy industries on this topic.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hf15nMnayXk

On the climate change front, you're probably in disagreement with scientific consensus, but this is not my field of expertise.

>>marvin+(OP)
> On the climate change front, you're probably in disagreement with scientific consensus, but this is not my field of expertise.

Not just probably in disagreement, definitely in disagreement: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_opinion_on_climate_c...

A lot of us like to believe we're rational actors in the world, but denying scientific consensus on this is very irrational, if not just badly misinformed.

>>lilsun+Di
the idea of climate change goes against everything conservatives and libertarians believe in. first, it disproves the randian notion that everyone working in their own self interest is positive. Second, it's a problem that can only be solved by government. When something goes against people's core values so deeply, no amount of proof in the world will change their mind. not believing in global warming is a big part of their identity. not to mention, if they accepted climate change, it'd be pretty hard to continue listening to talk radio or Fox News and watching their favorite commentators blatantly lie about climate change. Because hey, maybe if Sean hannity is wrong about climate change, maybe he's wrong about other stuff too.