STARS ARE TWO-FACED ON SUVS

[SJ]

Klaus:

I think you sum the whole debate best by posting Jason's Profile. Although I admit to agreeing with some of Jason's points, I think "antagonizing" members of this board is the wrong way to exercise one's democratic rights. I'd like to see improved MPG and lower emissions brought about by consumer advocate groups, rather than disrespecting a fellow American.

I don't like it when some one chooses a Toyota Tundra over a Chevrolet/GMC or Ford truck, but I respect that person's right to choose. Further, I don't approach the Toyota owner with my 20+ reasons why they should have purchased a very comparable American nameplate.

[Big Z]

Coal, petroleum (oil), and natural gas are burned in large furnaces to heat water to make steam that in turn pushes on the blades of a turbine.*Did you know that coal is the largest single primary source of energy used to generate electricity in the United States? In 2000, more than half (52%) of the county's 3.8 trillion kilowatthours of electricity used coal as its source of energy.

Natural gas, in addition to being burned to heat water for steam, can also be burned to produce hot combustion gases that pass directly through a turbine, spinning the blades of the turbine to generate electricity. Gas turbines are commonly used when electricity utility usage is in high demand. In 2000, 16% of the nation's electricity was fueled by natural gas.

Petroleum can also be used to make steam to turn a turbine. Residual fuel oil, a product refined from crude oil, is often the petroleum product used in electric plants that use petroleum to make steam. Petroleum was used to generate less than three percent (3%) of all electricity generated in U.S. electricity plants in 2000.

Nuclear power is a method in which steam is produced by heating water through a process called nuclear fission. In a nuclear power plant, a reactor contains a core of nuclear fuel, primarily enriched uranium. When atoms of uranium fuel are hit by neutrons they fission (split), releasing heat and more neutrons. Under controlled conditions, these other neutrons can strike more uranium atoms, splitting more atoms, and so on. Thereby, continuous fission can take place, forming a chain reaction releasing heat. The heat is used to turn water into steam, that, in turn, spins a turbine that generates electricity. Nuclear power is used to generate 20% of all the country's electricity.

Hydropower, the source for 7% of U.S. electricity generation, is a process in which flowing water is used to spin a turbine connected to a generator. There are two basic types of hydroelectric systems that produce electricity. In the first system, flowing water accumulates in reservoirs created by the use of dams. The water falls through a pipe called a penstock and applies pressure against the turbine blades to drive the generator to produce electricity. In the second system, called run-of-river, the force of the river current (rather than falling water) applies pressure to the turbine blades to produce electricity.

[\"Hummer\", heh, heh]

SJ: "I think you sum the whole debate best by posting Jason's Profile."

I soon realized that despite the fact that a few people here can dish out vitriolic diatribes, some can't take a comparably tame general criticism without taking personal offense and complaining. And since everyone is evidently comfortable standing shoulder to shoulder with the more virulent defenders of the SUV status quoa, I've chosen the high road by not responding with personal attacks, acknowledging peoples' complaints, and posting apologies to those who complained.

"Although I admit to agreeing with some of Jason's points, I think "antagonizing" members of this board is the wrong way to exercise one's democratic rights. I'd like to see improved MPG and lower emissions brought about by consumer advocate groups, rather than disrespecting a fellow American."

How would you have these consumer advocate groups pursue their goals? Maybe you think they should only seek out people who already agree with them so that there is no chance that someone will misconstrue their attempts to educate as antagonism?

SJ: "I don't like it when some one chooses a Toyota Tundra over a Chevrolet/GMC or Ford truck, but I respect that person's right to choose. Further, I don't approach the Toyota owner with my 20+ reasons why they should have purchased a very comparable American nameplate."

I would suggest that talking to someone inclined to buy a comparable foreign car is a perfectly reasonable approach to reconciling your differences. Base your arguments on fact and you should be able to make a strong case. If the other person has an open mind, you will at least be able to understand their point of view or cause them to re-examine their beliefs. The worst that can happen is you walk away agreeing to disagree. I take that back -- the worst that can happen is you're afraid to talk to them, and instead hold them in contempt because they have not given the issue the same consideration you have.

-Jason

[SJ]

Point #2:

Advocate groups should pursue their goals through all reasonable channels: Public Demonstrations, Letters to local members of Congress, and Letters to the Automotive Industry, etc.

Point #3:

To elaborate, I don't go up to Toyota owners AFTER they've made their purchase and expect them to sell their car/truck because of my personal beliefs. Just the same, we've already made a conscious decision to buy an American vehicle that is powered by a V8.

I don't post things on this site that I wouldn't say to a person's face and that is also why I've refrained from personal attacks. I have merely used the word Socialist because I have seen the sugar-coated approach prior to 1989 (in Eastern Europe).

My opinion is that your efforts here are very inappropriate in that you ultimately seek to "badger" us for our purchase. If this were not a web site with such a focus [h2 Enthusiasts], then I could foresee your points as being something other than belligerent.

[\"Hummer\", heh, heh]

SJ: "Advocate groups should pursue their goals through all reasonable channels: Public Demonstrations, Letters to local members of Congress, and Letters to the Automotive Industry, etc."

Why would someone who is offended by direct communication feel any less offended by the message if they read it in an op-ed? The argument is going to be the same either way, so if they are going to get offended by well-meaning, well-argued contentions made their favorite newsgroup, then chances are they would be offended by the same argument presented in other venues.

SJ: "To elaborate, I don't go up to Toyota owners _AFTER_ they've made their purchase and expect them to sell their car/truck because of my personal beliefs."

First, although I presented many challenges to SUV owners, don't forget that I also concurred that those who need the capability should get an SUV, and I said that I respect others' decisions who have listened to the arguments but arrived at a different conclusion, and I made the claim that owning an SUV and advocating reform are not necessarily mutually exclusive. So I don't think it's fair to characterize this approach as pure badgering.

Second, if I can get a membership to this board, then certainly there must be a spectrum of people reading it -- anywhere from die hard owners to people who just like big, shiny cars. Are you saying that in addition to SUV owners, advocates should stay away from people who are even considering buying an SUV?

In fact, with regards to the consumption aspect, SUV owners have an even higher vested interest in obtaining and using knowledge to reform regulation, since they are the ones who suffer the most at the pump.

-Jason

[Klaus]

Member Profile for "Hummer", heh, heh

Date Registered: January 22, 2003
Status: H2 Veteran
Total Posts: 8
View Posts By this Member
Email: -
Home Page: -
Picture: -
Gender: -
Date of Birth: -
Location: -
Instant Messaging: -
Why did you join this forum?: to ridicule its members
Tools Add to Contacts
Start a Private Topic with "Hummer", heh, heh

[InfamousTeeDog]

Who really cares what movie stars really think. The only reason that a lot people listen to movie stars is the fact that they are simpled minded sheep who can't for an opinion of their own. What happened to all of the smart people? People with any self-esteem or a reasonably average IQ can understand, analyze and format their own viewpoint with an empathetic ear towards others.

How come actors/actresses know how to act...but can't learn how to act? I think money can easily turn someone's opinion especially actors.

"Honesty is the best policy...unless you are really good at lying."