In response to:

Electric Cars: The Environmentally Friendly Way of Losing Money Since 2009

Scrap Iron in Texas Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 9:46 AM
Okay, I don't know all the physics involved with my ideas, but hydrogen power WILL be the wave of the future> And no matter the inefficiency of water to hydrogen, if you have a cheap source of power (nuclear), then is DOES make sense, economically. And I STILL think a small car with a 20 wet cell pack of batteries and a small gas engine turning a set of alternators would be efficient. There are ALWAYS power losses. If I could build one myself, I would,
rreid Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 3:50 PM
don't need hydrogen anymore with the emergence of natural gas through fracking.
Moonbat Exterminator Wrote: Dec 07, 2012 11:14 AM
There are two issues with hydrogen. First, the energy required to produce it by electrolysis of water or stripping it from methane is greater than the energy produced by combustion. Second, there's safety. Remember the Hindenburg or the Challenger?

A Congressional Budget Office report released in the fall tells Obama what the rest of us have known for some time: Your bet on electric cars wasn’t an investment, but a gamble; a dumb gamble.

And now you’ve just come up snake eyes.

“Despite the federal government pumping $7.5 billion into the electric vehicle industry in the United States through 2019,” writes the CSMonitor.com, “overall national gasoline consumption is unlikely to be significantly affected, according to a report released by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).”

The CBO says that even if Obama increased the amount of the subsidy, it...

Related Tags: Money