Green Movement, Toyota Prius, an Endtime Sign, page 1
Pages: <<  1    2  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times
Topic started on 22-8-2009 @ 07:39 AM by heliosprime
2And I saw another angel ascending from the east, having the seal of the living God: and he cried with a loud voice to the four angels, to whom it was given to hurt the earth and the sea,

3Saying, Hurt not the earth, neither the sea, nor the trees, till we have sealed the servants of our God in their foreheads.


Rev 7:2,3

The total insanity of the green movement and global warming hysteria can be explained with the prophesy of Christ about the end times. But let us look up close at the insanity.

We have all seen the comercials where driving a toyota Prius is saving the planet. The truth is every Prius built is damaging the environment far more that those evil 'SUV's" it is meant to replace.

Just to construction of a Prius damages the environment far more than the "fuel" savings it may or may not generate. In fact the materials that go into the construction of a Prius are many times more damaging that the evil "Hummer" could ever be....

Buy a Prius, Hurt the Planet
I recently read an article by Chris Demorro, in which he notes the path taken by nickel, mined in Ontario, Canada, then shipped to Europe, then to China, then to Japan and finally to the United States for assembly into a Toyota Prius. The net energy used to build the batteries for the Prius is really astounding and the environmental damage done by the mine is pretty bad. The battery production process doesn’t seem inline with the general public’s perception of the Prius and due to the tax credits involved in buying a hybrid vehicle, it should be a concern to all taxpayers.


www.badgreenadvice.com...

Building a Toyota Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer than a Prius....When you pool together all the combined energy it takes to drive and build a Toyota Prius, the flagship car of energy fanatics, it takes almost 50 percent more energy than a Hummer - the Prius’s arch nemesis.


deconsumption.typepad.com...

However, if that was the only issue with the Prius, I wouldn’t be writing this article. It gets much worse.

Building a Toyota Prius causes more environmental damage than a Hummer that is on the road for three times longer than a Prius. As already noted, the Prius is partly driven by a battery which contains nickel. The nickel is mined and smelted at a plant in Sudbury, Ontario. This plant has caused so much environmental damage to the surrounding environment that NASA has used the ‘dead zone’ around the plant to test moon rovers. The area around the plant is devoid of any life for miles.

The plant is the source of all the nickel found in a Prius’ battery and Toyota purchases 1,000 tons annually. Dubbed the Superstack, the plague-factory has spread sulfur dioxide across northern Ontario, becoming every environmentalist’s nightmare.

“The acid rain around Sudbury was so bad it destroyed all the plants and the soil slid down off the hillside,” said Canadian Greenpeace energy-coordinator David Martin during an interview with Mail, a British-based newspaper.

All of this would be bad enough in and of itself; however, the journey to make a hybrid doesn’t end there. The nickel produced by this disastrous plant is shipped via massive container ship to the largest nickel refinery in Europe. From there, the nickel hops over to China to produce ‘nickel foam.’ From there, it goes to Japan. Finally, the completed batteries are shipped to the United States, finalizing the around-the-world trip required to produce a single Prius battery. Are these not sounding less and less like environmentally sound cars and more like a farce?

Wait, I haven’t even got to the best part yet.

When you pool together all the combined energy it takes to drive and build a Toyota Prius, the flagship car of energy fanatics, it takes almost 50 percent more energy than a Hummer - the Prius’s arch nemesis.

Through a study by CNW Marketing called “Dust to Dust,” the total combined energy is taken from all the electrical, fuel, transportation, materials (metal, plastic, etc) and hundreds of other factors over the expected lifetime of a vehicle. The Prius costs an average of $3.25 per mile driven over a lifetime of 100,000 miles - the expected lifespan of the Hybrid.

The Hummer, on the other hand, costs a more fiscal $1.95 per mile to put on the road over an expected lifetime of 300,000 miles. That means the Hummer will last three times longer than a Prius and use less combined energy doing it.


www.hybridcars.com...

Can it be any clearer that the public hysteria over global warming and environmental issues is so misguided and misunderstood.

God is currently sealing his chosen and the demonic backlash to it, is the green movement as a cover-up of the truth. The seals are being opened......Jesus is at the door......man raises plant and animals over the wellbeing of his very existence through insane environmental ruleings, another sign of satans hate for mankind.

Man can not and will not destroy what God created, it is human arrogance to think such a thing. Man will try and perhaps even get close but God will stop the insanity.

The entire green movment is being directed by satan and his demons.


reply posted on 22-8-2009 @ 11:56 AM by DjSharperimage
this is total propaganda....
obviously fabricated by people who have an interest in oil companies or car companies that arent making any electric vehicles;
the guy even tried to put some religious quotes in there to get the sheep to fall in line more easily...
silly rabbit, tricks are for kids....

and of course it takes more energy to build the car because the technology is still new;
if you look at computers 20 years ago they were so big they filled up big warehouses;
but today the production of it has become alot more efficient and even better;
now take that and apply it to the prius;
the prius has only been around for 3 years; give it some time and i am sure production methods will improve

and you guys are comparing the Hummer at 4 miles per gallon to the Prius?!?!?
you must be kidding me;
you know who owns alot of Hummers?
The united states government

and also if you think that the world would be a better place if everyone on the planet drove hummers instead of prius's then you must be out of your mind;

and as for global warming;
have you ever seen the gigantic cloud of death smog forever covering the city of los angelas california?
if you dont call that green house gases then i dont know whats wrong with you;
you could let a 5 year old look at it and he will tell you its there....

a couple years ago i was in prison for a year breathing nothing but filtered air,
and you know what the first smell i smelled was after being released?
it smelled like nothing but burning oil everywhere!!
it stank like crazy and it mustve taken me 2 or 3 days to get used to the smell untill eventually i couldnt notice it anymore;
i swear to god if you ask anyone who has just been released from prison; he will tell you, the cities smell like burning oil....
and i bet if animals in the woods could talk, they would say humans stink like burning oil.....

and if you still think electric vehicles are a conspiracy then you need to watch the documentary titled "Who Killed the Electric Car?"
in the documentary they show the government forcing car companies to repossess all the electric vehicles that were sold and just crush them for no reason;
people were protesting like crazy because they loved their electric cars

the documentary is available at pluginamerica.com
or any other sources

and the green movement is about keeping the planet clean and sustainable; would you like it if someone came into your house and trashed the place and forced you to live in filth? no you wouldnt;

there are some companies who takes advantage of peoples need to be green, and lie about it;
the green movement community is well aware of them and those types of companies are called greenwashing

INTRODUCTION TO STOPGREENWASH.ORG

These days, green is the new black. Corporations are falling all over themselves to demonstrate that they are environmentally conscious. The average citizen is finding it more and more difficult to tell the difference between those companies genuinely dedicated to making a difference and those that are using a green curtain to conceal dark motives.

[edit on 22-8-2009 by DjSharperimage]

[edit on 22-8-2009 by DjSharperimage]

[edit on 22-8-2009 by DjSharperimage]


reply posted on 22-8-2009 @ 10:46 PM by heliosprime
reply to post by DjSharperimage


Wow how did anyone drink this much koolaide?

Note about "plug in cars".......the most inefficient method of delivering energy is the electric grid. FACT 75% of all electricity generated is LOST in transportation. YES only 1 out of every 4 kilowatts generated is consumed by the enduser.

All electric plug in cars will use 4 times more "total" energy than gasoline powered cars. The there is the battery issue............an environmental disaster in itself.

Everywhere you look the "greenie" movement is full of total failure and deception. As the bible predicts...satan is confusion...........


reply posted on 23-8-2009 @ 01:22 AM by DjSharperimage
The US Department of Energy has granted $9.5 million to a company in California that plans to build America's first recycling facility for lithium-ion vehicle batteries.
Waste materials: Recycling worn-out batteries from electric cars produces a mix of finely shredded metals, consisting of cobalt, aluminum, nickel, and copper (show on the left), and a slurry that is processed into a cobalt cake (on the right).
Credit: Tesla Motors

Anaheim-based Toxco says it will use the funds to expand an existing facility in Lancaster, OH, that already recycles the lead-acid and nickel-metal hydride batteries used in today's hybrid-electric vehicles.

There is currently little economic need to recycle lithium-ion batteries. Most batteries contain only small amounts of lithium carbonate as a percentage of weight and the material is relatively inexpensive compared to most other metals.

But experts say that having a recycling infrastructure in place will ease concerns that the adoption of vehicles that use lithium-ion batteries could lead to a shortage of lithium carbonate and a dependence on countries such as China, Russia, and Bolivia, which control the bulk of global lithium reserves. "Right now it hardly pays to recycle lithium, but if demand increases and there are large supplies of used material, the situation could change," says Linda Gaines, a researcher at the Argonne National Laboratory's Transportation Technology R&D Center.

Toxco's DOE grant may seem like pocket change--last week the DOE awarded a total of $2.4 billion to companies developing batteries and systems for electric vehicles--but it's also early days for the project. Sales of plug-in hybrids and all-electric vehicles have yet to take off, and though President Barack Obama has pledged to get a million plug-in hybrids on US roads by 2015, it will likely be a decade before any large-scale recycling capability is required.

Demonstrating the capacity to recycle, however, will be key to showing that electric vehicles are truly "green"--both emission-free in operation and sustainable in design. "Management of these batteries has to be done in an environmentally responsible way and in an economic way," says Todd Coy, executive vice president of Kinsbursky Brothers, Toxco's parent company.

Toxco also has an edge over newcomers to the market. The company is already North America's leading battery recycler and has been recycling single-charge and rechargeable lithium batteries used in electronics devices and industrial applications since 1992 at its Canadian facility in Trail, British Columbia. "We're managing the bulk of the batteries already out there," says Coy.

Story continues below

The Trail facility is also the only one in the world that can handle different sizes and chemistries of lithium batteries. When old batteries arrive they go into a hammer mill and are shredded, allowing components made of aluminum, cooper, and steel to be separated easily. Larger batteries that might still hold a charge are cryogenically frozen with liquid nitrogen before being hammered and shredded; at -325 degrees Fahrenheit, the reactivity of the cells is reduced to zero. Lithium is then extracted by flooding the battery chambers in a caustic bath that dissolves lithium salts, which are filtered out and used to produce lithiu


reply posted on 24-8-2009 @ 07:33 AM by jibeho
This current Green Movement Scam has got to be one of the greatest Sucker Scams in our nations history. We now have a Planet Green Cable channel. Advertisers and product promo is thrown in your face. A select few are making a mint on the gullible populace of the U.S.

The only "green" realized by the "Green Movement" is the money that is being stolen out of our pockets. We may consume less with energy saving devices, water saving toilets, cfls etc. The suppliers are simply going to increase rates, surcharges, delivery fees, taxes etc to offset the revenue loss. The cost burden is NEVER placed directly on the supplier. It is always so innocently placed on the backs of the consumer.

The last time I checked we are the only major industrialized nation who pretends to give a rats #$% about the Green Movement. We have lost most manufacturing in the this country to foreign lands who will eagerly produce anything that our consumer nation desires.

So, that leaves us with the Green Movement and CFL light bulbs that are Chinese made.
A president that is spending $2 billion in Columbia for oil exploration and drilling.
A former Vice President that is hoping to make billions off of the sale of bogus carbon credits and companies like GE who will rake in the money hand over fist with the passing of Cap and Trade legislation.

There must be a special little atmospheric bubble over the U.S. that will be protected by all of this nonsense. No other countries are buying this B.S. But they will gladly export Windmills and Chinese Solar cells to us.

I think we have larger problems to solve in our once humble nation first. This green crap won't make a world of difference. The only experts regarding any Green Movement are the Canadian Geese who routinely foul up my favorite putting green.

[edit on 24-8-2009 by jibeho]


reply posted on 25-8-2009 @ 12:43 AM by heliosprime
Originally posted by EnlightenUp
Originally posted by heliosprime
But distribution would still loose 75% from generator to "plugin"...


You said this was a FACT so I checked it since it seems outlandish. It seems to be off by approximately a factor of 10.

Losses
Transmission and distribution losses in the USA were estimated at 7.2% in 1995


Direct link to cited source:
tech-options-1-3-2.pdf


Your sources are as usual a bit flawed. Total distribution losses are not "resistance" alone. They also include isolator failures, conductor failures, storms, peak summer ambient temperatures, animal based disruptions, and many more including generator "brush" overheating.

read this first and learn...

www.ferc.gov...

The combined "system" losses are and always have been approx 75% of original generator output.............



reply posted on 25-8-2009 @ 06:59 AM by EnlightenUp
Originally posted by heliosprime
Your sources are as usual a bit flawed.


I'm not sure what "as usual" means here in relation to myself.

Total distribution losses are not "resistance" alone.


The souce I sited claimed no such thing and was also a nice government document. There are reactive and coronal losses as well. More below.

They also include isolator failures, conductor failures, storms, peak summer ambient temperatures, animal based disruptions, and many more including generator "brush" overheating.


That is equivocation on the word "losses". One set are economic due to maintenence issues, the other are in terms of actual physical operating efficiency of the grid ie. losses of actual energy.


www.ferc.gov...

p.55:
Losses depend on a variety of factors, including the physical properties
of transmission facilities, the distance the electricity must travel, and the current use of transmission facilities by others. The costs of system losses are sometimes included in uplift charges borne equally by all transmission system users, which leads to inefficient use of the system.


I see a sligtly higher estimate range as well but not anthing that appears of the magnitude you claim, p.78:
Electricity losses in transmission and distribution
systems exceed 10 percent of total electricity generated. Reducing these losses would represent
hundred of millions of dollars in annual savings to the nation’s electricity bill.


Energy Efficiency in the Power Grid says:

p.1
The transmission and distribution or “T&D” system, then, includes everything between a generation plant and an end-use site. Along the way, some of the energy supplied by the generator is lost due to the resistance of the wires and equipment that the electricity passes through. Most of this energy is converted to heat. Just how much energy is taken up as losses in the T&D system depends greatly on the physical characteristics of the system in question as well as how it is operated. Generally speaking, T&D losses between 6% and 8% are considered normal.


and

p.1
T&D losses amounted to 239 million MWh, or 6.1% of net generation. Multiplying that number by the national average retail price of electricity for 2005, we can estimate those losses came at a cost to the US economy of just under $19.5 billion.


It states net generation but we're still within around the 10% order of magnitude.

So, we're left needing the efficiency of the generating station itself-- output divided by total energy avaiable in fuel source. I feel confident it won't be low enough bring it all to net 75% loss on large turbines. On a small gasoline portable generator, then yes but that's not part of the grid.

read this first and learn...


I know extraneous snips at me are intended as a defense mechanism on your part however I am grateful to you for the opportunity to learn more.

Perhaps you want reader that buy any claim you make. Help me out here and show me that the system has a net energy loss of 75%. We aren't talking about the economic impact of someone spilling their coke on the generator. Your citation a big document and I don't have time to do all 108 pages.

The combined "system" losses are and always have been approx 75% of original generator output.............


Nope, AGAIN I'm failing to find any source besides you making that claim. In fact, resistive losses seem to be the greatest concern at this time. It is yours, so back it up. This isn't a confrontation. Just show me where any reputable accounting reaches that number. Here! I'm opening an opportunity to you to show how dumb and ignorant I am.

Edit to add something I should have included:
Ok, the paper I cited did mention efficiency of traditional coal power plants being typically 30-35% efficient in converting the energy available in coal to electricity. More efficient technologies are citied as well.

For traditional coal alone:
eff = (1-.061)*(.30 to .35) = .2817 to .32865 ~= 28.2% to 32.9% overall energy utilization of the fuel based upon this one type of source in the worst case but still higher than 25%.

Now to address the original premise and my views:
Does driving an electric car or gasoline hybrid produce much more than smug after all losses to the wheels are accounted for? That is a resounding NO with coal generation being about 50% of the power generated. That is with current technology. Modestly increasing coal plant efficiency, assuming coal continues to play a similarly large part is the best way to change the numbers in favor of electric cars.

What is the goal? Improved efficiency or reduced pollution and environmental damage from extraction and other byproduct? Since this is based mainly around CO2 it is a scam given is status as a pollutant is dubious. If we had zero-point modules with an endless supply of free, clean joules, then efficiency would be largely irrelevant.

The best bet in the current situation looks to be clean diesel powered cars which can improve efficiency by 25-30%. Some efficient biofuel process would go a long way. Will will be hearding about that algae farming process? Hmmm.

[edit on 8/25/2009 by EnlightenUp]

[edit on 8/25/2009 by EnlightenUp]


reply posted on 25-8-2009 @ 07:28 AM by Nineteen
reply to post by DjSharperimage


Electric cars are not so new, my mother's boss had one in the late 1940's. They were never "encouraged" because the car companies wanted cars that required plenty of servicing and the oil companies wanted our dependence for their own monetary gain.

Listening to the radio once I heard a man saying that his grandfather had invented a car that ran on water and he challenged Ford to a race across the Blue Mountains in Australia. The water powered vehicle beat the T-Model Ford.

Ford bought the patent and nothing ever came of it.

Thge problem today is that everything is controlled by large corporations and the people have no power of their own in regards to innovation.


reply posted on 25-8-2009 @ 07:37 AM by Gamma MO
Originally posted by Nineteen
reply to post by DjSharperimage

The problem today is that everything is controlled by large corporations and the people have no power of their own in regards to innovation.


Agreed on that point. But now the corporations just slap green labels on something (ethanol, wind power, cleaning products) and it's business as usual...until people start having a little more critical thinking.

Most greenies I've met have shut their minds up tight. Green - good...everything else bad...Simplistic, dangerous thinking.


reply posted on 25-8-2009 @ 07:44 AM by EnlightenUp
reply to post by Gamma MO


Yes, I think besides the issue of total energy to produce the more complex goods and operate them, is the side effects that are hidden in the attempt to make it sound appealing. Really, I don't want forests decimated to build wind and solar farms nor do I want people's quality of life ruined in the process.

It is gung-ho because money has been poured into development of various schemes and those involved will do everything they can to make sure there is a return, for them at least. They'll socialize any losses and unpleasant aspects when reaping the profits for themselves.

It's a little green energy mafia.

Better, cleaner technology is important but it needs to be thought through while considering the negative impacts. If something better has been invented, then the old "better way" should simply be discarded or redeveloped.
Pages: <<  1    2  >>    ^^TOP^^



The Strange Sounds, The Dogon, Sirius B and The Bullroarer.
  Posted 19 days ago with 64 member flags
The Mahdi does not negotiate. Neither should we
  Posted 6 days ago with 10 member flags
HEADS UP! Prediction in "The Conspiracy Theory" movie: 4/23/12
  Posted 18 days ago with 9 member flags
Hopi-Tibetan Prophecy
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags
Sky sounds = "World Wide Sounding of Ram Horn"?
  Posted 10 days ago with 6 member flags
Dream of whats to come?
  Posted 6 days ago with 6 member flags
Heads up! Possible Iran false flag attack on March 2nd
  Posted 4 days ago with 6 member flags