Quote: "hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe (aside from n00bism)"
That's the answer! Noob-powered cars! Just attach some idiot who tk'd you or asked you to join their MMORPG team to the front of your Mazda and MUSH!
Quote: "You know, funnily enough water vapour is one of the major causes of the greenhouse effect..."
The greenhouse effect is a natural one, but humans and their stupid cars are speeding it up drastically. And before you say "global warming doesn't exist" take a look at my city, Binghamton NY. After the warmest winter in New York's recorded history as a state, we had massive floods that left 40k homeless. If global warming didn't cause it, what did?
Quote: "maybe they should try to make something thats human powered?"
Every year, humans get lazier. Technological advances are pushing these lazy trends along. But this is a FACT. How can I say that? Take a look at the obesity problem facing the United States that's now leaking into Europe. Expecting people to abandon their cars is unrealistic. But if you take their fossil-fueled cars away and give them pollution-free vehicles, they can help the environment and help themselves without realizing it
The "big three" in alternative fuels and their pros/ cons:
Hydrogen Fuel Cells: The cleanest, but the most complicated conversion and thus the most expensive. But the fuel is dirt-cheap (literally)... They literally run on water. They'll have a hard time getting off the ground because whenever people hear "hydrogen" they think of Bikini Atoll and the Hydrogen bomb, and stupid people (you know, most of them) tend to worry their car will explode and take out St. Louis. Sounds retarded, sure, but go ask three randomly-selected people what they think of when they hear the word "hydrogen." The results will make you giggle. At any rate: Pros = super-clean and cheap to fill; cons = expensive maintenance costs and extremely poor performance (hydrogen is "too" efficient, as hydrogen cars aren't very fast, and a lot of people like fast cars.
Corn Ethanol: This is the option that the government is trying to push on us the hardest. It's also the worst idea ever. It's almost as bad for the environment as petrol, and it's nothing if not problematic. While it'll be cheaper because it runs on corn, it'll be more expensive because the same five ****holes (yes, that was a four-letter word) will be earning all of the profit from it and firing the costs through the roof. Pros = we won't be buying oil from brown people anymore, the entire goal of the Bush administration in terms of "saving the environment"; Cons = Problematic, costly in the long run, and BAD for the environment
Sugar Ethanol: In Brazil, they're using Sugar Ethanol to power everything now, and it's working out splendidly. Sugar ethanol isn't as clean as hydrogen, but it's easy and cheap to convert, FAR cleaner than corn ethanol, and it's the most efficient in that it takes less sugar ethanol to power a car than petrol, and said car will be faster than the petrol-powered ride. Pros = super efficient, good performance, cheap as heck; cons = not as clean as hydrogen
There's my $229.79. We should all be on Sugar Ethanol until we can be weened onto hydrogen (and until technology can make hydrogen cars as efficient in terms of performance as petrol cars, because if they aren't, they won't sell).
"In an interstellar burst, I'm back to save the universe"
