“…writ in water”

For my blog today I am going to throw an idea out into the open inspired by my recent MSN conversation with my godbrother GBF.   

It all started when I asked him what he thought of the possibility of creating a car that could run on pollution by converting it into clean breathable air.  A little idealistic I know, since my friend Neal crushed all hope of this ever happening by explaining how it will never work.  Can’t blame an Arts major for not knowing! (Yes Neal, that is still my excuse for everything.)  Although, deep down inside I still harbour some hope that it could one day be possible.  With technology advancing the way it is nowadays and able to mimic so much, why can’t they find a way to create a machine that can imitate how trees are able to convert carbon dioxide into oxygen?  Anyhow, GBF said a more feasible option –other than my non-existent and impossible invention of an oxygen-creating vehicle would be to encourage more public transit and … hydrogen buses.  Since I’m not a scientist or know very much about it please take all of this with a grain of salt. 

What GBF said was good- to encourage more public transit.  But with the world as it is now, people who have the means to not take public transit most likely won’t.  Therefore, to solve this problem you have to start with each individual.  If people could be convinced to purchase more environmentally-friendly cars it wouldn’t alleviate the problem of pollution in the environment but at least it would help by ceasing to aggravate the problem.  Apparently hydrogen combustion is a lot cleaner and a lot better for the environment.  Now don’t laugh, but here is a link that contains some information regarding hydrogen combustion- http://www.hydrogenhighway.ca.gov

Next, there is the problem of cost.  Environmentally-friendly cars (hydrogen combustion) are a little more expensive for what you get when compared to other cars.  But really, what would you do with a Hummer for example?  Why would anyone need a Hummer in city streets?  Or even in country streets?  When did it become the “in” thing to pollute the environment by purchasing a blatantly environmentally-unfriendly vehicle?  (And yes, I know there are other vehicles, but I am picking on this one today for my blogging purposes.)  If you have that much money to tie up in a car why don’t you spend that money on something more worthwhile and help the environment at the same time?  That’s just a thought for all of you would-be car purchasers. 

This is where the government comes in.  Maybe if the government proposes to subsidize a portion (or a larger portion) of the cost of all vehicles that run on hydrogen combustion or allow tax breaks (write-offs) for purchasing such vehicles then maybe people would be more inclined to purchase them.  And here is my grand idea!  I think China is in the perfect position to start promoting environmentally-friendly cars.  The economy in China is growing and is just starting to grow in a lot of areas.  This means people (though still a small percentage of the ENTIRE population) will have some more purchasing power.  If the Chinese government wants to do something good for its people (and the world), they should seize this opportunity to influence people to make wiser and more environmentally-friendly choices.  First, if China wants to maintain its position as a Communist state and have the world see Communism as a good thing for once, perhaps they should seriously consider taking the lead in environmental issues.  Having the world’s largest population (thanks Will), China is ethically obligated to make responsible choices.  Communism should promote the well-being for all, and if China adopts an environmentally-conscious policy then maybe people will begin to see modern Communism in a better light.  Second, they are in the prime position to implement these policies as the growth in their economy is fairly new and the Chinese people (the average worker- not wealth-handed-down,) have not yet fallen into purchasing habits as North Americans have.  Their purchasing behaviour and choices can still be influenced if subsidiaries and tax breaks are given for environmentally friendly cars. (I do have another argument to add to this in regards to the importance or ‘marketing’ but it will not fit in this blog.)  Third, this is in the best interests of the Chinese government- even if they do lose $ by subsidizing these engines.  China wants to become a world leader.  The US definitely is not backing major environmental issues ie. the Kyoto Protocol- therefore, China should step in.  They should take the lead and commit to the environmental standards required in the Protocol.  If China is able to do it, then there is no reason why other states can’t.  Besides, this is what Communism SHOULD have been about in the beginning.  It should be about the commune (world community in this case) and NOT the individual (national interests). 

So I am going to leave my argument here.  These are just some ideas thrown out- I do realize there are many loopholes in my argument as it stands in the above paragraphs, and I do stand to be corrected.  I do have other arguments as back-up that I have not posted and would love to share them with anyone who cares to challenge any point I have made.  In fact, if anything I have written is completely ignorant and wrong I would like to be told so.  Let me hear your opinions. 

This entry was posted on Monday, August 22nd, 2005 at 10:59 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.