PVHoward’s Recent Comments

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Automobile manufacturing

  For Dave McCurdy to suggest that "auto makers want to be part of the solution and are committed to improving fuel economy and reducing CO2" is ludicrous.  Auto makers worked hard to defeat and then to overturn California's zero emissions vehicles requirement.  While the law was in effect, they produced totally viable all-electric vehicles, but continued to advertise heavily the big trucks, SUVs and even the Hummer.  They are not so naive to believe that through this advertising they are not creating market.  They know damned well what they're doing, and as soon as California's ZEV law was overturned, they not only stopped manufacturing the electric vehicles, they recalled them all and crushed them!  This is an unforgivable sin.  They don't deserve the trust of the American people and they don't deserve $1 in public money to bail them out of a grave they dug for themselves.  Their priorities are profits and benefits to big oil.  Now that the nation has spoken regarding change and what sort of leadership they want from government, it's very convenient for McCurdy and other auto industry apologists to want to jump on the green bandwagon.  

  If the government gives them anything, it should be a mandate to direct their tremendous advertising budget to informing the public about the climate crisis, the ill effects of our dependency on oil, and the long-range benefits of going to an all-electric transportation system.  Then they should be required to revitalize the ZEVs, and re-tool to build electric light rail, trains, and busses, to become leaders in the effort to save the planet.  Firstly, they should be required to immediately recall and crush all the Hummers on American streets.

  "Listen to those who are seeking the truth; doubt those who have found it." -- Andre Gide

  On Environmental leaders offer their elevator pitches for Obama posted 1 year ago 1 Response

• Click here to view comment in original post

  Airlines must pay for emissions, E.U. says

  It bothers me to read things like "The United States is also opposed, and ..."   The United States doesn't support or oppose anything by consensus.  You are talking about an administration, that usually operates out of its own agenda and more frequently than not completely out of touch with the preferences of the population.

  Usually Grist is more careful to state more specifically "The Bush administration opposes ..." or "The State Department supports ..." etc.,  as there is seldom even unanimity in the Bush administration itself.On Airlines must pay for emissions, E.U. says posted 1 year, 4 months ago 7 Responses

• Click here to view comment in original post

  And the Mining Seems So Safe and Clean

  I like the writing style of Grist.  It's pithy, edgy, humorous without being silly or superficial, etc.  ...but I also harbor and old fashioned appreciation of proper spelling and grammar.  I especially bemoan use of past tense in place of the subjunctive case, as in "What if there was a liquid fuel...?"  Any 9th grade grammar text will tell you that the sentence should read, "What if there were a liquid fuel ...?"  This is the subjunctive, or speculative case, because you're asking a hypothetical question, not describing what "was."
  Thanks for your tolerance,
  Paul
  On And the Mining Seems So Safe and Clean posted 2 years, 5 months ago 1 Response