Somebody posted a thread about an air compressor that sparked a thought and I would like to get somebody else's opinion on. Since my wife doesn't like to talk about these kinds of thing I would like to bring the conversation here. I dont want this thread to become political... more of a technical discussion. I was thinking about all these "green" innovations to come out in the last few years that have become vogue... hybrids, fuel cells, electric lawn mowers, solar panels, wind turbines, compressed air cars, etc. How green are they really? Take for example... there is a company that sells compressed air cars. http://www.mdi.lu/english/ ... are they really more "green". How much energy does it take to compress the air? Is the energy "clean energy" (if that even exists)... or is it conventional coal energy? I'm not a physicist but isn't there a law out there that says that energy is never lost... only transferred to friction and heat. My point is that it takes a certain amount of energy to move a mass a given distance... correct??? Wouldn't it require a similar amount of energy from the electrical outlet to compress the gas as it would from the gasoline??? I know a ton of energy is lost in an internal combustion engine to heat... but how much energy is lost on the way to your house through the grid? I guess it then becomes a question of where the energy comes from in reference to coal, nuclear, wind etc. Is there really a "green energy" solution to our problems? Electric cars are even worse... right now PG&E is scrambling to meet the additional requirements that the estimated 30,000 new electric cars sold next year will require. At a time when they are running ads to promote "energy conservation" and conducting "rolling blackouts" is this really the answer??? Even with wind turbines and solar panels there are a ton of toxic chemicals used as lubricants and batteries. Even "hybrid" cars... you have to replace the batteries every 3 or 4 years (at a cost of about $4000)... Do we have a program to recycle the lead and lithium?? With current technology hydrogen cannot be produced without loosing energy thus creating a bigger "carbon footprint" than gasoline.... making fuel cell vehicles almost impossible (why else do you not see them mass produced yet). Companies like BP are scaling back investments in alternative energy because there is no profit involved, only loss. In fact without government incentives and intervention the "clean energy" movement would be dead. Are we chasing a white elephant here?? Is this really about saving the environment... because if you think about it logically all of these things being developed to "save us" may actually be worse than what they are replacing. The ford focus puts out like 99% fewer emissions than any car built in the 60's and 70's... can we consider the job done. Or do we really need to invest trillions in borrowed money to create these "green" technologies?