California Mandates Display of 'Global Warming Score' on New Vehicles

California wants you to consider greenhouse gas emissions when you buy your next new car. And to help you do that, they’ve revised their mandatory Environmental Performance label for all 2009 model-year cars. All new vehicles must display the modified sticker by January 1, but some could appear on cars as early as this month.

Next to the traditional “Smog Score,” there’s now a “Global Warming Score.” Both show scales of 1 to 10 and display where a particular vehicle stands on the scale. The higher the score, the cleaner the vehicle—and the scales adjust so that the average across all new cars each year is exactly 5. The scales incorporate all classes of consumer vehicles, from zero-emission electric cars to the heaviest SUVs and vans.

The new Global Warming Score reflects the emissions of greenhouse gases from the vehicle’s operation and the production of fuel to power it. The older Smog Score looks at smog-forming emissions just from operating the vehicle, including the three “criteria emissions” that have been regulated by law for 35 years: carbon monoxide (CO), hydrocarbons (HC), and nitrous oxides (NOx).

A car’s Global Warming Score might well differ from its Smog Score. One that’s exceptionally economical with fuel—emitting relatively little CO2, the main greenhouse gas—but produces close to the maximum permitted criteria pollutants, for example, would be relatively “dirtier” than its Global Warming Score would show. That said, a Toyota Prius is still likely to do better than average on both scores, while a Hummer H2 will probably do worse than average.


  • Bryce

    I think I saw one of these things on a lot the other day. They are interesting, but I suspect that when consumers are looking at these things, their eyes will be drawn more to the MPG than a theoretical little number that won’t necessarily save them any money personally. I suppose awareness is good though, and there certainly is no harm in the little numbers. : )

  • WompaStompa

    Only 49 more states to go. I agree with Bryce that a lot of people probably pay more attention to MPGs than how “green” a car really is. I personally don’t only drive a hybrid to get from point A to point B more times between fill ups as much as because I have one of the lowest emissions cars available which fits with my otherwise environmentally conscious lifestyle. But saving $$ at the pump doesn’t hurt either.

    Hopefully, though, someone just out shopping for car may notice car A’s score is only a 5 while car B is a 7 and that will influence their decision that way. I guess time will tell rather your average car buying will actually take this information into account when buying a new vehicle.

  • Ross James

    This is garbage. There’s been no warming for the past 11 years, even though carbon dioxide concentration has increased. Call it something meaningful – CO2 ouput. The question is – do we want more or less? For humans it doesn’t matter. Plants want more. I’m more concerned about preserving non-renewable energy. Fuel efficiency is what counts for me.

  • Anonymous

    Ross James says “There’s been no warming for the past 11 years” What?????

    Not even community colleges would tell students that junk
    Please share your point without the misleading remarks and do some real research instead of hearing some nut on the radio or brain washing political group tell you what to say

    I get the point about fuel efficiency but please tell people who have respiratory problems due to increase of C02 that it doesn’t matter oh by the way there is actual scientific studies that link this

    Sorry for seeming pissy but
    Please a little help for James?

  • Bob B

    Anonymous, Mr. James is correct in that the global mean temperature has been statistically unchanged for the last decade. It’s a fact Jack.

  • Anonymous

    Ah, Bob and Ross remind me of the kids in the sandbox who weren’t allowed to help build the group sand fort and would then throw a tantrum and ruin everyone else’s fun.

    Would either of you care to cite peer reviewed proof of your assertion regarding the last decade? How about the last 150 years?

    Go play in the Fox News sandbox.

  • Anonymous

    It’s a fact Jack.

    Ok Bob B I respectfully challenge you to do some research on your argument please read some data for and against my point that global temp has increased. I also didn’t see u say anything about “The question is – do we want more or less? For humans it doesn’t matter” Got something to say about that?

    For
    http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2007/
    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/12/071213101419.htm

    Against
    http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/warming-on-11-year-hiatus/
    http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-stopped-in-1998.htm

    Please also read the references if u feel the same after reading these articles fine maybe I have a different view of the statement but don’t say its a fact until you do some research
    Best Wishes…….

  • Dave the Frustrated.

    Both of them are right I am sad to inform you. The fact of the matter, CO2 is a poor green house gas and not very effective at all. Al Gore succeeded in his money at what he intended to do. Seperate a large number of very scared people from there money at the box office. That’s nothing compared to the amount of money the fools are going to be seperated with when his carbon cap and trade scheme gets in effect. The sad truth of all of this is that, we’ll never get to say I told you so. When the environment stays nice and cool, as it most certainly will, the left wing environmentalist wackos will run around patting each other on the back and snubbing the rest of us because they brought about global climate stability. What a racket, I wish I had thought of it first. The fact is, whether we do anything at all to alter the amount of CO2 going into the air, nothing is going to change, the sun will continue to drive cooling and warming cycles, just as it has for a billion years and will continue to do so until long after our progeny is deceased.

    Meanwhile, they succeed in forcing people like me that know the truth into submitting into the scam by purchasing hybrid cars and unproven technology that will allow us to buck the price of gas WHICH THEY CAUSED TO BE SO HIGH. Call me simplistic if you like. Challenge me if you like. I am right, and you can think about that as you watch your living standard plummet right into the toilet over the next twenty years due to an inconvenient myth.

  • Paul Beerkens

    Wow, isn’t this amazing. We found the last 3 people on the planet who do not believe that global warming exists and we found them on Hybridcars.com. Who would have expected that?

  • Chris 123

    The Nazi’s had something similar. It was a gold star.

  • moik

    similar to what?

  • Alex2312

    Wow did Dave just say that? Seems kind of funny do people like him get paid to post blogs? Hope the guy can say what he said in 30yrs to his kids or grandkids. I like the comment about researching the point it must have struck a nerve w/ the naysayer crowd. I like Dave’s response to the earlier comments w/c is I’m right your wrong and thats the way it is & who cares about science u environmentalist wackos. Wow! Love when people get bad and throw the environmental wacko comment into the mix sounds very mature. Someone needs to send Dave some extra love

  • what name

    4 make that 4 people who don’t think “global warming” is more than the current up trend in temps that will come down again… no matter what we humans do. On the otherhand… I drive a hybrid… because I am a real estate broker and need a good size car that gets decent milage… thus a toyota highlander hybrid. OH and I was all about the $2000 tax credit George (and a republican congress) gave me for buying a hybrid also.

  • Jody

    Correction 1-4
    Guess its time to stock up on some extra winter cloths Burr….

  • Vincent James

    By the way, Ross is right. Do research yourself. There are some 31,000 scientists that have signed a petition saying that global warming can’t be a man made phenomenon. Nor is it proven to actually be happening. Why don’t you listen to science instead of the totalitarian Al Gore trying to put a global tax on us all, fool! You think in 100 years that we have changed the earths temperature. It was even warmer before the industrial age. Who caused that? My talk show host has a PhD. What does Al Gore have, Hollywood actors?

  • james w

    Yes guys, Global temperatures overall are at a standstill over the past 10 years despite increased emissions, and this was originally released from the UN. Whats more important than that is the fact that most of the computer climate projection models as late as the early 2000s were projecting the irreversible warming al gore had described, yet were wrong only a few years out. Maybe we should take that into consideration before we let our hysteria lead us into another endless power trip for congress. Btw, you can count me in on the growing number of dissidents on this website. If its not too much to ask id also like to invite my 31,000 friends from here:

    http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=64734

    if you guys want something to debate, you should read this article too:

    http://wattsupwiththat.wordpress.com/2008/06/05/lieberman-warner-debate-senator-rohrabacher-do-you-really-think-the-world-is-filled-with-morons/

  • Joseph Shippee

    Global warming is a theory, nothing more. I cannot believe how naive and trusting that this country is, that people will buy anything the media force feeds them. In the late 70′s the talk of the unemployed leftist trust fund hippies was “Global Cooling”. We all see how that theory turned out. Now its “Man Made Global Warming”, which is such a poor theory that it is downright laughable. First off there is no “global” warming, some parts of the world are getting warmer, some are getting cooler. This past winter was the one of the coldest on record, and it is well documented that the average temperature of the oceans is dropping as well. There is much stronger evidence that this is a natural phenomenon than there is pointing to any actions by humans that are the cause of any type of climate change. Liberals are not ignorant, they just seem to know so much that isn’t so.

  • neodog

    GLOBAL WARMING IS A MYTH. MAN MADE RELIGON! CALIFORNIA NEEDS TO LAY OFF THE OPIUM AND LSD OR WHAT EVER THEY’RE SMOKING, INJECTING OR SNORTING.

  • Anonymous

    WOW You freaks all need a life badly…. You sound like a bunch of media parrots. Just remember the liberal environmentalists were screamimng we were all going to freeze to death about 7 years ago and when that did not come to pass, they quickly changed it to we are all going to cook ourselves. Good grief just like with their church of evolution, here we go again with another non issue, non earth shaking (melting) problem. Gads when are the lib’s going to get a hobby ? I cannot imagine spending my time blabbering on about a non exsisting issue. Do you lib’s ever get embarrassed when your stupid physco babble never comes to pass ? When do you alarmist, Gore, believing fools give up on the propaganda, worshipping, junk science ? Why don’t you get out from hiding behind your computers, drive your Inbred cars to some remote location and take up a hobby like studying the tectonic plate theory, or rock hunting ?

  • Show me in PA.

    Does anyone know the maximum, and minimum Artic sea ice data for any of the years between 900 AD, and 1800 AD. Well until I see this data, phooey on global warming. There is no competent data on which to base the “global warming myth”. With only about 60 years of data on the sea ice, and much less on Antartic ice pack, 55 years is an insignificant amount of time on which to base a theory of global warming unless it is more a con than a theory.

    Even the University of Illinois Sea Ice Dataset at http://arctic.atmos.uiuc.edu/SEAICE/ states the following:

    “Please note that much of the pre-1953 data is either climatology or interpolated data and the user is cautioned to use this data with care.”
    “Gaps within observed data are filled with climatology or other
    numberically derived data.”

    The above two quotes are cut and paste from the data on the site. Including “numberically” go figure… make up words, make up data to fill in gaps.

    Another quote comes from a report by the: the National Snow and Ice Data Center:
    “The record melting of the Northwest Passage comes two weeks after the NSIDC and two other ice-monitoring agencies in the U.S. and Japan declared that the Arctic Ocean ice cover has shrunk to its smallest size since regular satellite imaging of the polar cap began in 1979.”

    1979!!! Only 30 puny years of data! What insanity to bet the future on only 30 years of data.

    “[A]nalysts at the Canadian Ice Service and the U.S. National Ice Center confirm that the Northwest passage is almost completely clear and that the region is more open than it has ever been since the advent of routine monitoring in 1972.”

    1972!!! Only 36 puny years of data! And now we are gonna bet our economical well being on 36 years of data!

    For instance, a name from history is Roald Amundsen, a Norwegian explorer who successfully navigated the Northwest Passage on August 26, 1905 in a wooden boat, no ice breaking with that boat.

    The RMCP also navigated the Northwest passage in 1940, 1942, & 1944.

    Gee seems the Northern Polar Ice cap has melted back before…before Al Gore and his associates figured out a way to make money on it, by duping the gullible.

    NASA recently reversed their position on global warming aka “climate change”-a definitionless euphanism without commitment as to the nature of change. This conveniently occurred shortly after the term “global warming” became part of the Bush administrations’ vocabulary.

    Investment bankers, brokers, corporations, and the politically connected stand to make trillion$, with cap and trade, trillions from the pockets of the little guys. Where do you fit, honestly, where do you really fit in the big picture…poor, cold, and hungry.

  • Jwood

    GLOBAL WARMING=Y2K=BULL

  • Hobart

    More stupic liberal BS that is supposed to make us feel better. As if reducing human’s CO2 gases a few percent is going to impact the climate of the ENTIRE EARTH! HA!!

    Stupid liberals. Whatever you do, DON’t BELIEVE THEM! They are either lying or seriously misinformed.

    Please remember that humans output only about 2-3 percent of the total amount of greenhouse gases emitted into Earth’s atmosphere every year. The rest is produced by MOTHER NATURE! Don’t belive me, check this NOAA website: http://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/infodata/faq_cat-1.html#17

    So, what do you think, shouldn’t we be suing Mother Nature? Or so the liberals would have us think.

  • thoughts

    hobart,

    after reading the website you listed, i believe you did not read it.

    ” The Earth has a natural CO2 cycle that moves massive amounts of CO2 into and out of the atmosphere. The oceans and land vegetation release and absorb over 200 billion metric tons of carbon into and out of the atmosphere each year. When the cycle is balanced, atmospheric levels of CO2 remain relatively stable. Human activities are now adding about 7 billion metric tons of carbon into the atmosphere every year,which is only about 3-4% of the amount exchanged naturally. But that’s enough to knock the system out of balance, surpassing nature’s ability totake our CO2 emissions out of the atmosphere. The oceans and land vegetation are absorbing about half of our emissions; the other half remains airborne for 100 years or longer. This is what is causing the rapid buildup of CO2, a buildup that dwarfs natural fluctuations.” notice the last couple of sentences there. we are knocking it out of balance.

    my thought is, if we can make our footprint smaller and take better care of the only planet we have, why not do it. but i will say the biggest problem we face and is never talked about is overpopulation and all of the issues that we face with it.

  • Paul Beerkens

    I guess that big coal/oil’s pr firms is monitoring http://www.hybridcars.com. As you are paying attention I would like to offer you a new slogan for free. “Coal does not kill, people do”.

  • Amaru

    I guess that big coal/oil’s pr firms is monitoring http://www.hybridcars.com. As you are paying attention I would like to offer you a new slogan for free. “Coal does not kill, people do”.

    LOL

    If anything is causing “global warming”, it is the Sun and the Sun only. I’m sure you just can’t wait to pay the global carbon tax and be fined if you have more than one child because they are natural polluters who will destroy the world. If you want to start now, you can move to China where there are STIFF penalties for having more than one child.

  • Old Man Crowder

    Oh please, people. Quit it already.

    Whether you believe we caused global warming or that it’s part of nature’s cycle, only a moron would argue that continuing to pump chemicals and pollution into our atmosphere is a good idea.

    The truth is, caring about the earth does not make you Che Guevara, and caring about the needs of the economy does not make you Michael Douglas in Wall Street.

    I once heard an expression: “he doesn’t have the brains God gave a dog.”… well malign dogs all you want, but at least they know something we humans don’t: you don’t sh*t where you eat.

  • Bill C

    What are the environmentalists going to do when a volcano spews, That is more pollution then we could ever do. So is al gore (you know the guy telling us to shut off lights while he turns his on) going to jump into the volcano and tell it to stop, or tax it some?

    More crapola from the looney left. Enough already.

  • AP

    To “Old Man Crowder’s” point: global warming (fact or fiction – don’t care) is not the only reason to cut down petroleum consumption. Politically and strategically, it is the right thing to do:

    1) It would reduce our need to keep “peace” in the Middle East,
    2) It would reduce the trade deficit
    3) It would reduce funding for state-sponsored terrorism,
    4) It would reduce the political power of questionable leadership in the Middle East,
    5) It would produce cleaner air here.

    But CAFE – Corporate Average Fuel Economy – is the wrong way to do this (it doesn’t create consumer demand for fuel-efficiency). We need to keep consumer demands and automakers’ products in line by increase the fuel tax when gasoline prices take a breather. We then return it to taxpayers in an income taxt credit. This would

    1) Create dependable demand for new fuel-efficient cars,
    2) Make it easier for American makers to predict consumers’ needs (it takes 5 years to bring out a new car – feeling lucky?)
    3) Discourage unnecessary driving in new AND old cars,
    4) Make fuel-efficient cars profitable for American makers,
    5) Promote more research in fuel-efficient designs (profits drive research and development), and
    6) Give America the push to become a center of fuel-efficient, petroleum-minimizing technology that other countries (Chnia, India, etc.) will need as petroleum prices go up.

    Setting standards and providing huge funding for research doesn’t do it. Necessity (of the consumer for fuel-efficiency) is the mother of invention.

  • dgagli1

    Actually, I think global warming started in 1934. So by our calculations, I think the world should have ended by now.

    http://www.nosocialism.com/2008/07/nasa-backtracks-on-1998-warmest-year.html

  • Bryan W.

    I hope this backfires in Californias face and people start buying cars only with 1 and 2 (worst score ratings) to show the government needs to stop trying to control everything. It is not necessary to waste this time, effort and money. It is a waste of time. while I agree that we should do our part to help the environment, it is also personal and private choice when it comes to goods and services we each decide to buy. The Peoples Republic of California has gone to far again. Can’t wait till we have have to pay for carbon credits to have a back yard barbecue, or for burning wood in our fireplaces in the winter. Why has our government gone so mad!!

  • Joe

    Volcano emission should be taxed heavily. The offending country should make the check payable directly to the UN bull#$@t fund. You can avoid volcanic outbursts by appeasing the earth goddess by performing abortions in her honor, and thereby cut down on volcanic gas emissions…..

    Sarcasm aside, co2 isn’t pollution. That crap I see in the sky, and smell in the nasty air of L.A. is not carbon dioxide. Why doesn’t Al Gore deal with our REAL environmental issues? Why does his house consume more energy than the homes of 200 Americans? If this global warming threat wasn’t a propaganda farce, maybe we’d hear about the real problems, rather than the fake ones that can be most easily taxed.

  • alex av

    Its interesting to me how people who lean more towards liberalist ideals tend to be more “pissy” or irritated with remarks that are not like their own…if I didn’t know much about the issue at hand it would lead to me to believe that the liberal is compensating for something and that something is the fact that they don’t know what they are talking about, I mean not totally so they revert to attacking the opponent with their sarcasm! FACT IS THAT THE SUN IS SOURCE OF HEAT/ENERGY in our world and if you follow sun flare activity you will see that when flares are up temperature on Earth is up and when they are down then there is a cooling like we experienced in the 70′s (I remember being scared sh*#*#less because lib teachers where telling us 7 year olds that the world was going to freeze!!) and are now experiencing in toddlers years of the is century. Haven’t you heard that Al Gore WILL NOT respond to John Coleman’s (the founder of the weather channel and I would assume he has more credentials than the son of the coal miner magnate Al Gore) request for a debate on the issue!

  • Bruce

    Why even waste the ink it takes to print the extra “numbers” when those numbers are based not on science and common sense but on scare tactics???

  • Jeff

    I think my favorite part of the lunacy of man made global warming is how once they realized it’s not really warming they had to create a new name. Now it’s called “climate change”. We used to call that “weather” when I was a kid but I guess a sucker is born every minute.

    You can’t believe the swell of the rivers here in colorado this year from the snow melt run-off. This is the second year in a row where we’ve had record snow levels from the so called man made global warming. I say bring on the CO2 as it’s great for ski season as well as spring rafting. BTW, the plants also thrive on high CO2 which happens to produce food and oxygen for all of us.

    This scam will bring millions to Al and his eletist friends. First he makes millions with Oxy coal now he make millions cleaning it up. Brilliant huckster that creator of the internet…….

  • Brian Simpson

    New mandated “hype warnings” on cars in California. Living in Alaska you can observe first hand the propoganda being fed to the rest of the country about “global warming”. The sea ice on the arctic ocean extended further south this year than previous years in living memory.
    My Eskimo friends were delayed in their traditional sea mammal hunting this summer due to the extent of the sea ice and how long it lingered past the normal hunting season. The walrus and bearded seal migrations were delayed due to the ice conditions and consequently the Nome hunters (to the south of the Bering Strait) had more hunting opportunity than normal.
    The musk ox, reindeer and caribou herds all calved two to three weeks later than I have ever seen in 30 years. Of course, what is normal? 20 years, a lifetime, as far back as any of the elders can remember?? Weather fluctuates, but now the natural changes are a source of reducing peoples’ freedom and enriching big business and government.
    The local hunters can attest to the fact the polar bears populations are up, and their fat, which indicates the general health of the animal, is in normal ranges. Stressed and dying polar bears?!
    we have millions of acres of wooded scrub in the interior of Alaska that burn each summer. The atmosphere becomes obscured with wood smoke, the air quality becomes worse than southern California on a bad day in Riverside. These are lightning (not man) caused fires and have occured for thousands of years. I wonder what the effect of the fires are, seems like the planet has adjusted for it ever since.
    I was really getting worried about the effect of my accumulating sins against nature, and I am relieved to know that I can purchase “indulgences” in the form of carbon offset trades and do my part to fund the wall street corporate thugs and government agency leeches in a whole new venue…..

  • Anonymous

    show me the research that proves it’s caused by man…who’s missleading who?

  • Pv1

    industrialized redistribution indoctrination its all about control and money…………………….always has and always will be???

  • Reiko

    This is utterly ridiculous. It’s like people have this mindless group mentality when it comes to zealous belief in anthropogenic global warming despite the fact it has been debunked time and time again.

  • Anonymous

    If some of these people went to college it is clear to me they got a BS in BS. Where did these crazies come from?
    SO HERE IT IS U CAN SAY THIS OR WRITE it DOWN

    Ready…….. Abnormal variations in natural global temp. cycles ARE happening some call this GLOBAL WARMING or others call it Global Climate Change

    Ok nuts u can say humans have nothing to do with this or u can say its some crazy wacky scientist who has somehow suckered in 99% of the Scientfic Communitiy under his crazy wasy spells. How about Democrates, or even worse Liberals

    What ever excuses u make I DONT CARE!!!!!!!!!!! LOOK IT UP WITH PEER REVIEWED LIT. OR BETTER YET ASK A KID IN 4 GRADE THEY COULD HELP YOU

    Oh thats right u believe that Polar Bears can live w/o ice and ocean levels will/are not rising, Hurricanes don’t get stronger due to higher sea temp, Abnormal Droughts and Weather patterns will/are not occurring, People are not getting more respiratory problems due to C02…….

    What is that I can’t hear u make some more BS up & post it on this Blog

  • Freedom Fries

    The President to his credit has come full circle in understanding that Global Climate Change is real say what u want about him but at least he is not listening to some of the crazies that post comments here

    Go USA!

  • Bryce

    Well, I guess I started the posting on this thread, and I suppose I can wrap it up. These little stickers are nifty little things, but people will really be looking to save money, and that comes from MPGs. On top of that, whatever one’s beliefs are, whether they hold to climate change or think it is a crock, we can all enjoy saving a little money and avoid putting money in you-know-where. : ) I hate to sound all frilly nilly, but we all have come to this site, either to stop global warming in our own way, save a few bucks at the pump, or keep our valuable dollars out of the hands of those that would do us harm, and that draws us together and puts us in the same basket, if u will. So please, stop yelling at each other, cuz we all want the same thing, affordable gas saving/free vehicles that we can be proud of and enjoy.

  • Old Man Crowder

    Thank you, Bryce.

    I was beginning to forget what the original post was about and the intended purpose of the site itself.

  • hellohello

    Thats why the entire state is burning down right now.

  • greenbutnotstupid

    The CO2 content of our atmosphere is not 10%, it’s not 1%, it’s not even .1%.

    It is .036%!

    That would be about the equivalent of 3 CO2 bubbles floating up in a can of coke. Barely an influence in what the temperature will be.

  • Anonymous

    One thing for all you global warming followers to consider–Al Gore made $100 million off speeches regarding this topic. Please also remember that everytime he flies in his private jet for 2 hours, he is emitting enough carbon for a family of 5 to drive across the country 12 times. Sounds to me like he could care less about the environment and more about putting money in his pocket!

  • Bryce

    I have to admit, I find it thoroughly entertaining that hybridcars.com is the place that so many climate change debunkers can be found. (no offense to either side……lol, I don’t want to get caught in the middle of this crossfire) Have fun discussing (hopefully civilly) this topic everyone!

  • Kerry

    Has anyone ever heard of the Precautionary Principle? According to Wikipedia,

    “When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically.”

    Whatever your opinion global warming is, it will never be a bad thing to reduce your environmental footprint. It will never be a bad thing to pump less manmade chemicals in our atmosphere. It just won’t. Anyone want to argue with me here? If you do, you’re probably like..evil.

    If global warming isn’t going to convince you to reduce emissions, how about ocean acidification?

    http://www.physorg.com/news134314354.html
    http://www.reuters.com/article/environmentNews/idUSN1046682220080710

    And I know people are going to be skeptics of ocean acidification, too. But you can’t argue with the logic in these hypotheses. Most of us have learned about the greenhouse effect in school. You car has windows closed in a hot, sunny parking lot. The heat gets trapped inside! Those who have learned any elementary chemistry (or have any common sense) will know that if you have higher concentration of a gas around a liquid, more of that gas will dissolve in the liquid! What a concept! It all seems pretty logical to me. For all we know there are many other un-global-warming-related-effects of producing more CO2.

    I’ll be honest. I might be one of those “environmental whackos” that were mentioned earlier, but some things I can’t help but believe. I’ve loved everything math and science related since I was a kid. I loved nature and how much order there was in a seemingly chaotic world. I loved learning about all the intricacies of life from the molecular level to the ecosystem level in biology class. The more I learn, the more I appreciate the life this planet has supported. I don’t care if we colonize Mars or the moon in the next century; it’s never going to be as beautiful as Earth. I know it sounds cheesy, but Earth is our only home. If you could do something that could potentially (potentially is the key word here) do irreversible harm to it, why risk it? It’s just not worth it.

    PS Has anyone read Ishmael by Daniel Quinn? If not, it’s an excellent read for..anyone!

  • Bryce

    That is a valid point…….then again, we tested the A-Bomb not sure if it wasn’t going to ignite the whole atmosphere and kill us all………..we were pretty sure it wouldn’t……..kinda sorta anyways. :)

  • Bryce

    wow, here u are again. amazing how “regina” just posted the same exact post as 3 other people nearly word for word all putting up links to this auto repair thing. Do u have permission to advertise on this site???

  • tapra1

    Bragman told HybridCars.com. “While it’s common in Europe to have greenhouse-gas emissions information on vehicle stickersBest Business Hosting