The truth is...

I am glad to say that I have material to work on the pursue of a more broad analysis and critic of issues posted in "The Echo." I guess more than material I had finally time to read what's been discussed in the Augsburg paper.

The Burning Gas and Burning Bridges article caught my attention because the essence of the debate. In my opinion Phillip Kaup's argument that DPS will drive away the efficiency of a hybrid car is rather dramatic. If the car is supposed to be fuel efficient, then no matter what less gas would be consumed, wasted, purchased, or whatever. Unless they decided to start driving more.
The truth is that, the wasteful driving will continue to go on, but it won't be as bad as it would be if they had purchased the Tahoe.

I admire Krohn's incentive to work with the administration of the school to get student issues addressed. What I find ridiculous is that the Green Vehicle Initiative puts that much effort in pushing for a green alternative for just one car. Ok pushing for a greener campus by having one car being hybrid is not going to do much for the overall emissions. I think is time that all the green people all over the place, here and elsewhere stop making themselves feel better for mediocre changes.

What we need is some activists that attack the big polluters more consistently. To track the public servers that are being bought by polluter companies. Ultimately they are the ones that account for the majority of the pollution. Furthermore, if green people really want a change they should push for a law that bans certain cars to circulate one day a week. In Mexico we have that law... well at least we used to now its been weakened by arguing new car's emissions are not as bad. Anyway that's a whole different arena. The main point is that the world is not better because we got one green vehicle. If you can work things out with the school administration, can you do it so with the state and federal administration? Now that's the million dollar question.