4 ms·
Or, you know, nat-gas is cheaper, pollutes far less, is cheap, and provides much better operational capabilities for mass transit than electric, etc etc. Or yo
by merpnderp 8y ago
Or, you know, nat-gas is cheaper, pollutes far less, is cheap, and provides much better operational capabilities for mass transit than electric, etc etc.
Or you can hand wave that all away and shout conspiracy theories.
- brightball 8y agoIt's not a conspiracy theory. That's what happens when you purchase mineral rights for drilling. And it is cheaper, but there are also significant questions about what will happen to that cost if consumption significantly increases via mass transit. I'm all for lower emissions, but let's not pretend there isn't a vested interest behind it. Especially when there are also other options that don't get nearly the attention. https://www.computerworld.com/article/3147405/sustainable-it/nikola-motor-unveils-its-hydrogen-fuel-cell-18-wheeler.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3147405/sustainable-it...
- Thorncorona 8y agoSources? I'd love to read about the analyses done on this topic. Most of the papers I've read have suggested the opposite conclusion that you're claiming.