What does GREEN really mean for the envirnment?

November 11, 2009 in Alternative Fuel Vehicles

Did you know that you can save fuel and run your car on water

hybrid vehicles

Colorless Polar Bear questioned:

We hear the term “green” the planet over and all seems to talk about it, among which are public and companies compelling compensation to the “trend” or “fashion”. What’s green really mean to you?

The following is what I found in Wikipedia.org:

“Green is used to mean environmentally friendly. For model, green cars are vehicles that have extremely low emissions that are detrimental to the background. The uncommon types of green cars contain hybrid, gripping, ethanol, biodiesel, natural gas, and high MPG gasoline cars. ”

Did you know that you can save fuel and run your car on water

Comments

4 Responses to “What does GREEN really mean for the envirnment?”
  1. Travis H says:

    I like the thought of green industrys cars and anything thats enviromentaly friendly even if even with the global warming speeches huge bussiness ordinarily tramples those dreams

  2. tasha says:

    Green to me is about preserving the background for my possibility generations…

    If you are attracted in prevention of Global Warming, I would stay the Global check Institute and gather about Fleeting way around and Convergance. Finally, if you are in the UK, perhaps a trip to the Huge Green Gathering force enlarge your views on “Green”.

  3. j says:

    Making background green earnings more plants. If here are many plants you will see the color green that surrounds the background.

  4. Gunny T says:

    For the background? Not a total lot, the thought(s) are frequently biased pretentiousness and feel-excellent imagery..
    If it puts a restriction on confidential frankness, free market economics, or national energy plot, it is liable to be on the ordinary list by the “Greens”. any serious methodical breakdown of each “green” restriction yields very dubious equipment on the by and large background. An across the board 10% reduction in global hydrocarbon fuel use (to reduce that horrid .35 part per billion Co2 content) would toss the worlds state(s) into total disorder, mass starvation and biased disorder would stay on. Do the “greens” tell you that part?

Speak Your Mind

Tell us what you're thinking...