Re: (ET) ET's place in the environment - was: (no subject)

[steves <ssawtelle erols com>]

Pieter wrote:
  I think the world would be better served if the EPA were
> bundled off to China where the "marginal gains" from regulation of 
> the gross and increasing pollution there would be far more 
> significant than the regulation of lawn mowers and BBQs here.

--- Good point - it will be interesting to see how long it takes China 
to become environmentally proactive. I hope it's not too far off.

> It is also interesting to speculate on the total "pollution budget" 
> of building, operating, and retiring an ET. 

-- snip --

I think ETs would fair very well in a 'true cost' assesment. I see ICE 
mowers and tractors literally thrown away after a few years just because 
they won't start. I believe a new ET would be reliable and low 
maintenance for many years. Batteries are a problem area, but a well 
tended battery set should last 7 years or more. ICE tractors probably 
get a new battery every two years. Yes they are smaller and there is 
only one, but  it does add up. Of course, there is pre-cycling - using 
batteries thrown away that still have good life left in them. Of course 
using a 'manual' mower or gravel yards may be much better (unless you 
think about the environmental cost of quarrying, crushing, and 
transporting). Howevr, in the end, I think a true comparison can only be 
made against a similar device (ie a lawn and garden tractor) since you 
need to look at mowing, snowblowing, road work, gardening, etc.

- SteveS