题目内容
The statistic released by the Alliance to Save Energy in 2004 showed that hybrid drivers spent much less money on fuel than SUV drivers.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
A．Languages connect with the community where it is used.B．Languages have different obl
Engines of Change
The Holy Grail(圣杯) for Automakers
I am driving through downtown Washington, D.C., in a white GM minivan with friendly blue-bubble paper decorating the sides. It's emitting no toxic chemicals and the engine seems to purr(发出隆隆声) rather than growl. I am driving a hydrogen-powered automobile—so clean, you can drink from the exhaust pipe—and it's a smooth, energetic ride.
It's also the Holy Grail for automakers, environmentalists, political leaders—and, most important, drivers everywhere, whether or not we realize it yet. What's not to like about a vehicle that combats global warming, offers hope of weaning(使戒掉) the world off Mideast oil, and could save on fuel costs？ More than anything, though, the development of the hydrogen car, along with other alternatives, is a response to one unsettling fact: The world will one day run out of oil. And that day may arrive sooner than most of us would think.
Industry experts at the Association for the Study of Peak Oil and Gas (ASPO) predict that by 2008, we may have extracted half the available global supply of oil. While it took us the better part of the last century to reach this halfway point, it will take significantly less time to consume the rest. With more industrialized countries, more cars, trucks and buses, and more demand than ever for home heating and appliances—just think China—oil could reach depletion more quickly than we once assumed. So the race is underway to find affordable fuel alternatives, as well as new ways to conserve our remaining oil.
For car manufacturers and a growing number of consumers, the future is now-in the form. of the latest generation of hybrid vehicles. Toyota, Honda and Ford have led the charge with technology that pairs a small gasoline engine with an electric motor that actually powers the car without high levels of pollution. The electric motor and gasoline engine is more efficient than a combustion(燃烧) engine. According to the Alliance to Save Energy, in 2004, SUV drivers spent about $1,225 on fuel, while passenger cars cost $976 to run. Hybrid drivers only spent between $350 and $450.
Also, hybrids have solved a big drawback of energy-efficient electric cars, which need to be recharged regularly literally plugged into a power source. Hybrids like Honda's Insight, Civic and Accord, and Toyota's Prius, charge the battery as you drive. Plus, some can travel more than 600 miles on a tank of gas.
To lure people to buy these cleaner, more efficient cars—hybrids, the federal government is offering owners a one-time tax deduction. Local governments are offering incentives too. Hybrid owners in Los Angeles receive parking exemptions; in Connecticut, residents whose energy-efficient cars get at least 40 miles per gallon are exempt from the sales tax on the car; Pennsylvania owners are eligible for a $500 discount at purchase; and in Virginia, hybrid drivers can take advantage of the HOV (high-occupancy vehicle) lane—no matter how many passengers are on board.
According to Bradley Berman, editor of HybridCars.com, 88,000 of these automobiles were sold in the United States last year—that's nearly double the previous year and about ten times as many sold in 2000. This year alone, the chic(时尚的) Prius is on track to sell some 45,000, despite six-month waiting lists.
Reducing U.S. Oil Consumption
Even as more hybrid cars hit the road, the technology is a key element in an exciting new project, one that could hasten our transition to a hydrogen-fuel economy. The Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI), a nonprofit organization dedicated to energy policy, has launched a research center with the sole purpose of creating the "Hypercar." This vehicle's design is what sets it apart. Hypercars are formulated to make the most of an ultra-light construction, low-drag aero-dynamics and hybrid-electric drive trains to achieve much greate
Throughout George Bush's presidency, the federal government has refused to support any regulation of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming. Whenever the subject comes up, officials tend to mumble(咕哝) about uncertainties. But on April 2nd, the Supreme Court at last settled one of the biggest outstanding questions: whether the government has the authority to curb emissions in the first place.
The court ruled that the Clean Air Act a law from the 1960s designed to combat smog— gives the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the power to regulate carbon dioxide, the main greenhouse gas. It also said the EPA would need an excuse if it decided not to use this power. It dismissed the justifications the EPA had provided for inaction that emissions from American cars were insignificant in the grand scheme of things and that unilateral action by America would undermine efforts to achieve international consensus on global warming—as inadequate. Strictly speaking, the ruling applies only to emissions from vehicles, but a very similar case regarding coal fired power plants is pending(未决的) in federal court. The EPA says it is now examining the ruling.
The EPA might examine it for some time, of course. Any regulations it comes up with in response might still defer action into the distant future, since the law allows the EPA to delay implementation until appropriate technology can be acquired at a reasonable cost. Even if it proceeds quite swiftly, a new president and Congress with globe-cooling ideas of their own will be in place long before any new rules come into effect.
That suits the environmental lobby just fine. They hope the ruling will spur Congress to address global warming with proper legislation. After all, it makes little sense for such an important issue to be tackled tangentially(无甚关系的) through a 40-year-old law. And if 2009 sees the inauguration of a greener president, he or she will now have the power, to dictate stricter fuel efficiency, in the form. of lower CO2 emissions, without reference to Congress.
California set an example. In 2002, the state assembly passed a law regulating emissions of CO2from vehicles, based on a provision of the Clean Air Act that allows California to adopt stricter pollution standards than the federal government. Carmakers have challenged the law, in part on the ground that CO2 was not an air pollutant. The car industry quickly declared that the issue of global warming is best handled at the federal level by Congress.
What is the Court's attitude towards the government's function in the control of greenhouse gases？
A．They should think about the business in their own countries.B．They should think how
微信支付 
支付宝支付