Talan kevesen tudjak de a 100km/o sebesseget eloszor  villany hajtasu
motorral leptek túl
Es ha figyelembe vesszuk az magan autósok szokasat hogy atlag napi
50km-t tesznek meg (78%)
akkor a kifogaskent felhozott kis hatótavolsag igazaból nem oszt ,szoroz
Es talan kevesen emlekeznek de meg a Trabant is kijott egy hibrid auto
prototípusaval   
Egy dízel v. benzines motor + egy 8oras ut megtetelere alkalmas villany 
motorral szereltek volna!!
A kisker ara meg a magyar mertekek szerint is elfogatható szintu lett
volna
Azóta tobb ceg is keszítet hasonló tanulmany autót de valahogy mindegyik
eltunt a sullyesztobe 
De vannak autók mint pl. a puli ami szinten csak  nehany db.-os szeriat
elt meg!!
Folyton azt halom hogy a emberek nem veszik  ezert nem kerulnek
gyartasra
Pedig tobbseguk meg se eli hogy sorozat gyartasra keruljon  mert egy
multi megvasarolja a jogokat!!
Na de ez mar gazdasag politika nem kornyezetvedelem
De azzal egyet kell ertenem amit szu irt : a jelenleg hasznalt uzemanyag
a kitermelestol a szallítasig 
es tovabbi a felhasznalasig folyamatosan  szennyezik a kornyezetet!
Kornyezet szennyezesi szempontból ennel jobbat nem is lehetne talalni
Ha valaki direkt szennyezni akarja egy azon termek lanccal a levegot,
vizet ,talajt, es a gen allomanyt
akkor ennel idealisabb anyagot keresve sem talalhat!!  

-- 
Gyula
,

Tisztelt KORNYESZ-olvasok!

A Kozep-Europai Egyetem (CEU) Kornyezettudomanyi tanszeken a szakdolgozatot  ha
gyomanyosan nehany diakunk cegeknel, vallalatoknal, NGO-knal, kornyezetvedelmi 
kormanyzati szerveknel, stb. irja, "internship" kereteben.  Ilyen egyuttmukodes
 mindket fel szamara elonyos: a fogado intezet (ceg, miniszterium, stb.) veguli
s "ingyen" munkaerot kap par honapra; valamint kiprobalhat olyan potenialis jov
endo munkatarsakat kockazat nelkul, akit alkalmazhat a kesobbiekben.  A diak (e
s a tanszek) szamara pedig garantalja, hogy a diakok valodi kornyezeti problema
k "real-life" megoldasain dolgoznak.

Kerem olyan cegek, intezetek, civil szervezetek jelentkezeset, akik szivesen fo
gadnanak ilyen diakokat.  A diakok egy nagy resze nem magyar (a Kelet-Europai r
egiobol valok), es csak angolul (vagy oroszul) tud; viszont mar mindenkinek van
 egy diplomaja, es mivel a CEU-ra bekerulni igen szelektiv, a diakok kepzettseg
e es tehetsege joval az atlag egyetemistae felett van.

Amennyiben a tanszekrol/egyetemrol tobbet szeretnetek tudni,  a www.ceu.hu -n l
ehet reszletesebb informaciot talalni.  

Varjuk intezetek/cegek/szervezetek jelentkezeset.

Prof. Diana Urge-Vorsatz, PhD
Dept. of Environmental Sciences and Policy
CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY
Ph:        (36-1) 327-3095  or -3021 (secreteriat)
Fax:       (36-1) 327-3031
Address:  H-1051 Budapest, Nador utca 9.

NO POINT IN WAITING AROUND FOR LEADERSHIP

The most earth-shaking event of the past two weeks had to do with
leadership, or
lack thereof, but it did not unfold in Florida.  It happened in the
Netherlands. 
The stunning lack of leadership came from the Clinton/Gore administration.

The meeting in the Hague was the sixth attempt since the Kyoto
conference of
1997 to forge an international agreement that could actually do
something about
climate change.  At Kyoto the industrial countries made solemn promises to
reduce their greenhouse gas emissions.  Europe promised to cut back eight
percent from its 1990 level, Japan by six percent, the U.S. by seven percent.

These cutbacks seem laughable in the face of the climatic facts.  Scientists
worldwide agree that the reduction needed to stabilize the climate is actually
more like 80 percent.  The latest scientific assessment has almost
doubled the
predicted rate of warming if no changes are made.  The Arctic ice pack has
thinned by 40 percent.  The Inuit people are seeing thunderstorms for
the first
time in legend or memory.  Glaciers are almost gone from Glacier
National Park. 
However, since Kyoto, the world's nations have not even been able to
agree on a
definition of "cut back."

You would think "cut back" would mean, you know, cut back, burn less fossil
fuel.  Everyone except the far right wing of the Republican Party
realizes that
oil, gas and coal burning are the main activities that have sent the climate
into bigger floods, droughts, hurricanes, and El Ninos.

But the present administration, which as we know has trouble defining
what "is"
is, wants to define "cut back" in a way that will irritate no oil, coal, gas,
electric or automobile company and no driver of a gas-guzzling vehicle. 
Therefore it wants to cut back using forests and farms.

There is some sense to this proposal.  Trees and soils can absorb carbon dioxid
e
released by fossil fuel burning.  It would be great to subsidize responsible
farmers and forest managers.  The possibility has even opened the minds
of some
western Republican senators to the whole climate issue.

But calculating how much carbon is absorbed by which forests and farms
is a
tricky task, especially when politicians do it.  Not only should you
give credit
for tree growth or the buildup of soil humus, you should issue demerits
for tree
cutting or the destruction of humus.  There is a terrible political temptation
to ignore the demerits, to fudge the numbers, to pretend you've helped
out the
atmosphere when you've actually done no such thing.

You may be able to fool the voters that way, but not the atmosphere. 
Nor the
scientists who know how to do proper carbon accounts.  Nor, it turns
out, the
European nations, most of which take climate change very seriously. 
After days
of wrangling, they finally refused to let the U.S. get away with cheating.

So everyone went home mad (at us) and the climate continues to
deteriorate. 
After eight years with Al Gore in as much power as he may ever be, our country
is far from a global leader on this issue.  We are the obstructionist, the
outlaw, the Saddam Hussein.  And George W. cares as much about climate
change as
you would expect from a Texas oilman.

So here's the good news.  A knowledgeable and courageous U.S. president could
help enormously in leading the world's nations toward saving the
climate, but an
ignorant or servile president can't stop committed nations, companies,
or people
from doing it anyway.

Whatever the United States does, Denmark, the Netherlands and Germany have
detailed plans to cut their greenhouse emissions by 20 to 50 percent --
and in
the process pioneer and patent the new energy technologies that will inevitably
replace coal and oil.

Seven corporations, who together emit enough greenhouse gases to qualify
as the
world's 12th largest emitting nation, have pledged cutbacks of 15
percent --
twice the Kyoto targets..  They even include two forward-looking oil companies,
Royal Dutch/Shell and British Petroleum (whose new motto is "Beyond
Petroleum.") 
Polaroid is working toward cuts of 25 percent, DuPont 65 percent.  Real cuts,
not offset by trees.

Honda's and Toyota's new cars that get 50-70 miles per gallon are
selling faster
than expected.  Daimler-Benz is close to marketing fuel-cell cars that
run on
hydrogen (and emit only water).  In a few years Ford is planning to
market a
fuel-cell-powered SUV.

And you and I don't need a president or a global treaty to tell us to
use stop
wasting energy.  We benefit immediately from doing so, with lower bills, less
air and water pollution, less dependence on the Middle East, and ultimately,
hopefully, a climate that is no longer zinging out of control.

No point in waiting around for leadership, in Florida or the Hague.  Leaders
only get their power from us, anyway.

(Donella Meadows is an adjunct professor at Dartmouth College and
director of
the Sustainability Institute in Hartland, Vermont.)

Kedves Richard!

Nem tudom te oktatsz-e, en eleg regen. Eddig meg nem
alkalmaztam az altalad javasolt oktatasi modszert, de
elgondolkodtatott. (Ti. az, hogy a benzin "koztudott" karossagat a
kert locsolas peldajan keresztul vilagitsam meg) Megprobaltam
tovabbgondolni es arra jutottam, hogy ha igy kezdenem, akkor
avval folytatnam, hogy az atomenergia "kozismert" karossagat az
atombomba peldajan mutatnam be, es hivatkoznek a konyhakes
es a 32-esnel nagyobb villaskulcs egeszsegkarosito hatasara.
Tovabba elmondanam, hogy lexikonnal mekkorat lehet utni es a viz
mennyire artalmas, ha belefulladunk. Befejezesul azonban
elarulnam, hogy a targyakat, eszkozoket a rendeltetesszeru
hasznalat soran mutatott tulajdonsagai alapjan lehet megitelni.

Ugye erre gondoltal?

Üdvözlettel
Gács Iván