NationStates Jolt Archive

Submitted:

Repeal "Hydrogen Powered Vehicles"
A proposal to repeal a previously passed resolution


Category: Repeal
Resolution: #18
Proposed by: Leg-ends

Description: UN Resolution #18: Hydrogen Powered Vehicles (Category: Environmental; Industry Affected: Automobile Manufacturing) shall be struck out and rendered null and void.

Argument: COMMENDS the good intentions of the original resolution,

RECOGNISES that effort needs to be made to reduce dependency on non-renewable energy sources,

NOTES that many economically developing nations do not use polluting vehicles on a large scale,

OBSERVES that such nations are therefore unlikely to significantly contribute to air pollution through vehicle emissions,

FURTHERMORE NOTES that the development of hydrogen fuel cells is technically difficult and expensive,

OBSERVES that Resolution #18 requires economically developing nations to duplicate the effort made and expense incurred by nations that are in a much better technological position to conduct the research,

REASONS that such funds would be spent more effectively elsewhere,

CONCLUDES that the funding of expensive duplicate technologies by economically developing nations is illogical and unnecessary,

and REPEALS UN Resolution #18 Hydrogen Powered Vehicles

Co-authored by the members of ACCEL

Special thanks to Westmorlandia and Gruenberg

Voting Ends: Fri Mar 3 2006

Original resolution:

UNITED NATIONS RESOLUTION #18

Hydrogen Powered Vehicles
A resolution to increase the quality of the world's environment, at the expense of industry.


Category: Environmental
Industry Affected: Automobile Manufacturing
Proposed by: Kibombwe

Description: We, the people of Kibombwe, propose that every nation should start developing hydrogen powered cars. We have polluted the air for too long -- it needs to stop. By passing this resolution we will be able to accompish these three things.

1. Less acid rain. Acid rain a problem that we feel should be stopped. It is especially a problem in the Northeast corner of the U.S.A. The Northeast is a place rich in historical buildings which acid rain damages. We passed a "PROTECT HISTORICAL SITES." This would only furthermore protect historical sites.

2. We wouldn't have to use as much oil. Oil is a nonrenewable resource that we only have so much of. By passing this resolution we would only prolong the time that we have oil on earth.

3. We would have cleaner air. Does anyone remember the days when "fresh air" was actually fresh? When it was a pure thing, without chemicals and other junk mixing in the air. With cleaner air, everyone would live longer, happier lives.

I hope that anyone and everyone who reads this agrees with us. PLEASE MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE!!!

Votes For: 12,533
Votes Against: 3,280

Implemented: Mon Jun 16 2003

This repeal seeks to end the inequity and injustice of forcing impoverished nations to fund development of Hydrogen technology.

It can be found here:
http://www.nationstates.net/page=UN_proposal1/match=hydrogen

Thank you for your support

Support. Although next time, you might want to take out the branding. ;)

Ouch didn't see that. Yes, this might be removed for branding...I think you're better off just crediting Westmorlandia. He contributed much more to the drafting.

NOTING: That the resolution only called for the development of hydrogen cars, not practical hydrogen cars.

UNDERSTANDING: That most nations routinely spend money on grants for far more moronic ideas.

REALIZING: That the repeal of a resolution never removes all the damage caused by the resolution itself.

LOVING: The Hydrogen Hummer that is one of the best photo op that any ruller can imagine. (Even if there is only one in existance and it has less miles on it than the Lunar rover.)

INSISTING: That Captain Nemo had it right when he built a hydrogen powered submarine.

POLITELY: Declines to endorse this repeal.

I shall lead the fight to have the weight of TNP behind this should it reach the floor of the General Assembly.


Steve Perry, GCRC
President

*Lacking a Self-Interest Motive Since 2006*

Hell yeah! HPV is one of the biggest pile of hippy sh...

...I mean, Cobdenia lends it full support to this repeal of utterly ludicrous legislation

Hippy sh... is the car that is run on leftover vegtable oil and has exhaust that smells either like a Chineese resturant or McDonalds, depending on how hippy the Hippy sh... is. :p

I supported another repeal of this awhile back and I'll support this one too. Wyldtree is behind the idea of alternative fuels and the environment but this resolution is too narrow in scope, focusing on only one alternative.

Repeal it?!? But...but...but...

http://test256.free.fr/UN%20Cards/sofluffy7tp.jpg

:p

Just endorsed this one, mate.:)

Are there any plans for a replacement? I think that a repeal is good due to the fact that the resolution is flawed and pointless, but it is definitely beneficial to have a resolution urging nations to invest in alternative fuels and facilitate international collaboration in that area, especially with Fossil Fuel Reduction Act forcing them to move in that direction.

Are there any plans for a replacement? I think that a repeal is good due to the fact that the resolution is flawed and pointless, but it is definitely beneficial to have a resolution urging nations to invest in alternative fuels and facilitate international collaboration in that area, especially with Fossil Fuel Reduction Act forcing them to move in that direction.


We've already got a perfectly good alternative fuel: Uranium... ;)

Should this make quorum and succeed in a floor vote, the Republic of Teruchev will celebrate with the resubmission of the Auto Free Trade Act.

And thread hijacking stops....now.

Yay fossil fuels! Ehrm... HPV was a step in the right direction, but doesn't work well. Get it out of the way so better things can come in instead.

Support.

Repeal "Hydrogen Cars"

As a major exporter of alternative fuel and alternative fuel vehicles, it is to my benefit to have people forced to make hydrogen cars. It is quite profitable for me, you need lots of platinum to make fuel cells currently. This may change, but this makes the cars very expensive. I do not want this repealed, I would lose a nice little niche market.

As a major exporter of alternative fuel and alternative fuel vehicles, it is to my benefit to have people forced to make hydrogen cars. It is quite profitable for me, you need lots of platinum to make fuel cells currently. This may change, but this makes the cars very expensive. I do not want this repealed, I would lose a nice little niche market.
If you're an exporter...wouldn't it be in your interests for everyone else to stop?

If you're an exporter...wouldn't it be in your interests for everyone else to stop?

Aye, but that would require an understanding of the issue at hand... :rolleyes:

I support the concept (repealing the less than satisfactory resolution), but you pose flawed reasoning in the repeal motion.

The second benefit of reduction in dependence on oil is nullified by the "Law of the Conservation of Energy"; which states that energy can not be created or destroyed, only transformed, transferred, or transmuted, thus it would take an amount of oil equal to the amount used by the vehicles to create hydrogen fuel for them.

The bold is where you go wrong. for that to be correct, 100% of the energy in existence would have to be locked up in fossil fuels. In theory, one could use alternative sources of energy to support the hydrogen cells' creation. Thus, it doesn't require the burning of oil, as you suggest.

Also, you give no evidence that one needs to use the same or greater amounts of oil to create said cells, that implies a net loss in energy during the process. (the point of fuel is that there's already chemical energy within it, and that it takes less energy to put it in a usable state than it provides. We don't have to put the energy into the hydrogen, just make it usable. Unless there is evidence that the process is a net loss, the statements are useless.)