Actually I'd characterize that among the "running off in the wrong
direction" ideas. The cost--even just in resources consumed--would
infinitely overwhelm the value. I know, I know, we'd be setting a good
example--a justification for all kinds of pointless effort. But no, we
wouldn't. It's Sharon Crow touring the US in a bus to save the planet
from global warming.
Every time I hear of someone selling their 20 MPG car to buy a new 35
MPG car because it will be "good for the planet" I want to puke.
On Jun 5, 2008, at 3:21 PM, Steven Preiss wrote:
> With the current state of oil production and global politics, the
> can has
> pretty much been opened for us. The question remains, whether we as
> vintage
> enthusiasts are willing (able?) to broaden our perspective to include
> current concerns, or become increasingly limited in our appeal to
> those
> outside of our immediate, aging group. The public's initial interest
> in our
> cars when they were first introduced to this country was based in
> large part
> on their efficiency. Vintage does I agree carry other potent
> appeals, based
> in part on nostalgia and historic preservation, but equally on
> creativity
> (i.e. how do I make this old crate perform better than someone else
> can and
> stay within the rules). In my mind there no need to sacrifice these
> goals/ideals by introducing an aspect that is of growing concern to
> all who
> live on the planet.
> Steve P.
_______________________________________________
http://www.team.net/donate.html
Fot mailing list
Fot@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/fot
|