Does "Green" Mean "Money?"

A lot of "green" solutions turn out to be not so green when examined more closely. Take electric cars, for instance.

Ten years ago, one would be shouted down for even suggesting that the materials in batteries in electric cars might be troublesome, that the energy to power them might be really dirty, and nobody knows if massive electromagnetic fields that close to one's body might not be the greatest thing (even from people who complained about cell phones causing damage from the electric fields). But now people are starting to look at those things in earnest.

There's also the fact that once the batteries are used up (seven years?), you have to get another really expensive and material-intensive one. Mined rare earths are being diverted to many of the car batteries at an alarming speed.

And how will this all play out for the consumer? Suppose they implement one idea that has been talked about and put up charging stations so you can change out your depleted battery for a charged one every 100 miles (or whatever the range of an electric vehicle is). What happens when you change out your brand-new battery for one that is near the end of its chargeable life? Can you say "rip-off?"

It's funny how there's been a much more environmentally friendly vehicle around for a long time (called a "bicycle") that is just not getting the good press. And there's an even more environmentally friendly way of getting around. Have you heard of "feet?"