This is ToppaTom's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following ToppaTom's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Recent Activity
Since the $90M hydrogen bus fleet did not work out in British Columbia, lets ease into it one person at a time.
You say; "if we depended only on our own oil we would be out in less than 5 years." The article says; "US crude oil proved reserves increased for the fifth year in a row in 2013 ..."
You guys should just listen to yourselves. Do you understand what you write? The article claims the oil glut might fail some bonds and some oil companies (mostly small). Gee, no kidding? So Pww says; "up pops some Oil-industry shill to threaten us not to." Not to what? E-P says; "... the current situation will be very, very short-lived." You're sure? I don't recall you predicting the current situation. And I don't know if it's even safe to break into BK4's ramble.
Lets hope they rapidly transition this to "greedy" enterprises to build and install a bunch of these, rather than just study how they could be made or overspend on a bunch based on corrupt political considerations. Technology advances when both good engineering and good science develop a product that is desirable and profitable with no, or minimal, taxpayer money. And this is where American jobs, prosperity and social benefits originated.
Free electrical power is very exciting until the power level and TEG cost is considered. 1kW is only about 1.3 hp. Also, is the 1kW only generated at max engine power? Even if it can generate 1.3hp at mid engine power and for a considerable time after the enmgine is turned off, I don't think I can afford to buy one. Oh, wait; "$1.5 million vehicle efficiency program sponsored by the US Army "; I am buying them.
True. If it was a US government responsibility, it would take an act of congress to get them to admit anything. Except that would not work either.
Well BK4; 1. I think those are voices that you hear. 2. BASF’s huge investments and activities in the battery industry are the judgment of people investing their own money. 3. Because it is their money, it’s of no concern of mine. They decide if this is a safe bet that battery sales will grow. It’s free enterprise; their money, their decision. 4. It is still too soon to know if the federal government’s huge investments of my money in battery manufacturing were rational, but they rarely are. 5. After 15 years of government investment in hybrid vehicle sales, hybrid car sales remain below 4% and are dropping. 6. So I presume BASF is expanding while the acquisitions are cheap.
Fair enough Jer. I thought that was what you meant at first, but then read too much into it.
Even those with no integrity do not usually enjoy the misfortune of those who have worked hard and honestly and brought prosperity to their country.
Does Tesla have a lead equivalent to Toyota's? Will they; when and IF the planned GigaFactory is actually completed? Toyota has the lion's share of the HEV/BEV market, and that market is still below 4%. Tesla is a small fish in a small pond.
So, Jer; You want to crush the hardworking oil industry - but only if and when you are not inconvenienced. You do realize, I hope, that fracking and the oil industry triggered the oil glut and forced Iran to negotiate. And BK4, Yes, NA producers may have at best 20 years of production but the price has been driven down NOW – you are off by 20 years. And at the rate it is going, and using your same calculations, batteries will cost $150/kWh by 2045.
No, no, Bro K. The politicians and masters of industry do not GIVE us anything. They SELL it. They sell it to those that WANT to BUY it. If it is worthless to you, you might call the buyers slaves, but actually they might value it. Maybe you don’t want them to have it, but they might not want to help you pay for a hybrid either. I think those who buy what you don’t like have the better case and exhibit more regard for the rights of others. And EP, you are such a disappointment. You say; “As a matter of fact, there WAS resistance ... And currently there IS resistance”. RESISTANCE? There is always resistance; to most anything; but that is NOT A MAJORITY. The majority does not want to retain cannibalism here, nor I suspect, in Papua/New Guinea nor did Papua/New Guinea's cannibals figure into the 90% in our last US elections. Nor does the majority want to abandon polio vaccination. And this illusory superiority of the minority is symptomatic of the incompetent. Striving to dictate what others buy, eat and say.
You continue to say the facts are what matters yet repeatedly fall back on IF. "If their views ... ". "If the minority strives". Your philosophy is all about IF; not even what IF, which would indicate a grasp on reality. Facts are like; "European residential electricity prices have historically exceeded U.S. prices, and the gap has widened in recent years. Regulatory structures—including taxes and other user fees, investment in renewable energy technologies, and the mix and cost of fuels—all influence electricity prices." IFs are fantasy, like "If the minority strives in the face of majority resistance to eradicate smallpox by vaccination, or kuru by eliminating cannibalism".
“The popular vote does not change facts. Not about evolution, not about vaccines, not about toxicity, not about climate. A 90% landslide vote of morons for a faulty policy will still be morons voting for a faulty policy.” Of course. But what makes you think that the 10% are NOT the morons. Was the majority, that put this administration in power, morons? Oops; recent history supports you there. But now that the original majority morons are fewer, are they automatically the enlightened minority. Ridiculous. Common sense rule: The group (majority or minority) that strives to impose its will on the others, are the immoral morons. . And that is why the people turned their backs on you. It was that and your blind faith and arrogant belief that only you are right and obligated to impose your will on others, even when only 10% of the people agree with you
I was about to respond to some of the less rational posts above but to save time I will just agree with msevior and ... AND point out that the IEA says" “By 2040, world energy supply is divided into four almost equal parts: low-carbon sources (nuclear and renewables), oil, natural gas and coal”. They are saying that nuclear and renewables will be about 12% each. And oil, natural gas and coal will EACH be 25%. After 25 more years. And; Making money for stockholders is the MAIN (and moral) duty of most companies/corporations. Among the ways they do this is maintaining good will; the populace as a whole wants cheap gas. Finding and producing more oil makes cheap gas AND makes more money - so the obvious, common sense answer is to find and produce more oil. If this is not done morally they will lose good will. And; You may dislike low gas prices and the “the status quo fight” but in a democracy, if the people think THEY are right and you are wrong, effectively and morally, you ARE wrong.
"We see our eREV vehicles as an important part of the fleets of the future." So do I, the future, the near future I hope, but still the FUTURE. So, let's buy a bunch NOW - before they are fiscally sensible - now, while there is still time to waste money (need I wonder who's). If they were even remotely affordable, they would give the price; either before or after the incentives.
The Air Force? Must be that they have too much money left over after buying a bunch of F35s? Apparently that budget sequestration should be repeated.
P,S. I think I begin to see why you might believe that the recent elections were a ringing endorsement of the democrats and the administration.
1. “The interesting irony is reducing fossil fuel usage will actually IMPROVE the economy.” - Delusional, wishful thinking. Tar sands and fracking have been a HUGE boon to the North American economy - much to the president's dismay 2. “When the world's two largest polluters agree to reduce their emissions by 25% by a fix date, it is very good news. “ - FIXED date? Good news? How about a "sucker deal and laughable promise by Xi". 3. “BUSH wanted us to …”? Really? BUSH ? - Is that a 6 year old post?
I agree with you; partially . We are the richest, most prosperous and strongest country; as well as one of the most generous. Probably because of this, many have gone soft and are jerks. Like the poor little rich kid, many have rebelled against the affluent society that was achieved by other Americans before us. Speaking for yourself, I presume you also consider your immediate family wasteful and arrogant, yet you are probably fiercely loyal to your sports team, your car brand, your favorite wine and your iPhone. Also, If Xi had - No, Wait, - , If either party had said that “they will never do anything ever” about cutting greenhouse gas emissions, I would have assumed they intended drastic reductions.
I cannot decide what kind of joke this is. Maybe like; “Lending out all your money and then skipping town?” Maybe more like; “Second prize is a free one week vacation in Beijing. First prize is a free 3 day vacation in Beijing.” I’m thinking that before Obama bargained with him, Xi was probably going to “promise” to quit emitting more greenhouse gasses right away - But he realized he was up against the master of deceit, and did not want to win the Pinocchio award.
A few posters confuse high prices with value. They typically buy coffee at Starbucks instead of McDonald’s. Don’t be jealous of those who buy a BMW or MB instead of a Ford or Toyota; they pursue status, not value. If you simplistically think you get what you pay for, Elon will sell you a Tesla for over 100 grand and you can buy gas for ~$4/g (Av-gas) at the airport. Don’t let those soulless oil companies and our free enterprise system seduce you into cheap gas.
When you say; "[Science and engineering] try to make better things while the third group want to capture more market share with lower Dollar Stores, Wal-Mart, Target, McDonald, Burger King style prices." I assume you meant to say you are NOT actually in favor of "better things" at lower prices, but were unable to express yourself. I work in the aerospace industry, but agree that defense spending may be too big. But one of or THE prime roles of government is to provide for the common defense. And spending the taxpayer's money for the F35 accomplishes this well. It also ensures our rights to Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Money for Hybrids “gives” (rather than allows the pursuit of) happiness to the fiscally challenged and provides negligible reduction in global pollution. Oh; and fracking is what provides “less imported oil”
electric-car-insider; times have changed. A gallon of gas costs less than $2.70. And the Volt and the Tesla are the sad results of government incentives. Sales of EVs (electric and hybrid cars) have stalled, capturing just 3.6% of the market (per after 15 years. This is in spite of unwavering (albeit involuntary) financial support, by me, through rebates, credits and incentives. At enormous cost to the taxpayers, EVs have had little effect. They have slightly reduced the improvements auto makers must make in ICE efficiency to meet CAFÉ, thus perpetuating the dominance of the ICE. I am in favor of advanced automotive technology, especially EVs, but I object to the costly ideological government meddling that is screwing things up. Let science, engineering and the market place continue to make the US the world’s leader.
As to predicting what will arrive to provoke a change in human behavior, even Dr. Seuss knew the foolishness of this when he said; “Fantasy is a necessary ingredient in living, it's a way of looking at life through the wrong end of a telescope, and that enables you to laugh at life's realities.” As for blaming a specific group for our presently fouled up government and its inability to force people to use presently non-viable alternatives to burning all the world’s oil, Robert Heinlein said; “Political tags - such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and so forth - are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire.”